|
cease and desist
Woger wrote: wrote in message ups.com... an_old_fraud wrote: cease and desist Go suck your daddy's cock, Markie. Or is that what your shemale wife is doing while you are online? + Wow, Not Roger. You certainly are without peers when it comes to responses. indeed it is amazing the way he comes up with them |
cease and desist
wrote in message ups.com... an_old_fraud wrote: cease and desist Go suck your daddy's cock, Markie. Or is that what your shemale wife is doing while you are online? + Wow, Not Roger. You certainly are without peers when it comes to responses. |
N9OGL: Exceeding the Part 15 EM limitation for fun and profit
Stagger Lee wrote: On 15 Aug 2006 10:32:49 -0700, N9OGL wrote: Steve the Electrical Field emission for 13 Mhz is 15,484 uV/m @ 30 Meters. Omega One Radio is running a power output 100 watts, and the electrical field emission a 17.5 meters is 2,000 uV. At 30 Meters the field emissions is 0 uV You Also have to remeber that 13 MHz is the 22 meter Shortwave Band, which does skip. It it possible to hear part 15 stations on that frequency. You can put out a higher power and produce the required electrical field. A back of the envelope calculation says you are way over the legal field strength if you're running 100 watts. You can calculate the power it takes for an isotropic radiator to produce a field strength of 15,484E-6 volts/meter as follows: 1. The area of a sphere of radius r is 4*Pi*r^2. An isotropic radiator emitting P watts at the center of the sphere will produce a power density of Pd = P / ( 4*Pi*r^2) on its surface. 2. The power density is related to the electric field and the impedance of free space (120*Pi) by the formula Pd = e^2 / (120*Pi). 3. Solving (1) and (2) for the power, P, you come up with P = (er)^2 / 30. So, for an "e" of 15,484E-6 and an "r" of 30, P = 0.00719 watts, or roughly seven milliwatts. Since antennas are not isotropic, the power must be reduced even further so that the electric field will not exceed the legal limit in the direction of highest antenna gain. This calculation ignores line losses and final amplifier inefficiencies, but there's no way in Glendale you can convince me that you can take a 100 watt transmitter and manage to lose so much power that you have seven milliwatts or less being radiated. All my DeVry Correspondence School instincts tell me that you are seriously in violation of the law. Other DeVry grads at the FCC will immediately agree, as will our distinguished alumnus, KC8JBO, the only man to have discovered negative VSWR. Be careful, Todd, and rethink your current station configuration. ==================== "lean how to spell it write, moron" -- N9OGL in message .com The power in wattage and the electrical field are not related because a power output in wattage can produce different fields depending on lengh of coax, antenna, antenna height...and your friends in the Office of engineering and technology at the FCC will tell you that. The antenna I'm using is a very imefficient antenna, in fact the signal is acually coming out of the end of the coax. The coax is a 65 feet of crappy coax I had that had been hit by lighting a few times and one piece even has holes in it. I have a Field strenght meter and at 17.5 meter I'm only getting a power reading of 2,000 uV. At 30 meters I'm getting no voltage. The thing you habe to remeber is that watts can produce different electrical fields and it's the electrical field the FCC is looking at not wattage. Todd N9OGL OMEGA ONE RADIO 13.556.00 MHz LSB http://n9ogl.blogspot.com (OMEGA ONE RADIO BLOG) |
Cease and desist breathing, Markie
Lisping cocksucker Davey wanting to suck Roger's Woger wrote: wrote in message ups.com... an_old_fraud wrote: cease and desist Go suck your daddy's cock, Markie. Or is that what your shemale wife is doing while you are online? + Wow, Not Roger. You certainly are without peers when it comes to responses. Wow, Dave, it sure beat your limpdicked one. |
Cease and desist breathing, Marqueer!
an_old_fraud wrote: indeed it is amazing the way he comes up with them However it's not surprizing you can't come up with anything good, Marqueer. |
N9OGL: Exceeding the Part 15 EM limitation for fun and profit
On 15 Aug 2006 19:40:07 -0700, N9OGL wrote:
The power in wattage and the electrical field are not related because a power output in wattage can produce different fields depending on lengh of coax, antenna, antenna height...and your friends in the Office of You can't get around physics, Todd. The power density is directly related to the electric field through an Ohm's law type of relationship, expressed as the square of the r.m.s value of e, divided by the impedance of free space. Once you know the power density, it is a matter of summing that power density over the radiation pattern of the antenna to figure out the total radiated power. Therefore, there *is* a relationship between radiated power and field strength. In the case of an isotropic radiator, the relationship between radiated power and field strength is easy to calculate, and it provides one with a limiting case which can act as a guideline. engineering and technology at the FCC will tell you that. The antenna I'm using is a very imefficient antenna, in fact the signal is acually I'm not interested in your rationalizations, Todd, because I'm not the one who is at risk. In this real world, your power output is about five orders of magnitude larger than the power theoretically needed to produce the maximum allowed electric field. To me, that would be a cause for great concern. If you want to risk an FCC enforcement action against you, be my guest. ==================== God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = -@B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and then there was light. |
Cease and desist breathing, Markie!
|
N9OGL: Exceeding the Part 15 EM limitation for fun and profit
Stagger Lee wrote: On 15 Aug 2006 19:40:07 -0700, N9OGL wrote: The power in wattage and the electrical field are not related because a power output in wattage can produce different fields depending on lengh of coax, antenna, antenna height...and your friends in the Office of You can't get around physics, Todd. The power density is directly related to the electric field through an Ohm's law type of relationship, expressed as the square of the r.m.s value of e, divided by the impedance of free space. Once you know the power density, it is a matter of summing that power density over the radiation pattern of the antenna to figure out the total radiated power. Therefore, there *is* a relationship between radiated power and field strength. In the case of an isotropic radiator, the relationship between radiated power and field strength is easy to calculate, and it provides one with a limiting case which can act as a guideline. Cut and pasted from another website. engineering and technology at the FCC will tell you that. The antenna I'm using is a very imefficient antenna, in fact the signal is acually I'm not interested in your rationalizations, Todd, because I'm not the one who is at risk. In this real world, your power output is about five orders of magnitude larger than the power theoretically needed to produce the maximum allowed electric field. To me, that would be a cause for great concern. If you want to risk an FCC enforcement action against you, be my guest. BWHAHAHAHA Saggytits cut and pastes from another website and added a few of his own words so it looks like he knows what the **** he is talking about. |
N9OGL: Exceeding the Part 15 EM limitation for fun and profit
Staggytits Lee whined: On 15 Aug 2006 17:08:18 -0700, Secwet Woger wrote: Hi Davey! How's that ex-streetwealker wife of yours? : : As usual, Saggytits cut and pastes from another website and adds a few : of his own words so it appears he knows what the **** he is talking : about. If you know what you are talking "aboiut," You mean like how you said one "operates" a dictionary instead of "using" one? Saggytits Lee steps on his own tiny dick when he tried to correct somebody else's English use first by saying one "operates" a dictionary instead of reading it, then uses "things" instead of "thinks" in : "Translation: Woger can't figure out how to operate a dictionary, let alone correct someone else's language.But that's not surprising from someone who things that..." "Who things that?" BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you should be able to prove what you just said. But, of course, you can't. Sure he could, Davey. You cut and paste from other websites and add a few words do it looks like you know what the **** you are talking about. You've been caught doing that before. Like the time you tried to pass off an Alabama ARES website for the one in Wiseman's area. : This calculation ignores line losses and final amplifier inefficiencies, : but there's no way in Glendale you can convince me that you can take a : 100 watt transmitter and manage to lose so much power that you have : seven milliwatts or less being radiated. : : BWHAHAHAHA Says the know-nothing moron who claimed an Alabama ARES : website was the one for Wiseman's West Virginia local ARES. Grasp onto that desperately, Woger, You want to grasp onto Roger's "woger," we all can see that fatass. Tell us why you hide behind that fictitious negro name, fatass. Is it because you desperately want to find your real father, who is of that race? Subject: Get on the Marshall County ARES webpage...... Date: 3 Jul 2002 22:03:46 GMT From: (Stagger Lee) Organization: Houston's least reliable ISP MsgId: Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc References: On Wed, 3 Jul 2002 14:18:35 -0400, AB8MQ wrote: : "Bob" wrote in message : ... : and send them some of Rogers filth. I'm sure they would love it. : : Dumb****, the Marshall County ARES doesn't have a webpage, try again, Then what is at http://www.geocities.com/skywarncanwarn/ doodle brain? It sure looks like the Marshall County ARES, and it even has a place to send email. BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:34 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com