From that article, that's the original Hamming windows with a_0 = 0.54 and a_1 = 0.46.
> Setting a_0 to approximately 0.54, or more precisely 25/46, produces the Hamming window, proposed by Richard W. Hamming. That choice places a zero-crossing at frequency 5π/(N − 1), which cancels the first sidelobe of the Hann window, giving it a height of about one-fifth that of the Hann window. The Hamming window is often called the Hamming blip when used for pulse shaping.
This is pretty much how I feel every time delving into FFTs. Like, I get the concept, but something in my brain just shuts off when it comes to actually trying to grok it. I do however very much appreciate those that have created software where I just provide --input and they handle the rest.
I also have trouble wrapping my head around all of this, and complex numbers, for that matter. Never mind that I'm employing this stuff all the time in GNU Radio.
Up until about 2 months ago contact tracing in Australia was very effective. Contact tracing teams were able to trace who and where each person got infected. They were also notifying/testing/isolating first and sometimes secondary downstream contacts (up to 400 people in the case of one country town outbreak).
One of the infections was traced to a department store and the interaction between the two people was caught on cctv. They walked past each other and didn't talk. It was seconds.
It’s not like you can see the viral particles jumping over in that exact moment. I’m sure there is more to the story, but let’s not try and claim that this is incontrovertible scientific proof that infection happens “in seconds”.
* You have an infection whose only traceable contact is for a few seconds in a store...
It seems pretty likely that the infection happened in the moments surrounding those few seconds. Especially when we have multiple circumstances like this. Especially when it agrees with our underlying understanding of the germ theory of disease.
Extended contact makes infection much more likely. But people who are sick shed live virus, and there's not a safe level of exposure of live virus where infection is impossible.
Not necessarily. I'd be interested to know if the virus samples from those two people were sequenced in order to prove transmission from one to the other. Absent that evidence there could be other explanations such as : transmission was from some third person not known to the contact tracers.
> transmission was from some third person not known to the contact tracers.
This becomes an unlikely explanation once
> > * A vast majority of infections can be traced
and
> > Especially when we have multiple circumstances like this.
The probability of an alternate explanation becomes exceptionally unlikely. It's further reduced by our general scientific understanding that:
> > But people who are sick shed live virus, and there's not a safe level of exposure of live virus where infection is impossible.
Infection from a momentary contact is fairly unlikely. But when you have a massive number of momentary contacts in the populace, it happening many times becomes a near certainty.
E.g., this:
> Several individuals in Australia were also infected with the Kappa variant through lingering virus aerosol particles in the hallway of a quarantine hotel in May. Though the individuals had no direct contact with each other they opened the doors to their hotel rooms within 30 minutes of each other and tested positive for the same strain.
No complete sequencing, but the same variant... spread several times apparently by the same mechanism of indirect contact, several individuals infected. In a quarantine hotel, where there's not many alternate explanations available.
Or this one, confirmed by sequencing:
> A similar event occurred earlier in April where two families quarantining in rooms next to one another were found to share the same viral sequence, after briefly opening their doors 30 minutes apart.
From the ingredients list on the Amazon product listing it contains a number of soaps derived from coconut, palm and tallow (usually beef fat). Sodium X-ate is a soap made from X.
Surprised to see this on HN, it's not my main gig but recently I've been getting into the details of exporting and selling coconut oil soap from my family's business.
It's a remarkably simple process to make soap from oil or fat. just heat and add a caustic agent. Sodium Hydroxide for bar soap or Potassium Hydroxide for liquid soap.
When I check out the competition and look at the ingredients list I'm surprised at how many different things that are in most products. Most body washes are technically detergents not soaps.
> Most body washes are technically detergents not soaps.
Many bar "soaps" you find in pharmacies and grocery stores are detergent too, at least in the US. If it doesn't say "soap" on the label, it probably isn't.
