Sidebands
 

"Well, it's like this. The story starts in 1915, when mankind discovered
sidebands. Now possessing this superior understanding of the AM signal,
radio scientists began to understand the implications of their discovery.
Soon afterwards, our old friends at Bell Labs, who have discovered
practically everything, developed a method for removing one of the sidebands
of an AM signal but retaining all the essential modulation components. As an
expert of that day supposedly said, "both sidebands are saying the same
thing" (Goodman, 1948). " From:
http://www.hamradiomarket.com/articles/SSBHistory.htm

I was born after 1915. I am supposing that in that time was possibility to
tune to the three different frequences.
Am I right?
S*

Sidebands
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:
"Well, it's like this. The story starts in 1915, when mankind discovered
sidebands. Now possessing this superior understanding of the AM signal,
radio scientists began to understand the implications of their discovery.
Soon afterwards, our old friends at Bell Labs, who have discovered
practically everything, developed a method for removing one of the sidebands
of an AM signal but retaining all the essential modulation components. As an
expert of that day supposedly said, "both sidebands are saying the same
thing" (Goodman, 1948). " From:
http://www.hamradiomarket.com/articles/SSBHistory.htm

I was born after 1915. I am supposing that in that time was possibility to
tune to the three different frequences.
Am I right?
S*

Nope, you are just spouting word salad gibberish as usual.

See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-sideband_modulation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwid...nal_processing)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passband



--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Sidebands
 

U¿ytkownik napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
"Well, it's like this. The story starts in 1915, when mankind discovered
sidebands. Now possessing this superior understanding of the AM signal,
radio scientists began to understand the implications of their discovery.
Soon afterwards, our old friends at Bell Labs, who have discovered
practically everything, developed a method for removing one of the
sidebands
of an AM signal but retaining all the essential modulation components. As
an
expert of that day supposedly said, "both sidebands are saying the same
thing" (Goodman, 1948). " From:
http://www.hamradiomarket.com/articles/SSBHistory.htm

I was born after 1915. I am supposing that in that time was possibility
to
tune to the three different frequences.
Am I right?
S*

Nope, you are just spouting word salad gibberish as usual.

See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-sideband_modulation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwid...nal_processing)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passband

Here are thy unrestricted signal (upper diagram). It has the three peaks:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pa...schematic3.png

So in an old radio the same station was in the three places (on the scale)
close to one another.
Am I right?
S*

Sidebands
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Here are thy unrestricted signal (upper diagram). It has the three peaks:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pa...schematic3.png

So in an old radio the same station was in the three places (on the scale)
close to one another.
Am I right?
S*

Nope, you haven't the slightest bit of understanding of what the term
"passband" means so your question is nonsense.



--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Sidebands
 

On Dec 21, 9:13*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
"Well, it's like this. The story starts in 1915, when mankind discovered
sidebands. Now possessing this superior understanding of the AM signal,
radio scientists began to understand the implications of their discovery.
Soon afterwards, our old friends at Bell Labs, who have discovered
practically everything, developed a method for removing one of the sidebands
of an AM signal but retaining all the essential modulation components. As an
expert of that day supposedly said, "both sidebands are saying the same
thing" (Goodman, 1948). " From:http://www.hamradiomarket.com/articles/SSBHistory.htm

I was born after 1915. I am supposing that in that time was possibility to
tune to the three different frequences.
Am I right?
S*

Only three? If the modulation is a complex signal (not just a single
sinusoid), you'll get (ideally) a carrier on a single frequency, and
upper and lower sidebands spanning a range of frequencies. Any decent
spectrum analyzer will easily resolve these components.
Communications receivers with narrow bandwidth, sharp cutoff filters
can also resolve them, of course.

And only "in that time"? You still can: there are plenty of AM
stations broadcasting in the 0.5MHz to 30MHz range (and some outside
that). But in 1915, it may well have been easier to analyze the
signal mathematically than with hardware. The hardware may not have
been very common, but certainly the math identities required were
readily available, as was Fourier analysis.

What if both sidebands are NOT "saying the same thing"? Then, for
instance, you can broadcast stereo in a way that receivers mixing the
two sidebands will still receive an acceptable mono signal.

Cheers,
Tom

Sidebands
 

On Dec 21, 6:14*pm, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
U ytkownik napisa w wiadomo ...



Szczepan Bialek wrote:
"Well, it's like this. The story starts in 1915, when mankind discovered
sidebands. Now possessing this superior understanding of the AM signal,
radio scientists began to understand the implications of their discovery.
Soon afterwards, our old friends at Bell Labs, who have discovered
practically everything, developed a method for removing one of the
sidebands
of an AM signal but retaining all the essential modulation components. As
an
expert of that day supposedly said, "both sidebands are saying the same
thing" (Goodman, 1948). " From:
http://www.hamradiomarket.com/articles/SSBHistory.htm

I was born after 1915. I am supposing that in that time was possibility
to
tune to the three different frequences.
Am I right?
S*

Nope, you are just spouting word salad gibberish as usual.

See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-sideband_modulation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwid...nal_processing)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passband

Here are thy unrestricted signal (upper diagram). It has the three peaks:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pa...schematic3.png

So in an old radio the same station was in the three places (on the scale)
close to one another.
Am I right?
S*

no

Sidebands
 

On Tue, 21 Dec 2010 17:35:07 -0000, wrote:
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
"Well, it's like this. The story starts in 1915, when mankind discovered
sidebands. Now possessing this superior understanding of the AM signal,
radio scientists began to understand the implications of their discovery.
Soon afterwards, our old friends at Bell Labs, who have discovered
practically everything, developed a method for removing one of the sidebands
of an AM signal but retaining all the essential modulation components. As an
expert of that day supposedly said, "both sidebands are saying the same
thing" (Goodman, 1948). " From:
http://www.hamradiomarket.com/articles/SSBHistory.htm

I was born after 1915. I am supposing that in that time was possibility to
tune to the three different frequences.
Am I right?
S*

Nope, you are just spouting word salad gibberish as usual.

Which, in this instance, has squat zilch to do with antennas.

Sidebands
 

Uzytkownik "K1TTT" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On Dec 21, 6:14 pm, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:

Szczepan Bialek wrote:
"Well, it's like this. The story starts in 1915, when mankind
discovered
sidebands. Now possessing this superior understanding of the AM signal,
radio scientists began to understand the implications of their
discovery.
Soon afterwards, our old friends at Bell Labs, who have discovered
practically everything, developed a method for removing one of the
sidebands
of an AM signal but retaining all the essential modulation components.
As
an
expert of that day supposedly said, "both sidebands are saying the same
thing" (Goodman, 1948). " From:
http://www.hamradiomarket.com/articles/SSBHistory.htm

I was born after 1915. I am supposing that in that time was possibility
to
tune to the three different frequences.
Am I right?


Here are the unrestricted signal (upper diagram). It has the three peaks:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pa...schematic3.png

So in an old radio the same station was in the three places (on the
scale)
close to one another.
Am I right?

no

Now my radio use FM. The one station is on the distance circle 1cm.
In 1915 was the same for AM?
S*

Sidebands
 

"K7ITM" wrote
...
On Dec 21, 9:13 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
"Well, it's like this. The story starts in 1915, when mankind discovered
sidebands. Now possessing this superior understanding of the AM signal,
radio scientists began to understand the implications of their discovery.
Soon afterwards, our old friends at Bell Labs, who have discovered
practically everything, developed a method for removing one of the
sidebands
of an AM signal but retaining all the essential modulation components. As
an
expert of that day supposedly said, "both sidebands are saying the same
thing" (Goodman, 1948). "
From:http://www.hamradiomarket.com/articles/SSBHistory.htm

I was born after 1915. I am supposing that in that time was possibility
to
tune to the three different frequences.
Am I right?
S*

Only three? If the modulation is a complex signal (not just a single
sinusoid), you'll get (ideally) a carrier on a single frequency, and
upper and lower sidebands spanning a range of frequencies. Any decent
spectrum analyzer will easily resolve these components.

What was in 1915?

Communications receivers with narrow bandwidth, sharp cutoff filters
can also resolve them, of course.

Have such Author of SSBHistory in 1915?

And only "in that time"? You still can: there are plenty of AM
stations broadcasting in the 0.5MHz to 30MHz range (and some outside
that). But in 1915, it may well have been easier to analyze the
signal mathematically than with hardware. The hardware may not have
been very common, but certainly the math identities required were
readily available, as was Fourier analysis.

What if both sidebands are NOT "saying the same thing"? Then, for
instance, you can broadcast stereo in a way that receivers mixing the
two sidebands will still receive an acceptable mono signal.

I am trying to find if that SSB from 1915 were the distance dependent.
S*

Sidebands
 

On
What if both sidebands are NOT "saying the same thing"? Then, for
instance, you can broadcast stereo in a way that receivers mixing the
two sidebands will still receive an acceptable mono signal.

I am trying to find if that SSB from 1915 were the distance dependent.
S*

Distance from where? You are not making sense.

Jeff

Sidebands
 

On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 10:38:54 +0000, Jeff rearranged some electrons to say:

On
What if both sidebands are NOT "saying the same thing"? Then, for
instance, you can broadcast stereo in a way that receivers mixing the
two sidebands will still receive an acceptable mono signal.

I am trying to find if that SSB from 1915 were the distance dependent.
S*

Distance from where? You are not making sense.

Jeff

He never does.

Sidebands
 

U¿ytkownik napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Here are thy unrestricted signal (upper diagram). It has the three peaks:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pa...schematic3.png

So in an old radio the same station was in the three places (on the
scale)
close to one another.
Am I right?
S*

Nope, you haven't the slightest bit of understanding of what the term
"passband" means so your question is nonsense.

"Radio receivers generally include a tunable band-pass filter with a
passband that is wide enough to accommodate the bandwidth of the radio
signal transmitted by a single station."

For me a radio is a box with the knob to rotate.
Now at FM no brakes between stations. At AM are.

What was in 1915?
S*

Sidebands
 

Uzytkownik "Jeff" napisal w wiadomosci
...

I am trying to find if that SSB from 1915 were the distance dependent.
S*

Distance from where? You are not making sense.

From the station.
S*

Sidebands
 

Nope, you haven't the slightest bit of understanding of what the term
"passband" means so your question is nonsense.

"Radio receivers generally include a tunable band-pass filter with a
passband that is wide enough to accommodate the bandwidth of the radio
signal transmitted by a single station."

That statement is at best misleading, and in some cases incorrect.

In most receivers any *tunable* filter is MUCH MUCH wider than the
bandwidth required to accommodate the bandwidth of the signal transmitted.

The selectivity being produced by one or more *fixed* frequency filters
which are just wide enough to accommodate the bandwidth of the wanted
signal.


For me a radio is a box with the knob to rotate.
Now at FM no brakes between stations. At AM are.

What was in 1915?
S*


In 1915 there were no broadcast stations to speak of so your dial
would be just one large "brake" (sic).

Jeff

Sidebands
 

I am trying to find if that SSB from 1915 were the distance dependent.
S*

Distance from where? You are not making sense.

From the station.
S*
________________

Radio waves behaved the same in 1915 as they do now.

The distance to a given field intensity, for the same conditions,
is the same now as it was then.

Sidebands
 

On 22/12/2010 17:10, Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Uzytkownik "Jeff" napisal w wiadomosci
...

I am trying to find if that SSB from 1915 were the distance dependent.
S*

Distance from where? You are not making sense.

From the station.
S*


If you tell us where you are and which station you are talking about
we might be able to find the distance!!

Jeff

Sidebands
 

Richard Fry wrote:
Radio waves behaved the same in 1915 as they do now.

Well sort of :-)

Before (and during) WWI, anything below 200 meters (over 1.5 mHz) was
considered too high in frequency to be useful.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson N3OWJ/4X1GM
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to misquote it.

Sidebands
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Użytkownik napisał w wiadomości
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Here are thy unrestricted signal (upper diagram). It has the three peaks:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pa...schematic3.png

So in an old radio the same station was in the three places (on the
scale)
close to one another.
Am I right?
S*

Nope, you haven't the slightest bit of understanding of what the term
"passband" means so your question is nonsense.

"Radio receivers generally include a tunable band-pass filter with a
passband that is wide enough to accommodate the bandwidth of the radio
signal transmitted by a single station."

Oh goody, you can cut and paste from a web site.

Yet you have no clue what the quote means or the implications of having
ommited any mention of the IF stages of a receiver.

For me a radio is a box with the knob to rotate.
Now at FM no brakes between stations. At AM are.

Gibberish.

What was in 1915?
S*

The battleship HMS Formidable is sunk off Lyme Regis, Dorset, England, by
a German U-Boat.

An earthquake (6.8 in Richter scale) in Avezzano, Italy, kills more than 29,000.

The 1915 locust plague breaks out in Palestine; it continues until October.

The theory of general relativity is formulated.

The first prototype tank is tested for the British Army for the first time.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Sidebands
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Now my radio use FM. The one station is on the distance circle 1cm.
In 1915 was the same for AM?
S*

Gibberish.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Sidebands
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

I am trying to find if that SSB from 1915 were the distance dependent.
S*

Babbling gibberish.

SSB was a laboratory curiousity in 1915 and was little more than a set
of equations.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Sidebands
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Uzytkownik "Jeff" napisal w wiadomosci
...

I am trying to find if that SSB from 1915 were the distance dependent.
S*

Distance from where? You are not making sense.

From the station.
S*

The modulation used has nothing directly to do with the distance a signal
is usefull. That is determined, at a given power and state of the the
ionosphere, mostly by signal to noise ratio which is influenced by the
bandwidth of the modulation method but not by the modulation method itself.

Electomagnetic propagate works the same today as it did in 1915 or even
30,000 BC if anyone had been around with a radio.

You are a babbling idiot.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Sidebands
 

On Dec 22, 12:59*pm, wrote:
What was in 1915?
S*

The battleship HMS Formidable is sunk off Lyme Regis, Dorset, England, by
a German U-Boat. --
Jim Pennino

Gallipoli landings.

Sidebands
 

Uzytkownik "Richard Fry" napisal w wiadomosci
...
I am trying to find if that SSB from 1915 were the distance dependent.
S*

Distance from where? You are not making sense.

From the station.
S*
________________

Radio waves behaved the same in 1915 as they do now.

The distance to a given field intensity, for the same conditions, is the
same now as it was then.

Look at the damped waves: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damped_wave

The damped waves pulses are simillar to AM (amplitude of oscillation
decreases/increases with time).

The decreasing/increasing may be sharp or gently.

The old damped waves " transmissions have a wide bandwidth".

Was the bandwith the distance dependent?
S*

Sidebands
 

"Jeff" wrote ...

Nope, you haven't the slightest bit of understanding of what the term
"passband" means so your question is nonsense.

"Radio receivers generally include a tunable band-pass filter with a
passband that is wide enough to accommodate the bandwidth of the radio
signal transmitted by a single station."

That statement is at best misleading, and in some cases incorrect.

In most receivers any *tunable* filter is MUCH MUCH wider than the
bandwidth required to accommodate the bandwidth of the signal transmitted.

The selectivity being produced by one or more *fixed* frequency filters
which are just wide enough to accommodate the bandwidth of the wanted
signal.


For me a radio is a box with the knob to rotate.
Now at FM no brakes between stations. At AM are.

What was in 1915?
S*


In 1915 there were no broadcast stations to speak of so your dial would
be just one large "brake" (sic).

"Well, it's like this. The story starts in 1915, when mankind discovered
sidebands. Now possessing this superior understanding of the AM signal,
radio scientists began to understand the implications of their discovery.
Soon afterwards, our old friends at Bell Labs, who have discovered
practically everything, developed a method for removing one of the sidebands
of an AM signal but retaining all the essential modulation components. As an
expert of that day supposedly said, "both sidebands are saying the same
thing" (Goodman, 1948). " From:
http://www.hamradiomarket.com/articles/SSBHistory.htm

If in 1915 were no broadcast stations to speak tell us what was with the
first station to speak and when it start transmitting.
S*

Sidebands
 

For me a radio is a box with the knob to rotate.
Now at FM no brakes between stations. At AM are.

What was in 1915?
S*


In 1915 there were no broadcast stations to speak of so your dial
would be just one large "brake" (sic).

"Well, it's like this. The story starts in 1915, when mankind discovered
sidebands. Now possessing this superior understanding of the AM signal,
radio scientists began to understand the implications of their discovery.
Soon afterwards, our old friends at Bell Labs, who have discovered
practically everything, developed a method for removing one of the
sidebands
of an AM signal but retaining all the essential modulation components.
As an
expert of that day supposedly said, "both sidebands are saying the same
thing" (Goodman, 1948). " From:
http://www.hamradiomarket.com/articles/SSBHistory.htm

If in 1915 were no broadcast stations to speak tell us what was with the
first station to speak and when it start transmitting.
S*


The first AM Broadcast station (as opposed to amateur or military ) was
in about 1919.

Jeff

Sidebands
 

Look at the damped waves: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damped_wave

The damped waves pulses are simillar to AM (amplitude of oscillation
decreases/increases with time).

The decreasing/increasing may be sharp or gently.

The old damped waves " transmissions have a wide bandwidth".

Was the bandwith the distance dependent?
S*

Damped waves bear little or no similarity to AM, they are essentially
pulses with a very different spectral content.

Being pulses the spectral content is wide, tending to infinite, and yes
I suppose that the spectrum received by a distant station will vary
depending on distance; the lower level spectral lines that are spaced a
long way from the fundamental will be lost below the noise as you get
further away or the signal gets weaker due to propagation changes. The
more side-bands that you loose the slower will be the rise and fall time
of the received pulse.

AM is very different the spectrum is much more contained and only 1
side-band is required to replicate the waned signal.

Jeff

Sidebands
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

If in 1915 were no broadcast stations to speak tell us what was with the
first station to speak and when it start transmitting.
S*

There were no broadcasting stations of any kind in 1915.

The first station that could even remotely be called a broadcasting station
was in 1916 and it broadcasted weather reports in morse code.

The first experimental AM broadcast stations started in 1919 and regular AM
broadcasting started in 1920 when all the spark gap morse transmitters
were shut down.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Sidebands
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Look at the damped waves: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damped_wave

The damped waves pulses are simillar to AM (amplitude of oscillation
decreases/increases with time).

Only to someone who hasn't a clue what they are talking about.

The decreasing/increasing may be sharp or gently.

The old damped waves " transmissions have a wide bandwidth".

Was the bandwith the distance dependent?
S*

Word salad gibberish.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Sidebands
 

On Dec 23, 1:56*am, Jeff wrote:
For me a radio is a box with the knob to rotate.
Now at FM no brakes between stations. At AM are.

What was in 1915?
S*

In 1915 there were no broadcast stations to speak of so your dial
would be just one large "brake" (sic).

"Well, it's like this. The story starts in 1915, when mankind discovered
sidebands. Now possessing this superior understanding of the AM signal,
radio scientists began to understand the implications of their discovery.
Soon afterwards, our old friends at Bell Labs, who have discovered
practically everything, developed a method for removing one of the
sidebands
of an AM signal but retaining all the essential modulation components.
As an
expert of that day supposedly said, "both sidebands are saying the same
thing" (Goodman, 1948). " From:
http://www.hamradiomarket.com/articles/SSBHistory.htm

If in 1915 were no broadcast stations to speak tell us what was with the
first station to speak and when it start transmitting.
S*

The first AM Broadcast station (as opposed to amateur or military ) was
in about 1919.

Jeff

KCBS, San Francisco, claims to be the direct lineal descendant of
Charles Herrold's broadcasting, which dates from 1910. However,
Herrold's early work involved broadcasting to amateurs, by his own
admission. http://www.charlesherrold.org/KCBS.html, et al.

KCBS and KDKA, Pittsburgh, have been trading claims and counterclaims
for decades. KDKA went on the air in November, 1920 and supporters of
their claim of "First!" say KCBS doesn't date from the Herrold days,
but rather from 1921, when they got their earliest commercial license,
as KQW. I don't claim to be able to settle it here. Oy!

"Sal"

Sidebands
 

If in 1915 were no broadcast stations to speak tell us what was with the
first station to speak and when it start transmitting.
S*

The first AM Broadcast station (as opposed to amateur or military ) was
in about 1919.

Jeff

KCBS, San Francisco, claims to be the direct lineal descendant of
Charles Herrold's broadcasting, which dates from 1910. However,
Herrold's early work involved broadcasting to amateurs, by his own
admission. http://www.charlesherrold.org/KCBS.html, et al.

KCBS and KDKA, Pittsburgh, have been trading claims and counterclaims
for decades. KDKA went on the air in November, 1920 and supporters of
their claim of "First!" say KCBS doesn't date from the Herrold days,
but rather from 1921, when they got their earliest commercial license,
as KQW. I don't claim to be able to settle it here. Oy!

"Sal"

A year earlier PCGG in Holland started broadcasting on November 6, 1919
and is thought to be the first 'real' broadcast station.

On 15th June 1920 Marconi made their first broadcast to the public from
their works in Chelmsford, but it took until 1921 before there were
regular programmes.

Jeff

Sidebands
 

On 24/12/2010 15:47, Jim Higgins wrote:
On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 09:56:06 +0000, wrote:

The first AM Broadcast station (as opposed to amateur or military )
was in about 1919.


You might want to look into the work of Reginald Fessenden. He made
the first entertainment type audio transmissions to a general audience
in 1906.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reginald_Fessenden


As did Marconi and several others, but they certainly could not be
described as a broadcast station, more like experimental demonstrations.

Jeff

Sidebands
 

On 24/12/2010 15:49, Jim Higgins wrote:
On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 17:12:38 -0000, wrote:

Szczepan wrote:

If in 1915 were no broadcast stations to speak tell us what was with the
first station to speak and when it start transmitting.
S*

There were no broadcasting stations of any kind in 1915.

The first station that could even remotely be called a broadcasting station
was in 1916 and it broadcasted weather reports in morse code.

The first experimental AM broadcast stations started in 1919 and regular AM
broadcasting started in 1920 when all the spark gap morse transmitters
were shut down.


Make that 1906 for the first experimental AM broadcast.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reginald_Fessenden


Again you must differentiate between sporadic demonstrations and the
setting up of a station with scheduled programming, which is what the
discussion is about.

Jeff

Sidebands
 

Jim Higgins wrote:
On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 17:12:38 -0000, wrote:

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

If in 1915 were no broadcast stations to speak tell us what was with the
first station to speak and when it start transmitting.
S*

There were no broadcasting stations of any kind in 1915.

The first station that could even remotely be called a broadcasting station
was in 1916 and it broadcasted weather reports in morse code.

The first experimental AM broadcast stations started in 1919 and regular AM
broadcasting started in 1920 when all the spark gap morse transmitters
were shut down.


Make that 1906 for the first experimental AM broadcast.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reginald_Fessenden

The operative words are "scheduled" and "public" in this context.

There were lots of one off things done before 1919.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Sidebands
 

On Dec 24, 9:21*pm, wrote:
Jim Higgins wrote:
On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 17:12:38 -0000, wrote:

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

If in 1915 were no broadcast stations to speak tell us what was with the
first station to speak and when it start transmitting.
S*

There were no broadcasting stations of any kind in 1915.

The first station that could even remotely be called a broadcasting station
was in 1916 and it broadcasted weather reports in morse code.

The first experimental AM broadcast stations started in 1919 and regular AM
broadcasting started in 1920 when all the spark gap morse transmitters
were shut down.

Make that 1906 for the first experimental AM broadcast.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reginald_Fessenden

The operative words are "scheduled" and "public" in this context.

There were lots of one off things done before 1919.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

but did distance affect the sidebands???? that is the question,
please keep mr. B on topic!

Sidebands
 

K1TTT wrote:

but did distance affect the sidebands???? that is the question,
please keep mr. B on topic!

This babbling moron has been posting his nonsense for years on the physics
and physics.electromagnetic groups.

When I first read his posts years ago I thought his gibberish was because
English wasn't his native language but soon came to realize that the issue
isn't language, the issue is brain chemistry.

Recently he has moved to the amateur groups, I guess in hopes that the
people here won't be as "harsh" as they are in the science groups.

You can give him facts and links all day long, but since he doesn't seem
to have more than two synapses that fire properly, he will never understand
any response and just continue to babble on.

So there are a few choices to answering his posts:

Don't

Remind him he is a drooling mental case

Respond with some facts that may be of interest to others when he accidently
hits on something, such as the history of broadcasting, then remind him he
is a drooling mental case



--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Sidebands
 

wrote ...
K1TTT wrote:

but did distance affect the sidebands???? that is the question,
please keep mr. B on topic!

This babbling moron has been posting his nonsense for years on the physics
and physics.electromagnetic groups.

When I first read his posts years ago I thought his gibberish was because
English wasn't his native language but soon came to realize that the issue
isn't language, the issue is brain chemistry.

Recently he has moved to the amateur groups, I guess in hopes that the
people here won't be as "harsh" as they are in the science groups.

You can give him facts and links all day long, but since he doesn't seem
to have more than two synapses that fire properly, he will never
understand
any response and just continue to babble on.

So there are a few choices to answering his posts:

Don't

Remind him he is a drooling mental case

Respond with some facts that may be of interest to others when he
accidently
hits on something, such as the history of broadcasting, then remind him he
is a drooling mental case.

Do not be angry that you do not know if " did distance affect the
sidebands???? ". It is nothing wrong.
The effect is obvious in light of physics laws. Such obvious that fathers of
the radio did not write about this.
Young people can measure it if it is interesting for them.
S*

Sidebands
 

On Dec 25, 10:06*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
...



K1TTT wrote:

but did distance affect the sidebands???? *that is the question,
please keep mr. B on topic!

This babbling moron has been posting his nonsense for years on the physics
and physics.electromagnetic groups.

When I first read his posts years ago I thought his gibberish was because
English wasn't his native language but soon came to realize that the issue
isn't language, the issue is brain chemistry.

Recently he has moved to the amateur groups, I guess in hopes that the
people here won't be as "harsh" as they are in the science groups.

You can give him facts and links all day long, but since he doesn't seem
to have more than two synapses that fire properly, he will never
understand
any response and just continue to babble on.

So there are a few choices to answering his posts:

Don't

Remind him he is a drooling mental case

Respond with some facts that may be of interest to others when he
accidently
hits on something, such as the history of broadcasting, then remind him he
is a drooling mental case.

Do not be angry that you do not know if " did distance affect the
sidebands???? ". It is nothing wrong.
The effect is obvious in light of physics laws. Such obvious that fathers of
the radio did not write about this.
Young people can measure it if it is interesting for them.
S*

distance itself does not affect sidebands.

frequency dependent dispersion in the ionosphere can affect sidebands
and the mark/space tones of rtty differently over short periods
causing differential fading and distortion.

Sidebands
 

K1TTT wrote:

distance itself does not affect sidebands.

frequency dependent dispersion in the ionosphere can affect sidebands
and the mark/space tones of rtty differently over short periods
causing differential fading and distortion.

One could also consider selective fading.

Sidebands
 

On Dec 25, 2:57*pm, joe wrote:
K1TTT wrote:

distance itself does not affect sidebands.

frequency dependent dispersion in the ionosphere can affect sidebands
and the mark/space tones of rtty differently over short periods
causing differential fading and distortion.

One could also consider selective fading.

that's just another name for it... i threw in the big words because
i'm sure that mr.b will look them up out of context and find all sorts
of hilarious ways to recombine them.

Sidebands
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Do not be angry that you do not know if " did distance affect the
sidebands???? ". It is nothing wrong.

It is gibberish; one has nothing to do with the other.

The effect is obvious in light of physics laws. Such obvious that fathers of
the radio did not write about this.
Young people can measure it if it is interesting for them.
S*

More meaningless gibberish.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.