That's good. Trying to educate you is like trying to teach a pig to sing.


and I thought brian's put downs were good.........

On 2/25/2015 2:30 AM, AndyW wrote:
On 24/02/2015 17:00, Jerry Stuckle wrote:

But you forget compression. For instance, unless there is a scene
change, the vast majority of a television picture does not change from
frame to frame. Even if the camera moves, the picture shifts but
doesn't change all that much. Why waste all of that bandwidth resending
information the receiver already has?

Which is why, on cheaper televisions, the picture tesselates when
showing random images such as rain, fire, waterfalls etc.
The true test of a quality television is to watch a waterfall or flames
and see it pin-sharp.
Cheaper TVs use cheap lower-powered decoding systems and for complex
images they do not have enough time to fully decode the image before the
next frame arrives.

Andy


Not really true, at least in the United States. All TV's here use the
same (proprietary) chipsets to decompress the digital signal. However,
it makes a huge difference on the resolution being used, i.e. 720P,
1080P, 1080I, UHD... The difference is in what happens after the signal
is decompressed.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================

On 2/25/2015 1:41 AM, rickman wrote:
On 2/24/2015 7:12 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
snip

Some compression algorithms (i.e. mp3) remove what they consider is
"unimportant". However, the result after decompressing is a poor
recreation of the original signal.

That is a value judgement which most would disagree with not to mention
that your example is not valid. MP3 does not *remove* anything from the
signal. It is a form of compression that simply can't reproduce the
signal exactly. The use of the term "poor" is your value judgement.
Most people would say an MP3 audio sounds very much like the original.


Here's a reference - Neil Young and Steve Jobs, no less.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2399710,00.asp

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle

==================

On Wed, 25 Feb 2015 11:43:09 -0000, "Jim GM4DHJ..."
wrote:


You been shot down again.

You are hurling abuse, as you always do.

Only you thinks otherwise.

Everyone else is laughing at you.




no we are not...hundreds of us don't give a **** about your one technical
upmanship....

WHS

"Jim GM4DHJ..." wrote in
:


You been shot down again.

You are hurling abuse, as you always do.

Only you thinks otherwise.

Everyone else is laughing at you.




no we are not...hundreds of us don't give a **** about your one
technical upmanship....

Too preoccupied with your imagined Morse code one-upmanship?

"gareth" wrote in message
...
"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...
He struggled with the idea that, as the phasor rotated, the angle became
more negative, and thus decreased. eg -20 -10
Brian, is there some truth in G7FUJ, Cum's assertion that you were
dismissed without references from your job as a mathematics teacher,
for your confusion about a change in direction of a phasor as you
express above would be very worrying?
When you say "more", in "more negative" above, you are saying
that the magnitude of the angle is increasing
There seems to be a fundamental problem in your grasp of the direction
of vectors, because there is nothing beween clockwise and anti-clockwise,
left and right, up and down, or, in this case, negative and positive, for
they
are merely words used to disambiguate the direction of the vector.
Brian, why don't you just give up whilst you are still behind?

Brian?

Hullo?

Are you there?

"gareth" wrote in message
...
"Stephen Thomas Cole" wrote in message
...

Sadly, Gareth absolutely cannot explain it. He doesn't remotely
understand
anything he's talking about, as per.

If you had but the remorest inkling of the technical matters about which
you sneer then you might have some credibility, (although I doubt that
anyone has failed to notice that _ALL_ of your posts are nasty personal
remarks), but as it is, you add weight to the old adage that empty vessels
make the most noise.


remorest? typo - remotest

"rickman" wrote in message
...

Maybe I don't understand the issue. Isn't that a valid example of a
negative frequency? There are some DSP experts in comp.dsp who talk about
negative frequency often.

If you, or, indeed, anyone else has any difficulties with the subject matter
and DSP in general, then do ask me, because having worked through
what appeared as a number of anomalies (all resolved 9 years ago
when I was working as a DSP manufacturer, picoChip in Bath, UK)
I feel sure that I'm well positioned to understand the difficulties that
others might encounter in this area.

"gareth" wrote:
"rickman" wrote in message
...

Maybe I don't understand the issue. Isn't that a valid example of a
negative frequency? There are some DSP experts in comp.dsp who talk about
negative frequency often.

If you, or, indeed, anyone else has any difficulties with the subject matter
and DSP in general, then do ask me, because having worked through
what appeared as a number of anomalies (all resolved 9 years ago
when I was working as a DSP manufacturer, picoChip in Bath, UK)
I feel sure that I'm well positioned to understand the difficulties that
others might encounter in this area.

WARNING! Make sure to search the archives and read all about his "Big K"
theory before taking seriously anything Gareth says about DSP. It'll
quickly become apparent that he has no understanding whatsoever of the
subject and you'll save yourself from wasting any time talking to him about
it.

Interestingly, the true experts of comp.dsp refer to Gareth Alun Evans
G4SDW as "that idiot from uk.radio.amateur".

--
STC // M0TEY // twitter.com/ukradioamateur

If you, or, indeed, anyone else has any difficulties with the subject
matter
and DSP in general, then do ask me, because having worked through
what appeared as a number of anomalies (all resolved 9 years ago
when I was working as a DSP manufacturer, picoChip in Bath, UK)
I feel sure that I'm well positioned to understand the difficulties that
others might encounter in this area.


there that shut brian up ! .......