Chuck wrote:

Keith Dysart wrote:
Using these examples, I can find no reason why the
multiple signal explanation is more real than the
varying amplitude explanation. And I suggest, that for
these two cases, the varying amplitude explanation
is probably more useful.

...Keith


Well, if I understand, and I often don't, you are saying that the
spectrum produced by method 1 is indistinguishable from the spectrum
produced by method 2 and THEREFORE, neither spectrum alone can be
considered true reality.

What he said is neither case is less real than the other. It's simply
two different ways of describing the same thing. Have a look at a
table of trigonometric identities. It is a list of different ways of
saying the same thing, mathematically. Each is real in one way or
another, but not necessarily in the same way.

I guess I can continue to assert that mathematical equivalence between
frequency and time domains is not evidence to me of an underlying
duality in reality, and you can continue to assert that to you, it is.

I guess that would depend on what underlying duality you are inferring
from the mathematical equivalence. Not that it necessarily applies
here, but one of the problems we frequently face here on the newsgroup
is a direct result of incorrect inference.

And I guess we could still be friends. ;-)

One of the great contributors to the ham radio newsgroups used to
remind us that "a gentleman is a man who can disagree without being
disagreeable". The challenge then is to remain agreeable amidst a
barrage of disagreeable comments.

73, Jim AC6XG