Posted by Jerry Avins on 10/31/34 11:28

Radium wrote:
> Jerry Avins wrote:
>
>>Radium wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>
>>>Remember:
>>>
>>>bit rate = sample rate X bit resolution X pixels
>>
>>Yes.
>>
>>
>>>1 = s X 100,000,000 X [1,000,000 X 10,000,000 X 1,000,000,000]
>>
>>No.
>
>
> Why not? The math works out. s is the sample rate.

Where does the 1 = come from?

>>>1 = s X 100,000,000 X [10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000]
>>
>>No.
>>
>>
>>>1 = s X 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
>>
>>No.
>>
>>
>>>s = 1/1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
>>
>>Absurd
>
> Why?

Because one sample every few billion years is absurd.

>
>>A sample must have at least one bit (black or white).
>
>
> True. In my design, each sample has 10^8 bits/sample
>
>
>>A pixel must have
>>(at least) one sample.
>
>
> Then why not sample them in a synchronized manner [i.e. sample all
> pixels at once].

How many samplers would that take? Where would you get them?

>>>bit-resolution = 100,000,000-bit
>>
>>Is that 10^8 bits/pixel?
>
>
> Yes. Color resolution is 10^8
>
>
>>Remember, you need one sample for every pixel. Otherwise, you don't know
>>what it is.
>
>
> Can't all pixels be sampled at once? In sync with each other?

No

>>>Pixels = 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 = 1,000,000 X 10,000,000 X
>>>1,000,000,000
>>
>>= 10^22
>>
>>
>>>There are 1,000,000 pixels for width, 10,000,000 pixels for height, and
>>>1,000,000,000 pixels for depth.
>
>
>>3D?
>
>
> Yes.
>
>
>>So, by your numbers, 1 image = 10^6 * 10^7 * 10^9 = 10^22 pixels.
>
>
> Yes.

That's 10^30 bits. How fast did you say the bits arrive?

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

[Back to original message]