Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
"Keith Dysart" wrote in message ps.com... On Jul 3, 2:07 pm, Keith Dysart wrote: On Jul 3, 12:50 pm, John Fields wrote: On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 23:03:36 -0700, "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: "John Smith I" wrote in message ... Radium wrote: snip Suppose you have a 1 MHz sine wave whose amplitude is multiplied by a 0.1 MHz sine wave. What would it look like on an oscilloscope? snip What would it look like on a spectrum analyzer? | | | | | | --------+--------------------+-------+------+---- 100kHz 0.9MHz 1MHz 1.1MHz Then suppose you have a 1.1 MHz sine wave added to a 0.9 MHz sine wave. What would that look like on an oscilloscope? snip Tricky!!! It looks like AM but it isn't, it's just the phases sliding past each other slowly and algebraically adding which creates the illusion. What would that look like on a spectrum analyzer? | | | | -----------------------------+--------------+---- 0.9MHz 1.1MHz -- JF But if you remove the half volt bias you put on the 100 kHz signal in the multiplier version, the results look exactly like the summed version, so I suggest that results are the same when a 4 quadrant multiplier is used. And since the original request was for a "1 MHz sine wave whose amplitude is multiplied by a 0.1 MHz sine wave" I think a 4 quadrant multiplier is in order. ...Keith- Ooops. I misspoke. They are not quite the same. The spectrum is the same, but if you want to get exactly the same result, the lower frequency needs a 90 degree offset and the upper frequency needs a -90 degree offset. And the amplitudes of the the sum and difference frequencies need to be one half of the amplitude of the frequencies being multiplied. ...Keith You win. When I conceived the problem I was thinking cosines actually. In which case there are no phase shifts to worry about in the result. I also forgot the half amplitude factor. While it might not be obvious, the two cases I described are basically identical. And this situation occurs in real life, i.e. in radio signals, oceanography, and guitar tuning. It follows from what is taught in high school geometry. cos(a) * cos(b) = 0.5 * (cos[a+b] + cos[a-b]) Basically: multiplying two sine waves is the same as adding the (half amplitude) sum and difference frequencies. (For sines it is sin(a) * sin(b) = 0.5 * (cos[a-b]-cos[a+b]) = 0.5 * (sin[a-b+90degrees] - sin[a+b+90degrees]) = 0.5 * (sin[a-b+90degrees] + sin[a+b-90degrees]) ) -- rb |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on anastronomically-low carrier frequency
On 7/4/07 7:52 AM, in article , "Ron
Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: "Keith Dysart" wrote in message ps.com... On Jul 3, 2:07 pm, Keith Dysart wrote: On Jul 3, 12:50 pm, John Fields wrote: On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 23:03:36 -0700, "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: "John Smith I" wrote in message ... Radium wrote: snip Suppose you have a 1 MHz sine wave whose amplitude is multiplied by a 0.1 MHz sine wave. What would it look like on an oscilloscope? snip What would it look like on a spectrum analyzer? | | | | | | --------+--------------------+-------+------+---- 100kHz 0.9MHz 1MHz 1.1MHz Then suppose you have a 1.1 MHz sine wave added to a 0.9 MHz sine wave. What would that look like on an oscilloscope? snip Tricky!!! It looks like AM but it isn't, it's just the phases sliding past each other slowly and algebraically adding which creates the illusion. What would that look like on a spectrum analyzer? | | | | -----------------------------+--------------+---- 0.9MHz 1.1MHz -- JF But if you remove the half volt bias you put on the 100 kHz signal in the multiplier version, the results look exactly like the summed version, so I suggest that results are the same when a 4 quadrant multiplier is used. And since the original request was for a "1 MHz sine wave whose amplitude is multiplied by a 0.1 MHz sine wave" I think a 4 quadrant multiplier is in order. ...Keith- Ooops. I misspoke. They are not quite the same. The spectrum is the same, but if you want to get exactly the same result, the lower frequency needs a 90 degree offset and the upper frequency needs a -90 degree offset. And the amplitudes of the the sum and difference frequencies need to be one half of the amplitude of the frequencies being multiplied. ...Keith You win. When I conceived the problem I was thinking cosines actually. In which case there are no phase shifts to worry about in the result. I also forgot the half amplitude factor. While it might not be obvious, the two cases I described are basically identical. And this situation occurs in real life, i.e. in radio signals, oceanography, and guitar tuning. It follows from what is taught in high school geometry. cos(a) * cos(b) = 0.5 * (cos[a+b] + cos[a-b]) Basically: multiplying two sine waves is the same as adding the (half amplitude) sum and difference frequencies. No, they aren't the same at all, they only appear to be the same before they are examined. The two sidebands will not have the correct phase relationship. One could, temporarily, mistake the added combination for a full carrier with independent sidebands, however. (For sines it is sin(a) * sin(b) = 0.5 * (cos[a-b]-cos[a+b]) = 0.5 * (sin[a-b+90degrees] - sin[a+b+90degrees]) = 0.5 * (sin[a-b+90degrees] + sin[a+b-90degrees]) ) -- rb |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on anastronomically-low carrier frequency
"Don Bowey" wrote in message ... On 7/4/07 7:52 AM, in article , "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: snip cos(a) * cos(b) = 0.5 * (cos[a+b] + cos[a-b]) Basically: multiplying two sine waves is the same as adding the (half amplitude) sum and difference frequencies. No, they aren't the same at all, they only appear to be the same before they are examined. The two sidebands will not have the correct phase relationship. What do you mean? What is the "correct" relationship? One could, temporarily, mistake the added combination for a full carrier with independent sidebands, however. (For sines it is sin(a) * sin(b) = 0.5 * (cos[a-b]-cos[a+b]) = 0.5 * (sin[a-b+90degrees] - sin[a+b+90degrees]) = 0.5 * (sin[a-b+90degrees] + sin[a+b-90degrees]) ) -- rb |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency onanastronomically-low carrier frequency
On 7/4/07 10:16 AM, in article ,
"Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: "Don Bowey" wrote in message ... On 7/4/07 7:52 AM, in article , "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: snip cos(a) * cos(b) = 0.5 * (cos[a+b] + cos[a-b]) Basically: multiplying two sine waves is the same as adding the (half amplitude) sum and difference frequencies. No, they aren't the same at all, they only appear to be the same before they are examined. The two sidebands will not have the correct phase relationship. What do you mean? What is the "correct" relationship? One could, temporarily, mistake the added combination for a full carrier with independent sidebands, however. (For sines it is sin(a) * sin(b) = 0.5 * (cos[a-b]-cos[a+b]) = 0.5 * (sin[a-b+90degrees] - sin[a+b+90degrees]) = 0.5 * (sin[a-b+90degrees] + sin[a+b-90degrees]) ) -- rb When AM is correctly accomplished (a single voiceband signal is modulated onto a carrier via a non-linear process), at an envelope detector the two sidebands will be additive. But if you independe ntly place a carrier at frequency ( c ), another carrier at ( c-1 khz) and another carrier at (c+ 1 kHz), the composite can look like an AM signal, but it is not, and only by the most extreme luck will the sidebands be additive at the detector. They would probably cycle between additive and subtractive since they have no real relationship and were not the result of amplitude modulation. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on anastronomically-low carrier frequency
When AM is correctly accomplished (a single voiceband signal is modulated onto a carrier via a non-linear process), at an envelope detector the two sidebands will be additive. But if you independe ntly place a carrier at frequency ( c ), another carrier at ( c-1 khz) and another carrier at (c+ 1 kHz), the composite can look like an AM signal, but it is not, and only by the most extreme luck will the sidebands be additive at the detector. They would probably cycle between additive and subtractive since they have no real relationship and were not the result of amplitude modulation. A peak detector is best understood in the time domain, try to create a simple description in the frequency domain and you can only cause confusion and incorrect conclusions. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency onanastronomically-low carrier frequency
"Don Bowey" wrote in message ... On 7/4/07 10:16 AM, in article , "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: "Don Bowey" wrote in message ... On 7/4/07 7:52 AM, in article , "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: snip cos(a) * cos(b) = 0.5 * (cos[a+b] + cos[a-b]) Basically: multiplying two sine waves is the same as adding the (half amplitude) sum and difference frequencies. No, they aren't the same at all, they only appear to be the same before they are examined. The two sidebands will not have the correct phase relationship. What do you mean? What is the "correct" relationship? One could, temporarily, mistake the added combination for a full carrier with independent sidebands, however. (For sines it is sin(a) * sin(b) = 0.5 * (cos[a-b]-cos[a+b]) = 0.5 * (sin[a-b+90degrees] - sin[a+b+90degrees]) = 0.5 * (sin[a-b+90degrees] + sin[a+b-90degrees]) ) -- rb When AM is correctly accomplished (a single voiceband signal is modulated The questions I posed were not about AM. The subject could have been viewed as DSB but that wasn't the specific intent either. onto a carrier via a non-linear process), at an envelope detector the two sidebands will be additive. But if you independe ntly place a carrier at frequency ( c ), another carrier at ( c-1 khz) and another carrier at (c+ 1 kHz), the composite can look like an AM signal, but it is not, and only by the most extreme luck will the sidebands be additive at the detector. They would probably cycle between additive and subtractive since they have no real relationship and were not the result of amplitude modulation. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequencyonanastronomically-low carrier frequency
On 7/4/07 8:42 PM, in article , "Ron
Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: "Don Bowey" wrote in message ... On 7/4/07 10:16 AM, in article , "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: "Don Bowey" wrote in message ... On 7/4/07 7:52 AM, in article , "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: snip cos(a) * cos(b) = 0.5 * (cos[a+b] + cos[a-b]) Basically: multiplying two sine waves is the same as adding the (half amplitude) sum and difference frequencies. No, they aren't the same at all, they only appear to be the same before they are examined. The two sidebands will not have the correct phase relationship. What do you mean? What is the "correct" relationship? One could, temporarily, mistake the added combination for a full carrier with independent sidebands, however. (For sines it is sin(a) * sin(b) = 0.5 * (cos[a-b]-cos[a+b]) = 0.5 * (sin[a-b+90degrees] - sin[a+b+90degrees]) = 0.5 * (sin[a-b+90degrees] + sin[a+b-90degrees]) ) -- rb When AM is correctly accomplished (a single voiceband signal is modulated The questions I posed were not about AM. The subject could have been viewed as DSB but that wasn't the specific intent either. You should take some time to more carefully frame your questions. Do you understand that a DSB signal *is* AM? Post your intention; it might help. onto a carrier via a non-linear process), at an envelope detector the two sidebands will be additive. But if you independe ntly place a carrier at frequency ( c ), another carrier at ( c-1 khz) and another carrier at (c+ 1 kHz), the composite can look like an AM signal, but it is not, and only by the most extreme luck will the sidebands be additive at the detector. They would probably cycle between additive and subtractive since they have no real relationship and were not the result of amplitude modulation. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequencyonanastronomically-low carrier frequency
"Don Bowey" wrote in message ... On 7/4/07 8:42 PM, in article , "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: "Don Bowey" wrote in message ... On 7/4/07 10:16 AM, in article , "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: "Don Bowey" wrote in message ... On 7/4/07 7:52 AM, in article , "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: snip cos(a) * cos(b) = 0.5 * (cos[a+b] + cos[a-b]) Basically: multiplying two sine waves is the same as adding the (half amplitude) sum and difference frequencies. No, they aren't the same at all, they only appear to be the same before they are examined. The two sidebands will not have the correct phase relationship. What do you mean? What is the "correct" relationship? One could, temporarily, mistake the added combination for a full carrier with independent sidebands, however. (For sines it is sin(a) * sin(b) = 0.5 * (cos[a-b]-cos[a+b]) = 0.5 * (sin[a-b+90degrees] - sin[a+b+90degrees]) = 0.5 * (sin[a-b+90degrees] + sin[a+b-90degrees]) ) -- rb When AM is correctly accomplished (a single voiceband signal is modulated The questions I posed were not about AM. The subject could have been viewed as DSB but that wasn't the specific intent either. You should take some time to more carefully frame your questions. Do you understand that a DSB signal *is* AM? So all the AM broadcasters are wasting money by generating a carrier? Post your intention; it might help. onto a carrier via a non-linear process), at an envelope detector the two sidebands will be additive. But if you independe ntly place a carrier at frequency ( c ), another carrier at ( c-1 khz) and another carrier at (c+ 1 kHz), the composite can look like an AM signal, but it is not, and only by the most extreme luck will the sidebands be additive at the detector. They would probably cycle between additive and subtractive since they have no real relationship and were not the result of amplitude modulation. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
In article ,
"Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: "Keith Dysart" wrote in message ps.com... On Jul 3, 2:07 pm, Keith Dysart wrote: On Jul 3, 12:50 pm, John Fields wrote: On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 23:03:36 -0700, "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: "John Smith I" wrote in message ... Radium wrote: snip Suppose you have a 1 MHz sine wave whose amplitude is multiplied by a 0.1 MHz sine wave. What would it look like on an oscilloscope? snip What would it look like on a spectrum analyzer? | | | | | | --------+--------------------+-------+------+---- 100kHz 0.9MHz 1MHz 1.1MHz Then suppose you have a 1.1 MHz sine wave added to a 0.9 MHz sine wave. What would that look like on an oscilloscope? snip Tricky!!! It looks like AM but it isn't, it's just the phases sliding past each other slowly and algebraically adding which creates the illusion. What would that look like on a spectrum analyzer? | | | | -----------------------------+--------------+---- 0.9MHz 1.1MHz -- JF But if you remove the half volt bias you put on the 100 kHz signal in the multiplier version, the results look exactly like the summed version, so I suggest that results are the same when a 4 quadrant multiplier is used. And since the original request was for a "1 MHz sine wave whose amplitude is multiplied by a 0.1 MHz sine wave" I think a 4 quadrant multiplier is in order. ...Keith- Ooops. I misspoke. They are not quite the same. The spectrum is the same, but if you want to get exactly the same result, the lower frequency needs a 90 degree offset and the upper frequency needs a -90 degree offset. And the amplitudes of the the sum and difference frequencies need to be one half of the amplitude of the frequencies being multiplied. ...Keith You win. When I conceived the problem I was thinking cosines actually. In which case there are no phase shifts to worry about in the result. I also forgot the half amplitude factor. While it might not be obvious, the two cases I described are basically identical. And this situation occurs in real life, i.e. in radio signals, oceanography, and guitar tuning. The beat you hear during guitar tuning is not modulation; there is no non-linear process involved (i.e. no multiplication). Isaac |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
"isw" wrote in message ... In article , "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: "Keith Dysart" wrote in message ps.com... On Jul 3, 2:07 pm, Keith Dysart wrote: On Jul 3, 12:50 pm, John Fields wrote: On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 23:03:36 -0700, "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" wrote: "John Smith I" wrote in message ... Radium wrote: snip Suppose you have a 1 MHz sine wave whose amplitude is multiplied by a 0.1 MHz sine wave. What would it look like on an oscilloscope? snip What would it look like on a spectrum analyzer? | | | | | | --------+--------------------+-------+------+---- 100kHz 0.9MHz 1MHz 1.1MHz Then suppose you have a 1.1 MHz sine wave added to a 0.9 MHz sine wave. What would that look like on an oscilloscope? snip Tricky!!! It looks like AM but it isn't, it's just the phases sliding past each other slowly and algebraically adding which creates the illusion. What would that look like on a spectrum analyzer? | | | | -----------------------------+--------------+---- 0.9MHz 1.1MHz -- JF But if you remove the half volt bias you put on the 100 kHz signal in the multiplier version, the results look exactly like the summed version, so I suggest that results are the same when a 4 quadrant multiplier is used. And since the original request was for a "1 MHz sine wave whose amplitude is multiplied by a 0.1 MHz sine wave" I think a 4 quadrant multiplier is in order. ...Keith- Ooops. I misspoke. They are not quite the same. The spectrum is the same, but if you want to get exactly the same result, the lower frequency needs a 90 degree offset and the upper frequency needs a -90 degree offset. And the amplitudes of the the sum and difference frequencies need to be one half of the amplitude of the frequencies being multiplied. ...Keith You win. When I conceived the problem I was thinking cosines actually. In which case there are no phase shifts to worry about in the result. I also forgot the half amplitude factor. While it might not be obvious, the two cases I described are basically identical. And this situation occurs in real life, i.e. in radio signals, oceanography, and guitar tuning. The beat you hear during guitar tuning is not modulation; there is no non-linear process involved (i.e. no multiplication). Isaac In short, the human auditory system is not linear. It has a finite resolution bandwidth. It can't resolve two tones separted by a few Hertz as two separate tones. (But if they are separted by 100 Hz they can easily be separated without hearing a beat.) The same affect can be seen on a spectrum analyzer. Give it two frequencies separated by 1 Hz. Set the resolution bandwidth to 10 Hz. You'll see the peak rise and fall at 1 Hz. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|