A Quadrature Signals Tutorial: Complex, But Not Complicated

Understanding the 'Phasing Method' of Single Sideband Demodulation

Complex Digital Signal Processing in Telecommunications

There are **7** messages in this thread.

You are currently looking at messages 1 to .

**Is this discussion worth a thumbs up?**

i hv to make a program for continuous time fourier series without using its inbuilt function in matlab ca anybody plz help me befor 30th june at s...@live.com Regards

On Jun 29, 7:53 am, samar <samar.na...@gmail.com> wrote: > i hv to make a program for continuous time fourier series without > using its inbuilt function in matlab > > ca anybody plz help me befor 30th june at smr_...@live.com > > Regards Whether you mean continuous-time Fourier transform or continuous-time Fourier series, I think you'll have a job - both involve integrals and/ or infinite series. How do you intend to represent continuous-time signals in Matlab?

_____________________________

On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 23:53:26 -0700 (PDT), samar <s...@gmail.com> wrote: >i hv to make a program for continuous time fourier series without >using its inbuilt function in matlab > >ca anybody plz help me befor 30th june at s...@live.com > > >Regards Hi, it sounds like you're using a computer to solve your problem. Sadly, no one can perform continuous signal processing on a computer. So what really is the problem your professor gave you? Does he want you to write a program to perform the discrete Fourier transform (DFT), or maybe a fast Fourier transform (FFT)? [-Rick-]

On Jun 29, 8:10 am, Rick Lyons <R...@_BOGUS_ieee.org> wrote: > Sadly, no one can perform continuous > signal processing on a computer. Of course you can. There's lots of symbolic math software. Of course you need a to do this on tractable closed form symbolic functions instead of arbitrary sampled data. But "assume a spherical cow" ... IMHO. YMMV. -- rhn A.T nicholson d.0.t C-o-M

_____________________________

Ron N wrote: > On Jun 29, 8:10 am, Rick Lyons <R...@_BOGUS_ieee.org> wrote: >>Sadly, no one can perform continuous >>signal processing on a computer. > Of course you can. There's lots of symbolic math software. > Of course you need a to do this on tractable closed form > symbolic functions instead of arbitrary sampled data. There are some calculators with pretty good symbolic math, too. Though I don't know that any yet do Fourier transforms, it wouldn't be hard. The TI-92 is pretty good, and reasonably affordable, too. (Discontinued, but available used.) -- glen

_____________________________

On Jun 29, 12:59 pm, Ron N <ron.nichol...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 29, 8:10 am, Rick Lyons <R...@_BOGUS_ieee.org> wrote: > > > Sadly, no one can perform continuous > > signal processing on a computer. > > Of course you can. There's lots of symbolic math software. > Of course you need a to do this on tractable closed form > symbolic functions instead of arbitrary sampled data. You don't have to do it with symbolic math; there are plenty of numerical techniques that can compute such things to any desired accuracy (given enough computing power) (although which technique you use will depend on what kind of function you are transforming). However, there's not enough information about the original poster's needs to give sensible advice in this case.

_____________________________

On Jun 30, 11:15 pm, "Steven G. Johnson" <stev...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > On Jun 29, 12:59 pm, Ron N <ron.nichol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Jun 29, 8:10 am, Rick Lyons <R...@_BOGUS_ieee.org> wrote: > > > > Sadly, no one can perform continuous > > > signal processing on a computer. > > > Of course you can. There's lots of symbolic math software. > > Of course you need a to do this on tractable closed form > > symbolic functions instead of arbitrary sampled data. > > You don't have to do it with symbolic math; there are plenty of > numerical techniques that can compute such things to any desired > accuracy (given enough computing power) (although which technique you > use will depend on what kind of function you are transforming). > However, there's not enough information about the original poster's > needs to give sensible advice in this case. Sounds like you're re-inventing DSP. I understood Rick's comment to imply that once you represent a continuous signal in a form suitable for the application of numerical techniques, it's no longer actually a continuous signal.

_____________________________