> don't care about the "student", I'm telling /you/ what convolution is. It's not the dot product. Then don't comment on expositions given to students. >Sweep

> don't care about the "student", I'm telling /you/ what convolution is. It's not the dot product. Then don't comment on expositions given to students. >Sweeping across your input is the heart and soul of convolution. But that's like just your opinion man. The definition is what the definition is and a component of it is the translation of the filter and a component of it is the weighted sum. It's up to each individual to decide what's the most significant component and each individual is free to adjust their focus according to the problem at hand. In this instant I chose to focus on the sum for the sake of pedagogy. >If you change a single minus sign, you get cross correlation which is completely different. No in fact you get literally the same function just flipped about t=0. I would not call that completely different. > I didn't take that tone when replying to your initial message. Read your response again and reflect some more because absolutely your initial message was antagonistic