[sdiy] Is everything digital?

[Scott Gravenhorst]

Glen <mclilith at charter.net> wrote:
>At 12:23 PM 5/14/2005 , Scott Gravenhorst wrote:
>
>>Except that digital systems react in a predictable manner to the well defined
>>discrete states.  I see no such dependance in analog systems, regardless of
>>whether the quantum states are real or theoretical.
>
>In another post, I explain that I was implying the *signal* is digital, not
>manner in which the circuitry processed the signal at a macro level.

Perhaps this is a difference without a distinction?  Or as Spock put it: "A
difference that makes no difference, is no difference."

If the states are not recognized nor reacted to, why then call it "digital"? 
That is, it's digitalness is not an attribute that matters.

---------------------------------------------------------
- Where merit is not rewarded, excellence fades.
- Hydrogen is pointless without solar.
- What good are laws that only lawyers understand?
- The media's credibility should always be questioned.
- The only good terrorist is a dead terrorist.
- Governments do nothing well, save collect taxes.

-- Scott Gravenhorst | LegoManiac / Lego Trains / RIS 1.5
-- Linux Rex         | RedWebMail by RedStarWare
-- FatMan: home1.gte.net/res0658s/fatman/
-- NonFatMan: home1.gte.net/res0658s/electronics/
-- Autodidactic Master of Arcane and Hidden Knowledge.