Xref: utzoo sci.electronics:17909 sci.physics:16898
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!eastapps!vergil!gsteckel
From: gsteckel@vergil.East.Sun.COM (Geoff Steckel - Sun BOS Hardware CONTRACTOR)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics,sci.physics
Subject: Re: A question about the Nyquist theorm
Message-ID: <4402@eastapps.East.Sun.COM>
Date: 20 Feb 91 23:56:43 GMT
References: <6607@healey> <883@idacrd.UUCP>
Sender: news@East.Sun.COM
Reply-To: gsteckel@east.sun.com (Geoff Steckel - Sun BOS Hardware CONTRACTOR)
Followup-To: sci.electronics
Distribution: na
Organization: Omnivore Technology, Newton, Mass. (617)969-3448
Lines: 17

In article <883@idacrd.UUCP> mac@idacrd.UUCP (Robert McGwier) writes:
 From article <6607@healey>, by grayt@Software.Mitel.COM (Tom Gray):
 > The shape of the wave is preserved within the sampling pulse. This
 > information allows representation of a signal at exactly 1/2
 > the Nyquist freqency.
 
 I pose the following question.  Suppose you are sampling at rate N samples
 per second, and you see a constant value V for your A/D sample.  Is the
 frequency of the signal which produced those samples 0 or N/2?  Since

AARRGGGHHH!  The Nyquist criterion requires that sampling be GREATER
THAN the highest frequency of interest.  Note also that the amplitude
response near Fs/2 rolls off towards 0  (sin X / X response).
	geoff steckel (gwes@wjh12.harvard.EDU)
			(...!husc6!wjh12!omnivore!gws)
Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with Sun Microsystems, despite the From: line.
This posting is entirely the author's responsibility.


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com