Everything starts off as theoretical babble though... “light as a wave and a particle” was babble. It’s just conjecture. Clearly many are conjecturing about more dimensions: why could info not be stored and processed in them? Fair question, no? The medium is projecting one wave, but the instantaneous parsing, collation, storage, and interrelation of millions of waves and subsets of these waves within the space of 70 cubic inches is not at all rational “legal tender” in the “information sciences” as we currently know them. One can pinpoint that “bad note” and relate it to countless numbers of other wavelets within waves, their bad notes, etc. and keep them all discrete. It’s simply nuts.

 

Everything starts off as theoretical babble though... “light as a wave and a particle” was babble. It’s just conjecture. Clearly many are conjecturing about more dimensions: why could info not be stored and processed in them? Fair question, no? The medium is projecting one wave, but the instantaneous parsing, collation, storage, and interrelation of millions of waves and subsets of these waves within the space of 70 cubic inches is not at all rational “legal tender” in the “information sciences” as we currently know them. One can pinpoint that “bad note” and relate it to countless numbers of other wavelets within waves, their bad notes, etc. and keep them all discrete. It’s simply nuts.

Lots of hand-waving balderdash.

It's only nuts if you lack the scientific desire to understand how it works.

 

Nahhhh... I have the desire; I simply believe there’s more to the nature of forces than we ascribe. Newton shared the same sentiment.

And “nuts” was another way of saying “amazing”

 

Nahhhh... I have the desire; I simply believe there’s more to the nature of forces than we ascribe. Newton shared the same sentiment.

And “nuts” was another way of saying “amazing”

Fine, you have the desire. Then get cracking. Newton was right and used that desire to expand our understanding of nature using scientific knowledge in a solid mathematical framework instead of metaphysical ramblings.

 

Fine, you have the desire. Then get cracking. Newton was right and used that desire to expand our understanding of nature using scientific knowledge in a solid mathematical framework instead of metaphysical ramblings.

I actually do... kindly point out where did I "metaphysically ramble?" As far as I can tell, I simply said some of those things are not "legal tender" within our existing framework of information theory awareness. That doesn't mean anything other than, "we have no current understanding of it." Where did I go all "metaphysical" again?

 

I actually do... kindly point out where did I "metaphysically ramble?" As far as I can tell, I simply said some of those things are not "legal tender" within our existing framework of information theory awareness. That doesn't mean anything other than, "we have no current understanding of it." Where did I go all "metaphysical" again?

I like your enthusiasm but you clearly are using a mix-mash of terms without any deep understanding of what they mean IRT acoustic wave production, transmission, reception, discrimination or interpretation.

 

I like your enthusiasm but you clearly are using a mix-mash of terms without any deep understanding of what they mean IRT acoustic wave production, transmission, reception, discrimination or interpretation.

Speaking of terms, you mean mishmash? I'm no semanticist with this stuff, agreed, but I don't pretend to be. I know enough about the underlying concepts to make them relevant to my broad-based studies, which is information theory and epistemology, logic, ontology, with elements of computational sciences and how it informs things like physics, and chemistry... no one has yet come up with a "theory for everything" because it intertwines various theories that draw on a variety of disciplines.

 

A link in another thread triggered these thoughts.
https://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/threads/the-irreversibility-of-time.168350/

You may have a number of instruments playing and then capture the composite sound into one recording. This is commonly done in a studio recording whereby the instruments and vocalists are recorded onto separate tracks. The recording engineer can mix, balance and blend post-recording to suit his/her fancy.

In principle, it is possible to "unwind" the recording back to the individual instruments. Some situations would be more difficult than others.

I often ponder about these things while sitting around enjoying a hot blazing campfire.
I imagine that if one were to toss a manuscript into the fire, then watch, observe and collect the energy and smoke rising into the air, by applying all the laws of physics one can reconstruct the original manuscript, text included, from the smoke and ashes, etc.

Reference:
https://www.newscientist.com/articl...size-of-the-universe-cant-predict-everything/

 

A link in another thread triggered these thoughts.

You may have a number of instruments playing and then capture the composite sound into one recording. This is commonly done in a studio recording whereby the instruments and vocalists are recorded onto separate tracks. The recording engineer can mix, balance and blend post-recording to suit his/her fancy.

In principle, it is possible to "unwind" the recording back to the individual instruments. Some situations would be more difficult than others.

I often ponder about these things while sitting around enjoying a hot blazing campfire.
I imagine that if one were to toss a manuscript into the fire, then watch, observe and collect the energy and smoke rising into the air, by applying all the laws of physics one can reconstruct the original manuscript, text included, from the smoke and ashes, etc.

Reference:
https://www.newscientist.com/articl...size-of-the-universe-cant-predict-everything/

Check this thread, Mr Chips.

 

Check this thread, Mr Chips.

Yes, I got it from your thread. I should have referenced your thread too. Thanks.

 

Well, we know it is a wave of infinite points, and it is storing this and millions more waves somehow without an actual geometric representation... sounds entirely like something else is happening that cannot be physically perceived, but that’s just me.

The acoustic wave encodes information, which our ear/brain system decodes. We remember the information, not the waveform. A similar mechanism happens in your radio: music is encoded in electromagnetic waves, which your antenna picks up and your radio decodes.

re: editor—I don’t think there is an audio editor that will permit the cannibalization of waves into wavelets for editing... just googled.

Don't use the term "wavelet" in your searches, as that's something else entirely. What you're looking for is audio pitch editing. Melodyne is the usual choice for audio engineers.

 

Yeah you know there is another view on this too and that is the point of unwinding time.
Some things can be unwound and brought back into their original states but other things are almost impossible to unwind because they are so complex and there is a bit of randomness within the new structure that i dont think can be determined.
One example that could be unwound is several baseballs thrown onto the ground using some sort of machine that is completely predictable.
One example that would be too hard to undo is a mixing of several chemicals by a human with a spoon. Once they are mixed it is too hard to unravel.
Another example is laminar flow vs turbulent flow. Laminar flow keeps things from mixing randomly (for the ideal case) but turbulent flow is unpredictable except in the most extremely controlled cases.

So i think we have examples of things that can be unwound and things that cant.
Note that in all cases the information is there, completely present, but to unravel it may involve some randomness.
The example i can think of is a singer who at the end of a longer note warbles their voice slightly. That is a trick to sound on key a little better but also adds to the content of the piece in a nice way. Can the warble be unwrapped into the original note? That would be interesting to try to figure out i think.

 

Speaking of terms, you mean mishmash? I'm no semanticist with this stuff, agreed, but I don't pretend to be. I know enough about the underlying concepts to make them relevant to my broad-based studies, which is information theory and epistemology, logic, ontology, with elements of computational sciences and how it informs things like physics, and chemistry... no one has yet come up with a "theory for everything" because it intertwines various theories that draw on a variety of disciplines.

Here's a interesting concept you might like.

 

Here's a interesting concept you might like.

Oh wow now i can FINALLY get some sleep at night!


One thing i never really thought about was a conformal mapping of a black hole. Now that i've seen it i cant imagine why i never thought of that myself because that often simplifies problems involving space/area that seem very implausible otherwise.

 

The acoustic wave encodes information, which our ear/brain system decodes. We remember the information, not the waveform. A similar mechanism happens in your radio: music is encoded in electromagnetic waves, which your antenna picks up and your radio decodes.


Don't use the term "wavelet" in your searches, as that's something else entirely. What you're looking for is audio pitch editing. Melodyne is the usual choice for audio engineers.

Thanks for the reply... but I’m not looking for audio pitch editing (I have been in the music field for years).... I’ve been using the term “wavelet” to mean “constituent wave” and I realize it’s already defined otherwise. So “constituent wave” or “sub-wave” or what have you. A single note in a big piano piece in a cathedral. Can you “get at it” and modulate it. Professors I’ve talked to say “not possibe” even in principle.

 

There are programs that can take a waterfall (Spectrogram) and reproduce the original sound from that stored information.
http://arss.sourceforge.net/examples.shtml

Instruments and vocals separation

 

There are programs that can take a waterfall (Spectrogram) and reproduce the original sound from that stored information.
http://arss.sourceforge.net/examples.shtml

Instruments and vocals separation

Thanks for the link... looks like a very good start. Wonder what the theoretical limits are, with AI...

 

Thanks for the link... looks like a very good start. Wonder what the theoretical limits are, with AI...

I found the professor that's telling you these things are impossible.

 

Good idea though.

All those sounds sound like they are inside a long tin pipe. That can be improved a lot.
The picture transmission through sound is interesting. Part of the Jpg specification is a conversion to frequency components as an intermediate step, so i guess you could partially decode a .jpg file and send the frequency components over a sound medium, possibly after some scaling. Funny what we dont think of sometimes until we see it. Once we see it it is like, "Oh yeah, duh, of course we can do that!"

Here is an example of impossible music.

 

Thanks for the reply... but I’m not looking for audio pitch editing (I have been in the music field for years).... I’ve been using the term “wavelet” to mean “constituent wave” and I realize it’s already defined otherwise. So “constituent wave” or “sub-wave” or what have you. A single note in a big piano piece in a cathedral. Can you “get at it” and modulate it. Professors I’ve talked to say “not possibe” even in principle.

It's certainly possible in principle. Play a sustained A minor triad on the piano, centered at middle C. Your fingers are playing the notes associated with 220 Hz, 262 Hz, and 330 Hz. Nonlinearities in the piano cause harmonic distortion in each of these notes, producing a sequence of weighted overtones at integer multiples of each of the fundamental frequencies. How these overtones are weighted determines the timbre of the chord, how it sounds.

There is enormous variety possible in the weights -- every instrument has its own signature, which the performer can modulate through her playing. Despite all this seeming complexity, the overtones are related to the fundamental frequencies by a very simple rule (integer multiples). So, if you know the fundamental frequencies in a complex wave -- and these are generally easy to pick out -- you know how to group any overtones present in the complex wave. Thus, for example, if you had really meant to play A major instead of A minor, you would change the 262 Hz tone (C) to 277 Hz (C#), and then find all the overtones harmonically related to 262 Hz and change them to be related to 277 Hz, with the same relative weighting.

That's the theory. In practice, there are of course complications. But then it just comes to down to implementation details. Here's a short video showing a working example of single-note manipulation in polyphonic (chordal) settings: