> Frequency is defined as the inverse of time. Time is not defined
> as inverse of frequency. Try to understand the difference.

No, time is ALSO defined as the inverse of frequency. IT COMES FROM THE VERY SIMPLE MATH EQUATION. Please try to understand that!!!

> It's funny that everything you don't understand is nonsensical...

Obviously you still don't understand what "time" really is! It can happen to the best of us!!! LOL

Are you just IGNORING the simple math equation!?

> From a dimension analytical point of view frequency doesn't
> even exist, time does.

Say what!? I could say the same EXACT thing! Time does not exist ONLY frequency exists. Are you for real!?

..and there is plenty of evidence that frequency does exist, otherwise there would be no wireless communications (TV, radio, cell-phone, wifi, etc, etc) for example...

> You could say that, but then you'd be missing the point of
> which of them is defined by the other. And that is what you
> are doing all the time. (all the inverse of frequency, in case
> you didn't understand what that meant.)

It really depends which one you take as the main reference! Meaning that they are directly related to each other on an inverse relationship so one is not more important than the other per say! It is only when one uses it or the inverse of it (frequency vs. time) as the reference when the TRANSFORMATION takes place...

> It seems to be a little too mind bobbling for you.

It is mind boggling. PERIOD

..but, it is CRITICAL to understand this simple equation in order to then fully understand wave/information theory and how the transformation (fourrier analysis for example) takes place. Obviously you are still having a very hard TIME grasping this...

-wirelessguru1