Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 11:00:22 -0400, Michael Coslo
wrote: I'm looking for those who think it isn't dangerous to have the courage of their convictions. Hi Mike, Unfortunately, by your conjecture I always issue the challenge of taping a wire from a 5 watt RF source to their temple. this implies a co-equivalent risk where neither activity have any data to support that a risk exists. Merely having a fear does not create that missing data or Saddam's WMD would have been on display in the white house rose garden. Haven't found any yet. They actually might be on to something, they just don't know it. They actually might be grossly ignorant is more appropriate. The positive spin is that with great fortune in luck, desire, or hope that they (there is nothing "actual" involved) might (the illusions of a gambler betting against the house) be on to something (a fog of correlation masquerading as causation). Those with the courage of conviction have more self-assurance than to drop their lives to join any contest in a flood of whim. What your challenge would reveal is quite the opposite: those who lack faculties, are insecure, and hopelessly embrace the latest superstition. Some swing their banners here without needing an inviting challenge. Let's simply return to: With my Blackberry about 5 feet away, the analyzer is showing a -10dbW (yes, 100mW) on a 2.4 gig antenna. and examine this from first principles. 5 feet away from an uncalibrated antenna (the emission is at twice the "2.4 gig antenna" whatever that means) is also 15 wavelengths away (probably more, but 15 is certainly instructive). Is this a gain antenna? That would remove some of the hot-house steam from this orchid's appeal. The breathless "yes, 100mW" is the dazzle of looking at the sun through binoculars. However, let's put the issue of gain aside and accept this valuation, along with the only known facts - that same 15 wavelength separation. A simple model performed using a free version of EZNEC, employing a clear path, no disturbing environment (like a skull), and perfect, lossless matching of source and load gives a path loss of 45dB. That report of "yes, 100mW" requires the Blackberry to source something closer to 5KW. It is more likely that -10dbW was "actually" -10dBm; and I am tempting credulity to even allow that. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|