Some great replies, gives me a lot to think about Terms like "well behaived" when applied to the "functon" make me wonder what stipulations might be implied by the language that you'd have to be a formal mathmatician to interpret. As an example, I don't even know what the instrinsic properties of a "function" may be in this context.
Since it's an infinit series I suppose it doesn't really matter, given enough time you could prove out any rational requirement? which is why you can throw math at it. If it was just a bunch of random numbers that started somewhere and stopped somewhere, I doubt anyone would be writing equations that mean anything. I'd guess we would turn to statistics at that pint to supply some context. As a broad answer to questions posted in a couple of the replies, my interest lies in imrpoving my understanding of specifically what the SNST proves, and the requirements for it to be valid. -- dupswapdrop -- the music-dsp mailing list and website: subscription info, FAQ, source code archive, list archive, book reviews, dsp links http://music.columbia.edu/cmc/music-dsp http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp
