Timeline for Result of conjugate symmetry property of DFT
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 24 at 20:58 | comment | added | Sheldon | Shouldn't the reason behind line 4 be "additivity of complex conjugate operator" instead of "sum operator linear"? I don't see what the linearity of the sum operator has to do with it. I think this step is rather a property of the complex conjugate. By the same logic, you could also say $(\sum a + b)^2 = \sum (a + b)^2$, which is not true. Am I missing something? | |
| Nov 29, 2018 at 17:02 | comment | added | Marcus Müller | @CedronDawg made that amendment. | |
| Nov 29, 2018 at 17:02 | history | edited | Marcus Müller | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 57 characters in body
|
| Nov 29, 2018 at 15:43 | comment | added | Cedron Dawg | I think you should have also explicitly mentioned that $$x^*[n]=x[n]$$ because the signal is real valued. | |
| Nov 27, 2018 at 22:49 | comment | added | Marcus Müller | Yep, I honestly keep forgetting that just because I see the $2\pi$ periodicity of $e^{jx}$ doesn't mean it's self-explanatory in a formula if I just work $\mod N$. | |
| Nov 27, 2018 at 22:14 | comment | added | robert bristow-johnson | this is good, but i think you wanna remind people that $$X[-k] = X[N-k]$$ in case some folks insist that $0 \le k < N$. | |
| Nov 27, 2018 at 22:00 | history | edited | Marcus Müller | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 22 characters in body
|
| Nov 27, 2018 at 21:53 | history | edited | Marcus Müller | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 445 characters in body
|
| Nov 27, 2018 at 21:47 | history | answered | Marcus Müller | CC BY-SA 4.0 |