Hi:

What is the highest radio frequency used for astronomy? Is it 3,438
GHz?

According to the link below, it is 3,438 GHz:

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?re...=11719&page=11

Is 3,438 GHz the highest radio frequency used for astronomy?


Thanks,

Radium

"Radium" wrote in message
ps.com...
Hi:

What is the highest radio frequency used for astronomy? Is it 3,438
GHz?

According to the link below, it is 3,438 GHz:

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?re...=11719&page=11

Is 3,438 GHz the highest radio frequency used for astronomy?


Thanks,

Radium


Radium

As the article suggests, higher frequencies are considered as being in the
infra red wavelengths of light, so 3,438 GHz can be considered to be at the
upper limits of radio frequency astronomy.

Visible light, ultra violet light, x-rays and gamma rays are all
electromagnetic waves at higher frequencies and are also used for astronomy
observations and experiments. Satellites are generally used to observe in
the ultra violet, x-ray and gamma ray spectrums as these wave lengths are
largely absorbed by the earth's atmosphere.

Remember, there are no strict cut off frequencies where one type of
electromagnetic wave becomes another type. Radio merges into infra red which
merges into visible light, ultra violet, x-rays and so on. Any limits are
purely arbitary ones applied by humans in order to categorise the way in
which electromagnetic waves of a certain frequency can be expected to
behave.

Look at a colour palette. It is easy to pick out the primary colours.
Everyone who isn't colour blind can pick out red, blue, green, yellow etc.
But where do you draw the line to decide where red becomes green, blue or
yellow? The colours slowly merge from one to another just as the
characteristics of radio waves change as frequency increases.

Mike G0ULI

What is the highest radio frequency used for astronomy? Is it 3,438
GHz?

According to the link below, it is 3,438 GHz:

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?re...=11719&page=11

Is 3,438 GHz the highest radio frequency used for astronomy?

That's very much a matter of convention. It all depends what you
choose to call "radio frequency" and what you choose to call something
else.

As the article you cite points out, the measurements at 3438 GHz
(3.438 THz) blur the lines between microwave measurements (which many
would call "radio") and far-infrared measurements (which may would not
call "radio frequency").

One source I see gives a frequency of 3.0 THz as the boundary between
"microwave" and "infrared". That boundary point is, I believe,
entirely one of human convention - there's no magical change in the
behavior of the signals as you cross from one side of this frequency
to the other.

If you choose to treat the conventional boundary point of 3.0 THz as
being significant for the purpose of your question, then one would
have to say that the 3,438 GHz measurements you refer to are *not*
"radio frequency" measurements, but rather "far-infrared"
measurements.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

"Dave Platt" wrote in message
...
What is the highest radio frequency used for astronomy? Is it 3,438
GHz?

According to the link below, it is 3,438 GHz:

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?re...=11719&page=11

Is 3,438 GHz the highest radio frequency used for astronomy?

That's very much a matter of convention. It all depends what you
choose to call "radio frequency" and what you choose to call something
else.

As the article you cite points out, the measurements at 3438 GHz
(3.438 THz) blur the lines between microwave measurements (which many
would call "radio") and far-infrared measurements (which may would not
call "radio frequency").

One source I see gives a frequency of 3.0 THz as the boundary between
"microwave" and "infrared". That boundary point is, I believe,
entirely one of human convention - there's no magical change in the
behavior of the signals as you cross from one side of this frequency
to the other.

If you choose to treat the conventional boundary point of 3.0 THz as
being significant for the purpose of your question, then one would
have to say that the 3,438 GHz measurements you refer to are *not*
"radio frequency" measurements, but rather "far-infrared"
measurements.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

I am curious here. At some point you have to switch from metallic conductors
and antennas to lenses and other optics. Any idea what the highest frequency
RF amplifier works at?

Tam

On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 14:52:12 -0700, Radium wrote:

Hi:

What is the highest radio frequency used for astronomy? Is it 3,438
GHz?

According to the link below, it is 3,438 GHz:

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?re...=11719&page=11

Is 3,438 GHz the highest radio frequency used for astronomy?

No.

Hope This Helps!
Rich

On 8/30/07 4:31 PM, in article ,
"Tam/WB2TT" wrote:


"Dave Platt" wrote in message
...
What is the highest radio frequency used for astronomy? Is it 3,438
GHz?

According to the link below, it is 3,438 GHz:

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?re...=11719&page=11

Is 3,438 GHz the highest radio frequency used for astronomy?

That's very much a matter of convention. It all depends what you
choose to call "radio frequency" and what you choose to call something
else.

As the article you cite points out, the measurements at 3438 GHz
(3.438 THz) blur the lines between microwave measurements (which many
would call "radio") and far-infrared measurements (which may would not
call "radio frequency").

One source I see gives a frequency of 3.0 THz as the boundary between
"microwave" and "infrared". That boundary point is, I believe,
entirely one of human convention - there's no magical change in the
behavior of the signals as you cross from one side of this frequency
to the other.

If you choose to treat the conventional boundary point of 3.0 THz as
being significant for the purpose of your question, then one would
have to say that the 3,438 GHz measurements you refer to are *not*
"radio frequency" measurements, but rather "far-infrared"
measurements.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

I am curious here. At some point you have to switch from metallic conductors
and antennas to lenses and other optics. Any idea what the highest frequency
RF amplifier works at?

Tam



It's all subject to state-of-the-art. 50 years ago 300 MHz. was complex to
work with and 10 GHz. was considered way out there. Today 300 MHz is about
as simple as DC and 10 GHz. is fairly straightforward to work with.

I imagine that in another 50 years or less, Integrated hybrid circuits for 3
THz. will be on the shelf items for experimenters to play with.

In article ,
Tam/WB2TT wrote:

I am curious here. At some point you have to switch from metallic conductors
and antennas to lenses and other optics. Any idea what the highest frequency
RF amplifier works at?

Dunno about an RF amplifier per se.

I do know that there have been some very interesting experiments with
nanotechnology, over the past couple of years, in which tiny carbon
nanotubes have been used as optical-frequency antennas.

http://www.nanowerk.com/spotlight/spotid=1442.php has a brief writeup
on one such.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

Tam/WB2TT wrote:
"Dave Platt" wrote in message
...
What is the highest radio frequency used for astronomy? Is it 3,438
GHz?

According to the link below, it is 3,438 GHz:

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?re...=11719&page=11

Is 3,438 GHz the highest radio frequency used for astronomy?
That's very much a matter of convention. It all depends what you
choose to call "radio frequency" and what you choose to call something
else.

As the article you cite points out, the measurements at 3438 GHz
(3.438 THz) blur the lines between microwave measurements (which many
would call "radio") and far-infrared measurements (which may would not
call "radio frequency").

One source I see gives a frequency of 3.0 THz as the boundary between
"microwave" and "infrared". That boundary point is, I believe,
entirely one of human convention - there's no magical change in the
behavior of the signals as you cross from one side of this frequency
to the other.

If you choose to treat the conventional boundary point of 3.0 THz as
being significant for the purpose of your question, then one would
have to say that the 3,438 GHz measurements you refer to are *not*
"radio frequency" measurements, but rather "far-infrared"
measurements.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

I am curious here. At some point you have to switch from metallic conductors
and antennas to lenses and other optics. Any idea what the highest frequency
RF amplifier works at?

Tam


I have even seen optics and electronics combined in an experimental
Road radar for car control from Philips, radar output was a very small
horn antenna connected to a wave guide, and in front of that they used a
plexyglass condensor lens to make a narrow beam, like you do with light.
Apparently those mm waves liked that plastic lens just fine.

In article ,
Sjouke Burry wrote:

I have even seen optics and electronics combined in an experimental
Road radar for car control from Philips, radar output was a very small
horn antenna connected to a wave guide, and in front of that they used a
plexyglass condensor lens to make a narrow beam, like you do with light.
Apparently those mm waves liked that plastic lens just fine.

It's also possible to use photonic crystals and quasicrystals to
refract and band-process electromagnetic energy across a very wide
range of frequencies... all the way from radio, through microwave,
through far infrared, and into the optical spectrum.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

Dave Platt wrote:

...
I do know that there have been some very interesting experiments with
nanotechnology, over the past couple of years, in which tiny carbon
nanotubes have been used as optical-frequency antennas.

http://www.nanowerk.com/spotlight/spotid=1442.php has a brief writeup
on one such.


Let's hope, super cheap, super efficient solar panels would be great!
Bye, bye power company ...

Regards,
JS