<p>Because it piques me and because acoustic phonetics is a field that fascinates me? Can you then thus stop insulting me because I am just trying to seek the right course that would point me in the right direction.</p>
<p>Speech</a> Compression is not an example of where signal science and phonetics merge? Nor Linear Predictive Coding?</p>
<p>And no of course I don't seek to master LPC any time soon. Yes I realise signals is a long intellectual journey requiring immense dedication. But preferably, there are certain choices of study that allow a curious (non-E-school) student to get closer to where its principles overlap with his other interests, as I know they must. (Or W.T.F. do I do to begin understanding the signally math thrown at me in papers that have nothing to do with EE but everything to do with my fields of interest?)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Analog/digital has nothing to do with continuous/discrete time.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It would be nice you know, if you corrected me, in the Jeffersonian spirit, rather than being so mean. :(</p>
<p>Redskin: ????</p>
<p>Everyone has tried to say this: you're going way too far in way too many directions. To learn everything you want to learn would take you 20 years. You're always bringing up your economic situation, so everyone assumes you can't afford 20 years of school (who can?). All of these "overlaps" overlap because there is one main top concept: biology/science. But that doesn't mean you can connect them all willy-nilly. Then, bringing in signals, well, that's a whole new ball field. Signals belongs to EE, and advanced math/physics majors may see it later in life, but probably because they cross studies with EE. But this is the point: instead of sitting down and rationally thinking about this, you launch into a grandiose scheme to study signals when there is no point. What you "think" about doing will be most likely left to people who specialize in signals from the EE field. But fine, go take Signals I, ECE323. Good f***ing luck too. Maybe it will calm down your "plans" a bit.</p>
<p>And to be quite honest, your grandiose language and jumps to weird conclusions tend to make people upset and ignore you on here. No one is impressed and you're just trying to show off. </p>
<p>And I wasn't being mean. I was correcting you. And trying to point out to you that signals is a whole other pond. Stay in your own.</p>
<p>"Redskin: ????"</p>
<p>Galosien, your diatribes are way out there, and are often way off base from the question that original threads seek to answer. I agree with Shoebox's comments for the most part. I don't know why you take off on tangents?
I can't help but feel like you are "looking for love in all the wrong places".
You are clearly an intelligent person and certainly not malicious. I bet you have a lot of advice for folks out there. Perhaps if you stick to trying to answer the question at hand when people post on CC, you'd be received in a more favorable light.</p>
<p>Okay this has nothing to do with tutoring anymore stop replying</p>