Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!think.com!hsdndev!rutgers!zodiac!bittel
From: bittel@zodiac.rutgers.edu
Newsgroups: sci.electronics
Subject: Re: Re: A question about Nyquist theorm
Message-ID: <605.27c28109@zodiac.rutgers.edu>
Date: 20 Feb 91 14:00:40 GMT
References: <91046.095459F0O@psuvm.psu.edu> <Abj8CR200WBN04RPUr@andrew.cmu.edu> <317@sphere.UUCP> <1991Feb17.115102.15399@Neon.Stanford.EDU>
Organization: Rutgers University - Computing Services
Lines: 26

In article <1991Feb17.115102.15399@Neon.Stanford.EDU>, zimmer@calvin.stanford.edu (Andrew Zimmerman) writes:

>>> >     "The sample frequency must be at least twice the highest frequency
>>> >component within the analog signal for an accurate representation of the
>>> >analog signal".
>>
>>I think this should be "GREATER than twice the highest frequency
>>component".
> 
> Just to nit-pick, it should be "GREATER then twice the bandwidth of the 
> signal", not twice the highest frequency.
> 
> Andrew
> zimmer@calvin.stanford.edu

I had a professor that loved to explain the sampling theory this way.
It is not correct!!!  What does the bandwidth have to do with it???
Say you have a signal with frequency components from 5000 to 5100 Hz.
The bandwidth is 100 Hz.. Does that mean you can sample at 200 samp/sec and
get the signal??? NO!! 

			Fs >= 2fmax

Enough said.

NJIT student who finally passed EE333.


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com