Hi Ian -

Thanks for trying to clarify, but I think you misread my post
somehow.

I said "...third-order distortion rises 3 times as fast (dB scale)
as the desired (linear) signal."

You said "Third order distortion DOES rise on a 'three dB
per dB' basis, but the wanted signal also rises - at 1dB per dB."

The content of our statements is the same. But you went on
to address the slope DIFFERENCE, which I did not discuss.

I believe Airy is making the same point I am making here
with his (2/5/05 8:25) post.

73, Ed, W6LOL


"Ian Jackson" wrote in message
...
In message t, Old Ed
writes

SNIP

The original author observed that many practical devices
(e.g., mixers) exhibit distortion levels that rise as the "power"
of the product in question. For example, third-order distortion
rises 3 times as fast (dB scale) as the desired (linear) signal.
Snip

Ed, where the increasing intermodulation distortion is simply a result
of increasing the level of the signals at the input of the mixer (or
amplifier), third order distortion actually rises TWICE as fast as the
desired signal. Third order distortion DOES rise on a 'three dB per dB'
basis, but the wanted signal also rises - at 1dB per dB. The difference
is 2dB. So the relationship is 2dB per dB.

If you continued to increase the signal levels, you might expect that
the level of the intermodulation would eventually catch up with - and
overtake - the level of the wanted signal (it doesn't, of course).

The third order intercept point is simply the hypothetical level where
the level of the intermodulation would have risen so much (at 2dB per
dB) that it equals the level of the wanted signal.

Ian.
--