But the limitations of math in replicating reality may factor in to the difference in listening experiences reported by so many vinyl lovers.This intelligent woman know that the map is not the territory...
Is it difficult to understand?
You attibute to her something that describe your attitude....It is yourself reducing human timbre perception to a mathematical theorem taken like an absolute...Acoustic is NOT signal theory....And in this statement she just shows herself to be yet another academic trying to look smart outside her area of expertise.
It is also the fallacy of accuracy, meaning that in no way we can attribute an absolute signification to numbers out of any human experience in the first and last place...
Elementary epistemology....
She speak here about the mathematical translation of ANYTHING analog in digital, using Nyquist theorem , that is to say using a FINITE amount of information to store ANY infinite continuous sound wave... This is the same thing that you already said from the beginning, not surprizing because this is linked to the content of the Nyquist theorem, then how can you accuse her of incompetence?
because humans only hear sounds within a certain range of frequencies, we can get rid of any other frequencies that may show up in a sound wave’s decomposition and still get back the original sound. So the sampling theorem explains how to use a finite amount of information to store any sound wave.
This is what she really said about fourier and Nyquist, and you think that i am stupid or what ?
This is the gibberish you attribute to her in place of what she just said in the citation i just use:
Infinite points implies infinite bandwidth and infinite signal to noise. You assume she understands Nyquist but I posit she has as best cursory knowledge