John Smith wrote:
Dave:

The Doc should have warned you, mixing alcohol with your meds can have
that effect... when the chemicals and alcohol have worn off, things
should return to normal, hopefully...

John

What effect would that be, "John"--the ability to see you dodging Jim's
points?

Dave K8MN

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 00:03:43 +0000, Dave Heil wrote:


John Smith wrote:

Jim:

I don't think I have ever made a statement or post to "reduce testing" or
even make it one question easier...

You are attempting to sneak in an argument of your own design and form a
false to what is being argued. Most, if not all, this is about is dumping
morse, an un-needed, under-used, ancient form of communication that a very
good portion of amateurs never use...

If they have some way of using ~1.72 - 80Mhz for BPL, go for it, at the
most they will only interfere with an insignificant number of hobby
users... business/corporate america can adapt to other freqs, indeed, the
boost on the whole to industry by updating the net will out weigh any
negative effects. Military can use satellites...

John

Wow! That car was really moving fast. Wonder what kind it was.
Ohhhhh, it's a *Dodge*.

Dave K8MN


On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 20:49:43 +0000, Jim Hampton wrote:



John,

Since you purport to have a ee degree, you might explain how some signals
held below 300 KHz could possibly serve a number of users (say in a
neighborhood) at 3 megabaud (or higher) rates? My $29.95 per month ADSL
runs from 4,000 kbits to 7,000 kbits per second. I downloaded I.E. 6 at 695
kilobytes per second, so it is not a fluke. Will BPL do as well? BPL isn't
going to be used in the countryside; they want to penetrate cities where the
cost per user will be cheap. The problem is that cable (Roadrunner) and DSL
are running $29.95 per month - oh, DSL is now available (high speed) at
$24.95 per month. Of course, satellite can also supply high-speed Internet
connections. Perhaps BPL can do it for $10.00 per month? LOL

For what it is worth, Len is correct; the BPL runs from just above the AM
broadcast band (in the U.S.) to around 80 MHz. Even at, say, 1.8 MHz, there
can be considerable radiation.

The easiest solution is simply to allow it, but not allow signals any
greater than those currently permitted for unintentional radiators. If
done, only a small number of amateurs would likely be affected.

If I recall properly (and anyone is free to correct these numbers), BPL
proponents had argued that BPL, as originally proposed, would only raise the
background noise some 10 dB. Ten decibels is, of course, 1 Bell, which is a
10 times increase in power (in this case, noise power). That is quite
unacceptable. Period.

I know that a large number of folks would like to reduce testing (not just
Morse) to as close to zero as possible.

My former employer discontinued apprenticeships a while back. Originally,
they were 4 year apprenticeships; later, they became 3 year
apprenticeships - but the 3 year apprenticeship conferred an associates
degree upon graduation. So, the 4 year apprenticeship must have been a
watered-down apprenticeship, right?

I see where one state in this country is now changing its' education system
to take a strong stand against evolution and make some statements
encouraging "intelligent design".

Speaking of that associate's degree apprenticeship, they stated that it
includes a lot of electronic theory. I saw the books. I was surprised that
they actually mentioned Norton and Thevenin equivalents, but they were
sorely lacking in much detail. No ac theory (forget complex impedance).
Simply series and parallel dc circuits. No bridges. No Delta Wye
conversions. No multiple dc sources either. Perhaps a maximum of 4
resistors in an extremely simple "circuit".

Whilst you and others seem intent on reducing testing (I have no problem
with Morse - either for or against), I cannot agree with simplifying the
theory/operating/law sections of the testing. I see other areas of the
country which are similarly intent on watering down much other than amateur
radio.

Why, oh why, are we the number 16 nation in the world in broadband
penetration (oh, BPL, right?)? We are far from number one with cell phones.
We are down around number 20 in life expectancy.

Yep, better argue against Darwin. All those liberal left-leaning
universities must be the problem. Perhaps we can chase away learned folks
the way Germany did 70 years ago or so. Werner Von Bran sure was an asset
to our country when he left Germany. Maybe we can return the favor and
chase some folks out of this country.

I'm beginning to see why some of the hams argue so vehemently. I think it
has something more than just Morse behind it.

Take a look at what is happening. Read some newspapers (best look outside
the U.S. for less-biased reporting). Check some numbers (such as poverty,
Internet penetration, life expectancy). No, we are not in bad shape, but
nowhere near the top where most folks simply *think* we are. Just because
the administration says were are doing well doesn't make it so.


Best regards from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA