On Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 3:17:39 PM UTC-8, RichD wrote:
> Probly been asked many times, but -
> Why is the sampling theorem called Shannon-Nyquist?
> Nyquist published his paper in 1924, what was Shannon's
> contribution? Where was the original's deficiency?
As well as I know it, Nyquist did the dual problem:
He figured out that the bandwidth needed to get pulses through a cable was half the pulse rate.
That is, he wanted to get digital signals through an analog medium, where now we want
to get analog signals through a digital medium.
But the math is the same either way, so he gets credit for it.
Reminds me of the discussion at the beginning of an ISDN book about the last time our
communicaitons system was all digital: it was digital (telegraph) before analog (telephone),
and then back to digital (ISDN, ADSL, etc.), but not yet completely digital.
Reply by rickman●March 3, 20162016-03-03
On 2/5/2016 1:06 PM, Steve Underwood wrote:
> On 02/05/2016 07:17 AM, RichD wrote:
>> Probly been asked many times, but -
>>
>> Why is the sampling theorem called Shannon-Nyquist?
>> Nyquist published his paper in 1924, what was Shannon's
>> contribution? Where was the original's deficiency?
>>
>> --
>> Rich
>>
> Nyquist realised that sampling at twice the bandwidth worked, but didn't
> seem to figure out the theory to back that up. Shannon provided the
> theory, and generalised the idea to complex samples and other sampling
> patterns. Whittaker and Kotelnikov independently worked out the sampling
> theorem before either Nyquist or Shannon.
Whose papers had the most influence on the subsequent science?
--
Rick
Reply by ●March 2, 20162016-03-02
On Friday, February 5, 2016 at 12:17:39 PM UTC+13, RichD wrote:
> Probly been asked many times, but -
>
> Why is the sampling theorem called Shannon-Nyquist?
> Nyquist published his paper in 1924, what was Shannon's
> contribution? Where was the original's deficiency?
>
> --
> Rich
It wasn't Nyquist or Shannon, but Whitaker and Kotelnikov
Reply by ●March 1, 20162016-03-01
On Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 4:17:39 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> Probly been asked many times, but -
>
> Why is the sampling theorem called Shannon-Nyquist?
> Nyquist published his paper in 1924, what was Shannon's
> contribution? Where was the original's deficiency?
>
> --
> Rich
Reply by Evgeny Filatov●February 6, 20162016-02-06
On 07.02.2016 0:11, Eric Jacobsen wrote:
(snip)
> That's a point that is often missed in the Western Hemisphere. I
> used to travel to Russia occassionally to synch up with some
> researchers there, and it was always interesting as a westerner to get
> the different perspective on the history of things.
>
>
> Eric Jacobsen
> Anchor Hill Communications
> http://www.anchorhill.com
>
There's a Russian translation of 3rd edition of Proakis'es "Digital
Communications" made by late prof. Daniil Klovskiy, which contains
multiple footnotes with useful references to contributions made by
Russian/Soviet authors. Unfortunately the book is too rare, but it can
be found e.g. here:
http://www.twirpx.com/file/45068/
Regards,
Evgeny.
Reply by Eric Jacobsen●February 6, 20162016-02-06
On Sat, 6 Feb 2016 02:06:36 +0800, Steve Underwood <steveu@dis.org>
wrote:
>On 02/05/2016 07:17 AM, RichD wrote:
>> Probly been asked many times, but -
>>
>> Why is the sampling theorem called Shannon-Nyquist?
>> Nyquist published his paper in 1924, what was Shannon's
>> contribution? Where was the original's deficiency?
>>
>> --
>> Rich
>>
>Nyquist realised that sampling at twice the bandwidth worked, but didn't
>seem to figure out the theory to back that up. Shannon provided the
>theory, and generalised the idea to complex samples and other sampling
>patterns. Whittaker and Kotelnikov independently worked out the sampling
>theorem before either Nyquist or Shannon.
That's a point that is often missed in the Western Hemisphere. I
used to travel to Russia occassionally to synch up with some
researchers there, and it was always interesting as a westerner to get
the different perspective on the history of things.
Eric Jacobsen
Anchor Hill Communications
http://www.anchorhill.com
Reply by Eric Jacobsen●February 6, 20162016-02-06
On Thu, 4 Feb 2016 15:17:35 -0800 (PST), RichD
<r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Probly been asked many times, but -
>
>Why is the sampling theorem called Shannon-Nyquist?
>Nyquist published his paper in 1924, what was Shannon's
>contribution? Where was the original's deficiency?
>
>--
>Rich
Basically, Nyquist covered it from a signal processing,
frequency-content perspective. Shannon added the perspective of
Information Theory, which was a significant thing. Essentially,
Shannon restated and verified it from an Information Theory
perspective.
Eric Jacobsen
Anchor Hill Communications
http://www.anchorhill.com
Reply by navaide●February 5, 20162016-02-05
On Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 6:17:39 PM UTC-5, RichD wrote:
> Probly been asked many times, but -
>
> Why is the sampling theorem called Shannon-Nyquist?
> Nyquist published his paper in 1924, what was Shannon's
> contribution? Where was the original's deficiency?
>
> --
> Rich
If I can presume to extend the scope of this discussion, Bode and Shannon subsequently coauthored a 1948 insightful interpretation of Norbert Wiener's "Extrapolation, Interpolation, and Smoothing of Stationary Time Series." That provides an optimized solution for a time series when only signal and noise spectra are available. With dynamic models available, modern estimation offers far superior and far more versatile capabilities (multidimensional applications, finite time, incomplete and indirect observations sampled at inconsistent rates, nonstationary error statistics, time-varying system parameters, ... ).
Reply by Steve Underwood●February 5, 20162016-02-05
On 02/05/2016 07:17 AM, RichD wrote:
> Probly been asked many times, but -
>
> Why is the sampling theorem called Shannon-Nyquist?
> Nyquist published his paper in 1924, what was Shannon's
> contribution? Where was the original's deficiency?
>
> --
> Rich
>
Nyquist realised that sampling at twice the bandwidth worked, but didn't
seem to figure out the theory to back that up. Shannon provided the
theory, and generalised the idea to complex samples and other sampling
patterns. Whittaker and Kotelnikov independently worked out the sampling
theorem before either Nyquist or Shannon.
Steve
Reply by Tim Wescott●February 4, 20162016-02-04
On Thu, 04 Feb 2016 15:17:35 -0800, RichD wrote:
> Probly been asked many times, but -
>
> Why is the sampling theorem called Shannon-Nyquist? Nyquist published
> his paper in 1924, what was Shannon's contribution? Where was the
> original's deficiency?
To the best of my possibly fallible recollection, Nyquist's original
paper was about pulses on a telephone (or telegraph) line. It sort of
hinted at the finished theory but didn't spell it out.
Shannon spelled it out.
The papers are out there in Internet-land if you Google for them. Then
you'll know for sure, and you can tell me!
--
Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com