On Sunday 16 May 2004 13:25, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Fri, 14 May 2004, Roman Haefeli wrote:
i had a discussion with a teacher today. the topic was the smallest delay-time possible. in his opinion one sample is the atom of signal and cannot be divided anymore. in my opinion it should be possible to get shorter delays than 1 samples with interpolation. my argument was: it should be possible to set the values of each sample so, that the resulting signal would be similar to a digitized analogue signal with a shorter than 1 sample delay.
Suppose you have a signal at exactly the Nyquist frequency and RMS=sqrt(2). Then its data is like +1,-1,+1,-1,...
Isn't that a pathological case though? I thought the Nyquist requirement was SR > Fmax, not SR >= Fmax. I could be wrong A signal at SR/2 is by theory, outside the Nyquist creterion.
is there anything still unclear?
Yes, namely what you are attempting to prove.
Larry Troxer