Timeline for Is digital necessarily discrete in both amplitude and time?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 11, 2023 at 20:34 | comment | added | Dan Boschen | @BenVoigt Yes that’s a great comment. I agree with you—- as far as what establishes a definition I am not sure, perhaps we can ask what a reasonable engineer would think of when you say “digital system” and if you would need to clarify if time is discrete or not. I suspect in most cases if we don’t clarify that then discrete would be assumed and that it would generally be safe for us to do so. In the cases where time is not discrete, it should be clarified for the same reason. | |
| Jan 11, 2023 at 19:57 | comment | added | Ben Voigt | The usage in "Oppenheim & Schaefer" is less a definition than a statement of what digital signals are discussed. It doesn't imply that continuous-time digital signals don't exist, just that you won't learn about them in that book (where the title immediately tells you that the scope is discrete time). | |
| Mar 19, 2022 at 15:07 | comment | added | Dan Boschen | @MarcusMueller (Continuing here)...I am actually content with O&S definition as being complete: Digital is simply discrete in time and discrete in magnitude. I don't see the reason to condition it to also be a finite number of magnitudes (and similarly for finite time). Yes that is a condition to be physically realizable, but we often use descriptions from infinite sets- I don't think that is a reasonable requirement to exclude a fictitious infinite digital system, no different than our use of infinite spans for frequency and time. | |
| Mar 19, 2022 at 14:39 | history | edited | Dan Boschen | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 795 characters in body
|
| Mar 11, 2022 at 17:32 | vote | accept | yaraklis | ||
| Mar 10, 2022 at 18:48 | history | answered | Dan Boschen | CC BY-SA 4.0 |