Talk:Signal

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Signal article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 12 months

‹See TfM›

Physics Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Telecommunications Mid‑importance

	Telecommunication portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Problem in the section "Quantization"

"If a signal is to be represented as a sequence of numbers, it is impossible to maintain arbitrarily high precision - each number in the sequence must have a finite number of digits. As a result, the values of such a signal are restricted to belong to a finite set; in other words, it is quantized." This looks wrong to me. First, representing a signal as a sequence does not imply that each number has a finite precision. A sequence of analog values periodically sampled has, in fact, arbitrary precision for signals with finite bandwidth (Shannon-Whitaker theorem). Second, even if the numbers are not analog, but also discrete, there are specific signals that still have exact digital representation.

I think that section about quantization should explain that a typical analog signal is approximated by a discrete signal representation (say, digital, for example). This discretization or digitalization is the same as quantization in this context. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hldsc (talk • contribs) 15:46, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the qualifier to "sequence of digital data". In mathematics "numbers" may have unbounded precision. Any practical system is bounded. The section above does talk about discrete time without discussing quantization. ~Kvng (talk) 17:48, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

is signal an alt tech

According to Wikipedia, MeWe is considered an alt-tech, even though it was not created as a platform for the far-right and is also popular among democratic activists in Hong Kong. By the same logic, we should mention in the beginning of this article that signal is an alt tech. Or we can do the more sense action and remove the claim of alt-tech from websites that are more grey. Anyway, as far as I see it, if Wikipedia is consistent with itself then both signal and MeWe should be labeled as alt-tech or non of them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.226.169.229 (talk) 16:50, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The question is beyond the scope of this article. BD2412 T 02:44, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing the article you meant to post this on is Signal (software) instead? This page is for the general concept of signals, not the messaging app. CaesiumTea (talk) 15:45, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think the generic term ‘signal’, which applies to human communication methods throughout history, is way, way too broad to apply a term like alt-tech to. The definition says alt-tech is a “social media platform or internet provider” --Chetvorno^TALK 01:29, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Scope of article

The section Requested move 3 April 2017 implies that a decision was made to turn this into a more general article about signals in various contexts, but does that actually still stand, or was it in fact reversed/abandoned? The maintenance template only says it needs corrections to tone, rather than mentioning anything about content changes still being wanted, even though the article clearly has only a technical context still. E.g., the very first words are still "In signal processing," which sounds like it's setting the context for the entire article.

If the decision was reversed somewhere else that's not documented on this talk page, then hopefully this section can serve to indicate it now. On the other hand, if the article is still meant to be expanded/rewritten, then I'll try to add an appropriate template for that type of changes. I might also take a stab at some of that rewriting, but I have a feeling that I'm already kind of in over my head as a newbie contributor. (My homepage conveniently suggested this as an "easy" first edit for me since it was only tagged for copy editing, hah!) --CaesiumTea (talk) 17:21, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The first paragraph of the lead gives context for signal processing. The second gives more general context but is not well supported by the article body; the body is technology focused. Reviewing Signal (disambiguation), I don't think it is a mistake for us to consider the topics discussed here to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC at least for content already developed in the encyclopedia. Maybe a more general article could be written and perhaps you'd like to take a crack at it but, you're right, it certainly is not a beginner task. This is not the only can of worms you'll find on Wikipedia. ~Kvng (talk) 13:27, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree the content of the article should be expanded to cover the topic better. There is a large field of signaling in biology: (Cell signaling, Signal transduction), and evolution and animal behavior (Signalling theory), and use of the term in economics (Signalling (economics), Conspicuous consumption) and game theory (Signaling game). That said, I agree with Kvng the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is in communications technology, so an emphasis on that is WP:DUE WEIGHT. --Chetvorno^TALK 17:51, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Talk

Make friends — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:95F0:FD00:AFE6:E174:5E3A:E635 (talk) 11:23, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]