|
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
Hi:
Please don't be annoyed/offended by my question. I have a very weird question about electromagnetic radiation, carriers, and modulators. Is it mathematically-possible to carry a modulator signal with a frequency of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles every 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond and an amplitude of 1-watt-per-meter-squared on a AM carrier signal whose frequency is 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanocycle* every 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 giga- eons and whose amplitude is a minimum of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000 gigaphotons per 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond? If it is not mathematically-possible, then please explain why. 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) second is an extremely short amount of time. 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond is even shorter because a nanosecond is shorter than a second. 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 cycles is an extremely large amount of cycles. 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles is even more because a gigacycle is more than a cycle. Giga-eon = a billion eons Eon = a billion years Gigacycle = a billion cycles. *nanocycle = billionth of a cycle Gigaphoton = a billion photons 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 -- now that is one large large number. 10^1,000,000,000 = 10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000 So you get: (10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000) 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) = 10^-(10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000)-to-the-power-(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) 10^-(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000) is an extremely small number at it equals 10-to- the-power-NEGATIVE-[(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10- to-the-power-1,000,000,000)] No offense but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am really interested in this. Thanks, Radium |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequencyon an astronomically-low carrier frequency
Radium wrote:
... Thanks, Radium ROFLOL!!! JS |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequencyon an astronomically-low carrier frequency
Radium wrote: Hi: Please don't be annoyed/offended by my question. Why not ? You're a trolling IDIOT. Graham |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jun 27, 9:38 pm, Radium wrote:
Hi: Please don't be annoyed/offended by my question. I have a very weird question about electromagnetic radiation, carriers, and modulators. Is it mathematically-possible to carry a modulator signal with a frequency of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles every 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond and an amplitude of 1-watt-per-meter-squared on a AM carrier signal whose frequency is 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanocycle* every 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 giga- eons and whose amplitude is a minimum of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000 gigaphotons per 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond? If it is not mathematically-possible, then please explain why. 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) second is an extremely short amount of time. 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond is even shorter because a nanosecond is shorter than a second. 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 cycles is an extremely large amount of cycles. 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles is even more because a gigacycle is more than a cycle. Giga-eon = a billion eons Eon = a billion years Gigacycle = a billion cycles. *nanocycle = billionth of a cycle Gigaphoton = a billion photons 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 -- now that is one large large number. 10^1,000,000,000 = 10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000 So you get: (10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000) 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) = 10^-(10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000)-to-the-power-(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) 10^-(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000) is an extremely small number at it equals 10-to- the-power-NEGATIVE-[(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10- to-the-power-1,000,000,000)] No offense but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am really interested in this. Thanks, Radium |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jun 27, 9:43 pm, John Smith I wrote:
Radium wrote: ... Thanks, Radium ROFLOL!!! JS |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jun 27, 9:59 pm, Eeyore
wrote: Radium wrote: Hi: Please don't be annoyed/offended by my question. Why not ? You're a trolling IDIOT. Graham |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
Radium hath wroth:
Please don't be annoyed/offended by my question. Why? Would you expect facts to change if I were annoyed or offended? If it is not mathematically-possible, then please explain why. Oh, that's easy. The worlds supply of zeros, nulls, and comma separators is strictly limited. The galactic supply of such things were created by the big bang and are not being made any more. If you consume a substantial number of zeros, the zeros must be borrowed from somewhere. While it is mathematically possible to bury the reader in zeros, it is ecologically incorrect to do so. Also, be advised that the government budget and trade deficits have cornered the supply of zeros, and may soon approach an astronomical accumulation of zeros. At the present rate of zero depletion, you may soon be forced to use large exponentials, in order to avoid consuming zeros. No offense Would defense be acceptable? but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am really interested in this. There are about 10^80 particles in the universe. Do with them as you please but do save the zeros for those that need them. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jun 27, 11:44 pm, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Radium hath wroth: Please don't be annoyed/offended by my question. Why? Would you expect facts to change if I were annoyed or offended? If it is not mathematically-possible, then please explain why. Oh, that's easy. The worlds supply of zeros, nulls, and comma separators is strictly limited. The galactic supply of such things were created by the big bang and are not being made any more. If you consume a substantial number of zeros, the zeros must be borrowed from somewhere. While it is mathematically possible to bury the reader in zeros, it is ecologically incorrect to do so. Also, be advised that the government budget and trade deficits have cornered the supply of zeros, and may soon approach an astronomical accumulation of zeros. At the present rate of zero depletion, you may soon be forced to use large exponentials, in order to avoid consuming zeros. No offense Would defense be acceptable? but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am really interested in this. There are about 10^80 particles in the universe. Do with them as you please but do save the zeros for those that need them. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequencyon an astronomically-low carrier frequency
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
There are about 10^80 particles in the universe. Do with them as you please but do save the zeros for those that need them. an a-null-ment is in order. mike |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jun 28, 12:15 am, m II wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote: There are about 10^80 particles in the universe. Do with them as you please but do save the zeros for those that need them. an a-null-ment is in order. mike |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
"Radium" wrote in message oups.com... snip No offense but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am really interested in this. Didn't you pull something like this crap in the sci.engr.television.advanced newsgroup a few years ago? The correct anwer then and now is that the output signal is the modulating signal with a slow phase change impressed on it proportional to the instantaneous amplitude of the carrier. Think "rotating vector." No further replies forthcoming, as my troll-o-meter is edging into the red zone. |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
"Radium" wrote in message oups.com... Hi: Please don't be annoyed/offended by my question. I have a very weird question about electromagnetic radiation, carriers, and modulators. Is it mathematically-possible to carry a modulator signal with a frequency of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles every 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond and an amplitude of 1-watt-per-meter-squared on a AM carrier signal whose frequency is 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanocycle* every 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 giga- eons and whose amplitude is a minimum of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000 gigaphotons per 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond? If it is not mathematically-possible, then please explain why. 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) second is an extremely short amount of time. 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond is even shorter because a nanosecond is shorter than a second. 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 cycles is an extremely large amount of cycles. 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles is even more because a gigacycle is more than a cycle. Giga-eon = a billion eons Eon = a billion years Gigacycle = a billion cycles. *nanocycle = billionth of a cycle Gigaphoton = a billion photons 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 -- now that is one large large number. 10^1,000,000,000 = 10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000 So you get: (10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000) 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) = 10^-(10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000)-to-the-power-(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) 10^-(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000) is an extremely small number at it equals 10-to- the-power-NEGATIVE-[(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10- to-the-power-1,000,000,000)] No offense but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am really interested in this. Thanks, Radium Radium The answer is no. It takes a finite time for even so called 'instantaneous' quantum interactions to occur, so the frequencies quoted are a nonsense. Essentially frequencies above around 10 ^ 30 Hz may (as) well not exist. I am probably a few orders of magnitude out here, but that is the general idea. For a detailed explaination see "The Road to Reality: A complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe by Roger Penrose - ISBN 0739458477". Available from Amazon and all good booksellers. Mr. Penrose has collaborated with some of the greatest theoretical mathamaticians and physicists of the last fifty years and if you can follow the maths, all will become clear. This book will explain a lot of the maths required anyway, so worth giving it a go. Most mathematicians prefer to simplify equations by removing superfluous zeroes and exponents by cancellation on either side of the equation. :-) Mike G0ULI |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequencyon an astronomically-low carrier frequency
Mike Kaliski wrote:
For a detailed explaination see "The Road to Reality: A complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe by Roger Penrose - ISBN 0739458477". Mike, does he say anything about quantum entanglement? -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jun 28, 3:52 am, "Sal M. Onella"
wrote: "Radium" wrote in message oups.com... snip No offense but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am really interested in this. Didn't you pull something like this crap in the sci.engr.television.advanced newsgroup a few years ago? The correct anwer then and now is that the output signal is the modulating signal with a slow phase change impressed on it proportional to the instantaneous amplitude of the carrier. Think "rotating vector." No further replies forthcoming, as my troll-o-meter is edging into the red zone. Your troll-o-meter is defective, it should be pegged hard in the red zone. Please have it recalibrated to a proper sensitivity. |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message t... Mike Kaliski wrote: For a detailed explaination see "The Road to Reality: A complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe by Roger Penrose - ISBN 0739458477". Mike, does he say anything about quantum entanglement? -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com Cecil Yes indeed he does. This book is about as leading edge as it gets. The author has worked closely with Stephen Hawking and people of similar academic credentials. It doesn't get any better than that. It is clear from reading this book that we have reached a plateau in our capability of understanding how the universe works and we need to await the arrival of new technology and techniques to be able to test the latest theories. The theory has outstripped the technology for the time being. Mike G0ULI |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jun 28, 10:22 am, "Mike Kaliski" wrote:
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message t... Mike Kaliski wrote: For a detailed explaination see "The Road to Reality: A complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe by Roger Penrose - ISBN 0739458477". Mike, does he say anything about quantum entanglement? -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com Cecil Yes indeed he does. This book is about as leading edge as it gets. The author has worked closely with Stephen Hawking and people of similar academic credentials. It doesn't get any better than that. It is clear from reading this book that we have reached a plateau in our capability of understanding how the universe works and we need to await the arrival of new technology and techniques to be able to test the latest theories. The theory has outstripped the technology for the time being. Mike G0ULI ? . . . |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jun 28, 12:15 am, m II wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote: There are about 10^80 particles in the universe. Do with them as you please but do save the zeros for those that need them. an a-null-ment is in order. mike .. . . ? . . . |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jun 28, 12:52 am, "Sal M. Onella"
wrote: "Radium" wrote in message oups.com... snip No offense but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am really interested in this. Didn't you pull something like this crap in the sci.engr.television.advanced newsgroup a few years ago? The correct anwer then and now is that the output signal is the modulating signal with a slow phase change impressed on it proportional to the instantaneous amplitude of the carrier. Think "rotating vector." No further replies forthcoming, as my troll-o-meter is edging into the red zone. .. . . ? . . . |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jun 28, 9:55 am, Martin wrote:
On Jun 28, 3:52 am, "Sal M. Onella" wrote: "Radium" wrote in message roups.com... snip No offense but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am really interested in this. Didn't you pull something like this crap in the sci.engr.television.advanced newsgroup a few years ago? The correct anwer then and now is that the output signal is the modulating signal with a slow phase change impressed on it proportional to the instantaneous amplitude of the carrier. Think "rotating vector." No further replies forthcoming, as my troll-o-meter is edging into the red zone. Your troll-o-meter is defective, it should be pegged hard in the red zone. Please have it recalibrated to a proper sensitivity.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - .. . . ? . . . |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jun 28, 4:09 am, "Mike Kaliski" wrote:
"Radium" wrote in message oups.com... Hi: Please don't be annoyed/offended by my question. I have a very weird question about electromagnetic radiation, carriers, and modulators. Is it mathematically-possible to carry a modulator signal with a frequency of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles every 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond and an amplitude of 1-watt-per-meter-squared on a AM carrier signal whose frequency is 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanocycle* every 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 giga- eons and whose amplitude is a minimum of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000 gigaphotons per 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond? If it is not mathematically-possible, then please explain why. 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) second is an extremely short amount of time. 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond is even shorter because a nanosecond is shorter than a second. 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 cycles is an extremely large amount of cycles. 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles is even more because a gigacycle is more than a cycle. Giga-eon = a billion eons Eon = a billion years Gigacycle = a billion cycles. *nanocycle = billionth of a cycle Gigaphoton = a billion photons 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 -- now that is one large large number. 10^1,000,000,000 = 10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000 So you get: (10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000) 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) = 10^-(10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000)-to-the-power-(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) 10^-(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000) is an extremely small number at it equals 10-to- the-power-NEGATIVE-[(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10- to-the-power-1,000,000,000)] No offense but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am really interested in this. Thanks, Radium Radium The answer is no. It takes a finite time for even so called 'instantaneous' quantum interactions to occur, so the frequencies quoted are a nonsense. Essentially frequencies above around 10 ^ 30 Hz may (as) well not exist. I am probably a few orders of magnitude out here, but that is the general idea. For a detailed explaination see "The Road to Reality: A complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe by Roger Penrose - ISBN 0739458477". Available from Amazon and all good booksellers. Mr. Penrose has collaborated with some of the greatest theoretical mathamaticians and physicists of the last fifty years and if you can follow the maths, all will become clear. This book will explain a lot of the maths required anyway, so worth giving it a go. Most mathematicians prefer to simplify equations by removing superfluous zeroes and exponents by cancellation on either side of the equation. :-) Mike G0ULI- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - .. . . ? . . . |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jun 28, 4:46 am, Cecil Moore wrote:
Mike Kaliski wrote: For a detailed explaination see "The Road to Reality: A complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe by Roger Penrose - ISBN 0739458477". Mike, does he say anything about quantum entanglement? -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com .. . . ? . . . |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
m II hath wroth:
Jeff Liebermann wrote: There are about 10^80 particles in the universe. Do with them as you please but do save the zeros for those that need them. an a-null-ment is in order. mike Divorcing oneself from reality is probably easier and cheaper than getting the church involved in an annulment. The problem here is that most people don't understand the difference between a zero and a null. Zeros are easy as they are place holders for orders of magnitude increases in quantities. Nulls are what's left when we run out of zeros. Think of nulls as place holders for the missing zeros. The uncontrolled substitution of nulls for missing zeros has the potential for destroying civilization as we know it. For example, a check written for a million dollars would normally be inscribed: $1,000,000.00 When all the zero have been consumed and replaced by nulls, it would look like this: $1, , . which leaves much to the imagination. Perhaps we should add zeros to the endangered "specie" list? -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
In article .com, rhf-
says... On Jun 28, 4:46 am, Cecil Moore wrote: Mike Kaliski wrote: For a detailed explaination see "The Road to Reality: A complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe by Roger Penrose - ISBN 0739458477". Mike, does he say anything about quantum entanglement? -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com . . . ? . . . I see there are a lot of unanswered questions in your life. |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
"Eeyore" wrote in message ... " Radium" Is a certified nutcase........ nothing new here. |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequencyon an astronomically-low carrier frequency
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
m II hath wroth: Jeff Liebermann wrote: There are about 10^80 particles in the universe. Do with them as you please but do save the zeros for those that need them. an a-null-ment is in order. mike Divorcing oneself from reality is probably easier and cheaper than getting the church involved in an annulment. The problem here is that most people don't understand the difference between a zero and a null. Zeros are easy as they are place holders for orders of magnitude increases in quantities. Nulls are what's left when we run out of zeros. Think of nulls as place holders for the missing zeros. The uncontrolled substitution of nulls for missing zeros has the potential for destroying civilization as we know it. For example, a check written for a million dollars would normally be inscribed: $1,000,000.00 When all the zero have been consumed and replaced by nulls, it would look like this: $1, , . which leaves much to the imagination. Perhaps we should add zeros to the endangered "specie" list? Doesn't the space collapse so that we end up with $1...? |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jun 28, 12:38 am, Radium wrote:
Hi: Please don't be annoyed/offended by my question. I have a very weird question about electromagnetic radiation, carriers, and modulators. Is it mathematically-possible to carry a modulator signal with a frequency of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles every 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond and an amplitude of 1-watt-per-meter-squared on a AM carrier signal whose frequency is 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanocycle* every 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 giga- eons and whose amplitude is a minimum of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000 gigaphotons per 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond? If it is not mathematically-possible, then please explain why. 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) second is an extremely short amount of time. 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond is even shorter because a nanosecond is shorter than a second. 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 cycles is an extremely large amount of cycles. 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles is even more because a gigacycle is more than a cycle. Giga-eon = a billion eons Eon = a billion years Gigacycle = a billion cycles. *nanocycle = billionth of a cycle Gigaphoton = a billion photons 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 -- now that is one large large number. 10^1,000,000,000 = 10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000 So you get: (10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000) 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) = 10^-(10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000)-to-the-power-(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) 10^-(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000) is an extremely small number at it equals 10-to- the-power-NEGATIVE-[(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10- to-the-power-1,000,000,000)] No offense but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am really interested in this. Thanks, Radium I guess you could have some real problems when the rise time of your modulated envelope becomes faster than the speed of light. |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequencyon an astronomically-low carrier frequency
Radium wrote:
Hi: Please don't be annoyed/offended by my question. Is it mathematically-possible to carry a modulator signal with a frequency of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles every 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond and Ah our village idiot is back again. Also crossposting like all welbehaving village idiots. |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequencyon an astronomically-low carrier frequency
Don Bowey wrote:
They don't know how to tie strings together? When some of them have only one end, it becomes bothersome. thankfully my shoelaces were spared this metaphysical ambiguity. mike |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 19:09:37 GMT, Larry Finger
wrote: Doesn't the space collapse so that we end up with $1...? Space does not collapse except in the vicinity of a black hole. Space also tends to collapse during department reorganizations, where there's never enough space left. There's also the problem of accounting for the missing nulls. Where did they go and what was the exchange rate? Such things are fairly important. For example, did you ever notice that Roman Numerals do not have a zero or a null? There was a half hearted attempt at inventing zero or null (nulla), but fortunately that failed for many centuries. Rome survived much decadence and some really weird Emperors without much difficulty. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numerals However, no sooner than the Romans adopted the bad habits of their conquered neighbors, which included zero and null, did their civilzation falter and eventually die. At the least, this should be an obvious clue that messing with zero and null should not be taken lightly. -- # Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060 # 831-336-2558 # http://802.11junk.com # http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:38:01 -0700, Radium
wrote: Hi: Please don't be annoyed/offended by my question. I have a very weird question about electromagnetic radiation, carriers, and modulators. Is it mathematically-possible to carry a modulator signal with a frequency of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles every 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond and an amplitude of 1-watt-per-meter-squared on a AM carrier signal whose frequency is 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanocycle* every 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 giga- eons and whose amplitude is a minimum of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000 gigaphotons per 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond? If it is not mathematically-possible, then please explain why. 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) second is an extremely short amount of time. 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond is even shorter because a nanosecond is shorter than a second. 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 cycles is an extremely large amount of cycles. 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles is even more because a gigacycle is more than a cycle. Giga-eon = a billion eons Eon = a billion years Gigacycle = a billion cycles. *nanocycle = billionth of a cycle Gigaphoton = a billion photons 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 -- now that is one large large number. 10^1,000,000,000 = 10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000 So you get: (10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000) 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) = 10^-(10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000)-to-the-power-(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) 10^-(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000) is an extremely small number at it equals 10-to- the-power-NEGATIVE-[(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10- to-the-power-1,000,000,000)] No offense but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am really interested in this. --- No offense but all you're really interested in is getting unsuspecting people with good hearts to respond to your inane trolls. It's painfully obvious that you're not even a neophyte when it comes to science, so your persistence in wasting everyone's time with your foolishness indicates that you're not looking for answers, only attention. -- JF |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequencyon an astronomically-low carrier frequency
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Such things are fairly important. For example, did you ever notice that Roman Numerals do not have a zero or a null? There was a half hearted attempt at inventing zero or null (nulla), but fortunately that failed for many centuries. Rome survived much decadence and some really weird Emperors without much difficulty. There's the troubling rumour that Zero fiddled while Rome burned. It's simply not rue. mike |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jun 28, 6:26 pm, m II wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote: Such things are fairly important. For example, did you ever notice that Roman Numerals do not have a zero or a null? There was a half hearted attempt at inventing zero or null (nulla), but fortunately that failed for many centuries. Rome survived much decadence and some really weird Emperors without much difficulty. There's the troubling rumour that Zero fiddled while Rome burned. It's simply not rue. mike |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jun 28, 2:21 pm, m II wrote:
Don Bowey wrote: They don't know how to tie strings together? When some of them have only one end, it becomes bothersome. thankfully my shoelaces were spared this metaphysical ambiguity. mike |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jun 29, 11:03 am, clifto wrote:
Radium wrote: Is it mathematically-possible to carry a modulator signal with a frequency of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles every 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond and an amplitude of 1-watt-per-meter-squared on a AM carrier signal whose frequency is 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanocycle* every 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 giga- eons and whose amplitude is a minimum of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000 gigaphotons per 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond? No. If it is not mathematically-possible, then please explain why. No. -- We can't possibly imprison 300 million Americans for not paying their taxes, so let's grant all of them amnesty NOW! |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
the question begs..... HUH????????
Radium wrote: Hi: Please don't be annoyed/offended by my question. I have a very weird question about electromagnetic radiation, carriers, and modulators. Is it mathematically-possible to carry a modulator signal with a frequency of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles every 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond and an amplitude of 1-watt-per-meter-squared on a AM carrier signal whose frequency is 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanocycle* every 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 giga- eons and whose amplitude is a minimum of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000 gigaphotons per 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond? If it is not mathematically-possible, then please explain why. 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) second is an extremely short amount of time. 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond is even shorter because a nanosecond is shorter than a second. 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 cycles is an extremely large amount of cycles. 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles is even more because a gigacycle is more than a cycle. Giga-eon = a billion eons Eon = a billion years Gigacycle = a billion cycles. *nanocycle = billionth of a cycle Gigaphoton = a billion photons 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 -- now that is one large large number. 10^1,000,000,000 = 10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000 So you get: (10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000) 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) = 10^-(10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000)-to-the-power-(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) 10^-(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000) is an extremely small number at it equals 10-to- the-power-NEGATIVE-[(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10- to-the-power-1,000,000,000)] No offense but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am really interested in this. Thanks, Radium |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequencyon an astronomically-low carrier frequency
m II wrote:
There's the troubling rumour that Zero fiddled while Rome burned. It's simply not rue. Correct...the fiddle wasn't invented for another thousand years. [quote Wiki] It was said by Suetonius and Cassius Dio that Nero sang the "Sack of Ilium" in stage costume while the city burned. However, Tacitus' account has Nero in Antium at the time of the fire. Tacitus said that Nero playing his lyre and singing while the city burned was only rumor. Popular legend remembers Nero fiddling-- that is, playing the fiddle-- while Rome burned, but this is an anachronism as the instrument had not yet been invented, and would not be for over 1,000 years. |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jun 30, 12:33 pm, DTC wrote:
m II wrote: There's the troubling rumour that Zero fiddled while Rome burned. It's simply not rue. Correct...the fiddle wasn't invented for another thousand years. [quote Wiki] It was said by Suetonius and Cassius Dio that Nero sang the "Sack of Ilium" in stage costume while the city burned. However, Tacitus' account has Nero in Antium at the time of the fire. Tacitus said that Nero playing his lyre and singing while the city burned was only rumor. Popular legend remembers Nero fiddling-- that is, playing the fiddle-- while Rome burned, but this is an anachronism as the instrument had not yet been invented, and would not be for over 1,000 years. |
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
"Martin" wrote in message oups.com... snip Your troll-o-meter is defective, it should be pegged hard in the red zone. Please have it recalibrated to a proper sensitivity. Big laugh -- TKS |
troll alert, Troll Alert. TROLL ALERT ! - Danger Will Robinson ! - Troll Alert . . .
On Jul 2, 9:37 pm, "Sal M. Onella"
wrote: "Martin" wrote in message oups.com... snip Your troll-o-meter is defective, it should be pegged hard in the red zone. Please have it recalibrated to a proper sensitivity. Big laugh -- TKS troll alert, Troll Alert. TROLL ALERT ! http://www.lostinspacerobot.com/ Danger Will Robinson ! - Troll Alert . . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danger%2C_Will_Robinson |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:18 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com