Re: Negative Group Delay ... again!
- From: Jerry Avins <jya@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2008 10:50:45 -0500
Oli Charlesworth wrote:
...
Not sure I understand. It's a given that the continuous-time system
is LTI, therefore we can apply the LT. In what way would it be
invalid?
Hey, fellows, this had been rehashed often in the past under a different guise. The optical equivalent of this apparent "prediction" is found so often in cases of anomalous diepersion, that the phenomenon is known by that name when in fact it is only a consequence of it. There's a simple explanation at http://tinyurl.com/3dqx49
Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Negative Group Delay ... again!
- From: Eric Jacobsen
- Re: Negative Group Delay ... again!
- References:
- Negative Group Delay ... again!
- From: Andor
- Re: Negative Group Delay ... again!
- From: Rune Allnor
- Re: Negative Group Delay ... again!
- From: Oli Charlesworth
- Re: Negative Group Delay ... again!
- From: Rune Allnor
- Re: Negative Group Delay ... again!
- From: Oli Charlesworth
- Re: Negative Group Delay ... again!
- From: Rune Allnor
- Re: Negative Group Delay ... again!
- From: Oli Charlesworth
- Negative Group Delay ... again!
- Prev by Date: Re: who's da reel DSP GURU?
- Next by Date: Re: Negative Group Delay ... again!
- Previous by thread: Re: Negative Group Delay ... again!
- Next by thread: Re: Negative Group Delay ... again!
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|