rickert at cs.niu.edu wrote in a message to All:
rc> The experience of techology favors digital devices. The
rc> compact disk holds more than a larger analog disk. The DAT
rc> holds more than the analog cassette. Telephone companies
I'd like to see a little more substantiation of this claim. A Digital
recording holds a _sample_ of an equivalent analogue recording, in a form
that is resistant to further degredation - but a sample only. On a gross
scale, a CD has a frequency range of 20-20KHz, an analogue disk, 20-22 KHz -
you have already `lost' some of the information that would otherwise be
obtainable. The digitial recording is a sample of the average waveform at
each moment in time a sample is take - unless you are sampling at rates where
the `limiting factor' approaches the time quantum unit [OK another argument
entirely :-)], you are losing information. A compact disk holds more of what
is considered to be subjectively relevant, not `more than the analogue
recording'.
Your comment seems to me to be a little like saying a photograph of a
hillside contains more information than the reality. It doesn't, it is merely
easier to reproduce, transmit and store. If the object is reproduction of
`intelligence', at a quick glance, the best you can hope for is a very good
approximation.
Still, that's the best most of us do ATM anyway.
Terry
--
Usenet: terrys at gastro.apana.org.au
Fidonet: 3:800/846.23
