31 July 2007

Bukowski Charlie Brown and... Fourier

Some definitely NSFW humor which I provide a link to with great hesitance
Heck, I've never even read Bukowski and I thought these were funny. If Bukowski wrote Peanuts.

A plea to my mathematically-smarter friends
It's amazing what an expensive education and two courses in signal processing didn't buy me -- would someone please tell me what's up with the two different Fourier transforms, the one with -i in the exponent and the one with +i in the exponent? (Look, I even had the decency to italicize them.)

An open letter to engineering textbook authors everywhere
Alright, enough's enough. I hereby decree:
  • Hear-ye! Hear-ye! Usage of xi and zeta are forbidden! I mean, I've been busily copying down xis and etas, freakishly enjoying the restful ease of eta, until I realized you could just do F-sub-x and F-sub-y. C'mon.
  • Stop with that weird Germanic calligraphic scary font already; I can't even tell an "F" from a "K" without a glossary. (This stuff. Well, heck, I guess that's my answer.)
  • I guess you can keep mixing "v" and nu on the same page, since it's some sort of you-must-be-this-tall-to-enter rite of passage for geeks to see if they can tell the difference, but really. You're leaving an awful lot of trust in your layout guy with that one.
And now the realization that no one writing a book anywhere will have seen this...

-g

1 comment:

Anthony said...

On Fourier signs, it's just convention. -i is (considerably) more popular. The results are just frequency-reversed versions of each other. The only important thing is that whatever sign is chosen, the inverse transform must have the opposite sign.