Radio Astronomy
 

"The first observations of cosmic radio emission were made by the American
engineer Karl G. Jansky in 1932, while studying thunderstorm radio
disturbances at a frequency of 20.5 MHz (14.6 m). He discovered radio
emission of unknown origin, which varied within a 24-hour period. Later he
identified the source of this radiation to be in the direction of the centre
of our Galaxy. From: http://encyclozine.com/science/astronomy/radio

I understand that the frequency "varied within a 24-hour period". It is the
"diurnal effect".
And what about the 365 days period (annual effect)?
S*

Radio Astronomy
 

On Mon, 07 Nov 2011 10:14:14 +0100, Szczepan Bialek rearranged some
electrons to say:

"The first observations of cosmic radio emission were made by the
American engineer Karl G. Jansky in 1932, while studying thunderstorm
radio disturbances at a frequency of 20.5 MHz (14.6 m). He discovered
radio emission of unknown origin, which varied within a 24-hour period.
Later he identified the source of this radiation to be in the direction
of the centre of our Galaxy. From:
http://encyclozine.com/science/astronomy/radio

I understand that the frequency "varied within a 24-hour period". It is
the "diurnal effect".
And what about the 365 days period (annual effect)?
S*

It is not the frequency that changed, but the intensity. And not a 24
hour period, but 23 hours, 56 minutes, thus proving that the noise was
not generated or varied by the earth's rotation.

http://www.enotes.com/karl-jansky-reference/karl-jansky

The radio meteor reflections that the NLO and others are picking up are just that - reflections of what the distant transmitter is sending -
So if the distant transmitter is an FM broadcast station you will hear a brief burst of audio from that station.
If you are listening on an amateur radio band you will hear a brief exchange between two stations either in audio (SSB probably) or in Morse code (maybe high speed) or in a data transmission format.
No sounds of the universe, just ordinary radio sounds but over an unusually long distance and a little spooky cos of the doppler and ionization distortion.

depending upon the frequency in use and the 'strength' of the ionization caused by the meteor the duration of the reflection path can be long enough for a complete real time over-over QSO to take place where callsigns and signal strength reports can be exchanged between the two amateur radio stations. The 50MHz and 144MHz allocations are good places to listen for this.

Radio Astronomy
 

" napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci ...
On Mon, 07 Nov 2011 10:14:14 +0100, Szczepan Bialek rearranged some
electrons to say:

"The first observations of cosmic radio emission were made by the
American engineer Karl G. Jansky in 1932, while studying thunderstorm
radio disturbances at a frequency of 20.5 MHz (14.6 m). He discovered
radio emission of unknown origin, which varied within a 24-hour period.
Later he identified the source of this radiation to be in the direction
of the centre of our Galaxy. From:
http://encyclozine.com/science/astronomy/radio

I understand that the frequency "varied within a 24-hour period". It is
the "diurnal effect".
And what about the 365 days period (annual effect)?
S*

It is not the frequency that changed, but the intensity. And not a 24
hour period, but 23 hours, 56 minutes, thus proving that the noise was
not generated or varied by the earth's rotation.

http://www.enotes.com/karl-jansky-reference/karl-jansky

Yes. "His" transmitter "produced" many frequencies. But Karl G. Jansky was
the pioneer in Radio Astronomy.

Now are the spacecrafts. They use the two frequencies.
I have found the link:
http://chaos.swarthmore.edu/courses/...er_Anomaly.pdf

""It is also possible to infer the position in the sky of a
spacecraft from the Doppler data. This is accomplished by

examining the diurnal variation imparted to the Doppler shift

by the Earth's rotation. As the ground station rotates underneath

a spacecraft, the Doppler shift is modulated by a sinusoid."


Probably in this paper is also the answer for my question: "And what about
the 365 days period (annual effect)?

Unfortunately I am not an expert in radio. Do you know the answer?
S*

Radio Astronomy
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Probably in this paper is also the answer for my question: "And what about
the 365 days period (annual effect)?

Unfortunately I am not an expert in radio. Do you know the answer?
S*

Why are you so obsessed by this question?

Radio Astronomy
 

On 11/7/2011 12:50 PM, Rob wrote:
Szczepan wrote:
Probably in this paper is also the answer for my question: "And what about
the 365 days period (annual effect)?

Unfortunately I am not an expert in radio. Do you know the answer?
S*

Why are you so obsessed by this question?


He's not. He's just obsessed.

He loves to ask questio0ns, get answers, and then tell all of us that
any science newer than 100 or 150 years old is incorrect. Even when the
scientist in question changed his original theory due to newer and
better evidence.

It will happen. Just wait a bit.

tom
K0TAR

Radio Astronomy
 

Uzytkownik "Rob" napisal w wiadomosci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Probably in this paper is also the answer for my question: "And what
about
the 365 days period (annual effect)?

Unfortunately I am not an expert in radio. Do you know the answer?
S*

Why are you so obsessed by this question?

Once mo
""In 1818 Arago found that the refraction of a prism for star light was the
same for light incident in the direction of the earth's orbital velocity v
as for that coming in the opposite direction. This unexpected null result
was explained that same year by Fresnel's ether-dray theory, which assumed
partial ether entrainment in transparent media by an amount depending upon
the first power of v." From: http://www.3rd1000.com/chronoatoms.htm

Today's spectrograph astronomers assume that the effect is not null.

It seems to me that today's astronomers are wrong because in physics are
still null result.
So I am looking for the result from communication with the spacecraft.
S*

Radio Astronomy
 

Uzytkownik "tom" napisal w wiadomosci
. net...
On 11/7/2011 12:50 PM, Rob wrote:
Szczepan wrote:
Probably in this paper is also the answer for my question: "And what
about
the 365 days period (annual effect)?

Unfortunately I am not an expert in radio. Do you know the answer?
S*

Why are you so obsessed by this question?


He's not. He's just obsessed.

He loves to ask questio0ns, get answers, and then tell all of us that any
science newer than 100 or 150 years old is incorrect. Even when the
scientist in question changed his original theory due to newer and better
evidence.

In each textbook is wrote that we can detect the angular motion of the Earth
but the orbital not.

It will happen. Just wait a bit.

To you know the best evidence (the frequency variation from the spacecraft
in the annual period)?
S*

Radio Astronomy
 

On 11/8/2011 2:10 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Uzytkownik napisal w wiadomosci
...
Szczepan wrote:
Probably in this paper is also the answer for my question: "And what
about
the 365 days period (annual effect)?

Unfortunately I am not an expert in radio. Do you know the answer?
S*

Why are you so obsessed by this question?

Once mo
""In 1818 Arago found that the refraction of a prism for star light was the
same for light incident in the direction of the earth's orbital velocity v
as for that coming in the opposite direction. This unexpected null result
was explained that same year by Fresnel's ether-dray theory, which assumed
partial ether entrainment in transparent media by an amount depending upon
the first power of v." From: http://www.3rd1000.com/chronoatoms.htm

Today's spectrograph astronomers assume that the effect is not null.

It seems to me that today's astronomers are wrong because in physics are
still null result.
So I am looking for the result from communication with the spacecraft.
S*



Like I said. He doesn't like new results. Ever.

And if you provide evidence that he doesn't like, such as spacecraft
comm results that will likely not be what he likes, he will dispute it
and point back to the deprecated experiments.

It never ends. He is the ultimate troll.

Ok, the ultimate troll isn't him, it's another that hasn't shown up here
lately, but he's very close.

tom
K0TAR

Radio Astronomy
 

"tom" napisal w wiadomosci
. net...
On 11/8/2011 2:10 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Uzytkownik napisal w wiadomosci
...
Szczepan wrote:
Probably in this paper is also the answer for my question: "And what
about
the 365 days period (annual effect)?

Unfortunately I am not an expert in radio. Do you know the answer?
S*

Why are you so obsessed by this question?

Once mo
""In 1818 Arago found that the refraction of a prism for star light was
the
same for light incident in the direction of the earth's orbital velocity
v
as for that coming in the opposite direction. This unexpected null result
was explained that same year by Fresnel's ether-dray theory, which
assumed
partial ether entrainment in transparent media by an amount depending
upon
the first power of v." From: http://www.3rd1000.com/chronoatoms.htm

Today's spectrograph astronomers assume that the effect is not null.

It seems to me that today's astronomers are wrong because in physics are
still null result.
So I am looking for the result from communication with the spacecraft.
S*

Like I said. He doesn't like new results. Ever.

I am looking for the new result.

Astronomers ASSUME. I do not know why.

And if you provide evidence that he doesn't like, such as spacecraft comm
results that will likely not be what he likes, he will dispute it and
point back to the deprecated experiments.

In today's physics is opinion that we can detect the angular motion (Sagnac
effect) but it is impossible to detect the linear motion.
Who and when deprecated the famous null result?
S*