Re: human versus spectral resolution

["Richard F. Lyon" <DickLyon@xxxxxxx>]

At 10:46 AM +0100 4/3/08, Alain de Cheveigne' wrote:
> Nordmark's point not well known or understood, even by savvy signal 
> processing specialists. It's very common to read that the 
> Heisenberg/Gabor principle (earlier suggested by Helmholtz) limits 
> the accuracy of  frequency measurement, and that the fact that one 
> can do better is a paradox.

Alain, thanks for quoting Nordmark on that; it's exactly what I had 
in mind, but you've explained it much better, through him.  My point, 
again, is that it's worth doing the experiment to see whether a 
human's performance on a task is "better than theory", as a way to 
get a clue as to whether you're using an inappropriate theory, as in 
that example.  A paradox is a good clue.

And yes, the community of "savvy signal processing specialists" is 
too often ignorant of this distinction, and too easily led astray by 
the Fourier/Helmholtz/Ohm/Heisenberg concepts.  That's why I had 
Helmholtz and Ohm as the "bad guys" or "anti-heros" in my talk on 
cochlear modeling retrospective.   ( 
http://www.archive.org/details/Helen_Wills_2007_10_01_Richard_Lyon )

Dick