KØHB wrote:
"Dee Flint" wrote


Hey I'm all for the "eureka" when it happens but the problem is that it is
unpredictable. Not only is it unpredictable in time but in the nature of the
breakthrough.



That's what makes ham radio some damn much fun! In my profession role I can
send a team of engineers off with some marketeers scribbling and know that
within 12-18 months I'll be shipping product. Bnt ham radio is not so
predicable --- we get these delightful surprises from unexpected places.

Some like APRS and PSK-xx gain traction and thrive in a niche, others like AX.25
packet radio and 2-meter autopatches which blossom like an Independence Day
firework, then fizzle to a few sparks on the ground after a short period of
glory.

Then there are a few genuine "revolutions" which fundamentally change the nature
of amateur radio. We're about due for one of those.

More so than that, Hans. This would be a real breakthrough!

Bandwidth is a precious commodity. That we are looking at a method of
transmission that breaks Shannon's law is one thing, but here is a
method that will allow us to send video at frequencies that are less
than their original needed bandwidth!!!!! If that isn't a revolution, I
don't know what is!

"John" should be thankful for my gauntlet that I tossed him. He will be
a *wealthy* man after his system is in place and working!

I mean we do all know why there is more bandwidth available as the
frequency is increased, no? No change in the *really* basic laws
governing bandwidth, correct? John's method, upon successful completion,
means that with simply using a personal computer, we will be able to
stuff immense amounts more data into all the available bands. The
problems of bandwidth squeeze will go away, and quickly!

What is most amazing is that a lot of engineers and programmers have
been working on this problem for a long time, and now an anonymous
poster in a newsgroup has figured out how to do it - with a PC and a
sound card no less. Amazing indeed....

I'll be proud just to be proven wrong on such a momentous moment in
communications history.

- Mike KB3EIA -

KØHB wrote:
"Dee Flint" wrote


Please show me and everyone else how we can run more than 300 baud on HF
without exceeding reasonable band widths.


Why is this conversation hung up on 300 baud?

It's perfectly legal, for example to run digital voice (J2E) on HF under todays
FCC rules, and it will fit nicely in the generally accepted 3KHz band width now
used by traditional SSB. 97.307(f)(3) applies to rtty/data transmission, it
does not apply to voice or image.

So, fit it into 3KHz, if that will be legal. John's system is
forthcoming soon. Live video will be broadcast on HF, probably in a few
months.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike:

It has been posted, it has been done, years ago.

For some reason you guys seem to claim a 56K phone modem which
operated within a ~5K audio bandwidth will suddenly cease to be able
to do so when hooked to a transceiver providing it with a ~5K audio
bandwidth...

.... logic which I am at a loss of words to describe--of how stupid
that logic looks...

.... and seems to pose the insane question of, "When is 5K really "NOT"
5K?" Or, "Are phone lines magic?"

.... or, "Whatever happened to the ~5K audio on my transceiver, and why
did it suddenly stop when I kludged on a modem?"

.... or just, "Do I look confused to you?"

.... or, "Am I dreaming all of this?"

.... or, "HELLO? Is anyone at home there?"

John

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Dee Flint wrote:

Please show me and everyone else how we can run more than 300 baud
on HF without exceeding reasonable band widths. There are a whole
lot of things, not just video, that would be nice to do.

How can we do it? Bandwidth is directly related to baud rate.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

John has been challenged. His system for real time video via HF will
be posted soon, TTPUOSU!

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike:

You are pretending you could build one, trust me, I know...

John

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
John Smith wrote:
Mike:

Oh no. Now someone is going to have to explain ccd cams and pixels
to you, huh? Take a course!


Challenge, "John Smith"!


DO IT!

Post the method in which you and I can send live Video to each other
via whichever HF band will propagate between our QTH's, and I will
build a duplicate. We can set up a sked. Once we have established
live communications, I will most certainly apologize for my olde
tyme hamminess. Let us keep everything in the group so that I may
apologize publicly when proven wrong.

Anxiously awaiting your system outline and diagrams..

- Mike KB3EIA -

John Smith wrote:
Mike:

The clock in a ~4GHz computer and DDR memory makes modem data xfr look
incredibly s-l-o-w.... with spaces miles long between marker bits...

100Mbs nic cards are not even close to a challenge to that clock
speed...


Um, John, just as a simple experiment, what do you get when you
modulate say a 14 MHz signal with that 4 GHz signal?

note: not that you would do that for a live video system, but are you
starting to see my point? What happens at the computer is not the issue.
It is what happens at the frequency we are trying to use.

Computer clock speed is not relevant to the the issue. It is how much
data an HF signal can handle.

There have been a lot of engineers, mathematicians and programmers
working on this problem. If you have a method of doing this, I
*strongly* suggest that you hire a patent attorney, and get to work. You
are gonna be rich, man!

I'm willing to help you with the initial experiments. In fact, in the
interest of the furtherance of Ham radio, science, and mankind, I have
challenged you to produce such a system.

- Mike KB3EIA -

- Mike KB3EIA -

John Smith wrote:
Mike:

It has been posted, it has been done, years ago.

For some reason you guys seem to claim a 56K phone modem which
operated within a ~5K audio bandwidth will suddenly cease to be able
to do so when hooked to a transceiver providing it with a ~5K audio
bandwidth...

... logic which I am at a loss of words to describe--of how stupid
that logic looks...

... and seems to pose the insane question of, "When is 5K really "NOT"
5K?" Or, "Are phone lines magic?"

... or, "Whatever happened to the ~5K audio on my transceiver, and why
did it suddenly stop when I kludged on a modem?"

... or just, "Do I look confused to you?"

... or, "Am I dreaming all of this?"

... or, "HELLO? Is anyone at home there?"


Post it, John! I will duplicate the system and we will sked on HF.

But if you are speaking of connecting a 56K modem to an HF rig, you are
not even *close* to the BW that is needed.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike:

Have you ever seen a webcam on a computer hooked to a 56K modem which
is hooked to a phone line and used for video conference?

.... so now your argument has become, "Webcams on computers are magic?
But cease to function on when the "signal" is fed to a transceiver!"

People used to use 'em on 14K modems, but with rather poor results...
Get real!

John

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
John Smith wrote:
Mike:

It has been posted, it has been done, years ago.

For some reason you guys seem to claim a 56K phone modem which
operated within a ~5K audio bandwidth will suddenly cease to be
able to do so when hooked to a transceiver providing it with a ~5K
audio bandwidth...

... logic which I am at a loss of words to describe--of how stupid
that logic looks...

... and seems to pose the insane question of, "When is 5K really
"NOT" 5K?" Or, "Are phone lines magic?"

... or, "Whatever happened to the ~5K audio on my transceiver, and
why did it suddenly stop when I kludged on a modem?"

... or just, "Do I look confused to you?"

... or, "Am I dreaming all of this?"

... or, "HELLO? Is anyone at home there?"


Post it, John! I will duplicate the system and we will sked on HF.

But if you are speaking of connecting a 56K modem to an HF rig, you
are not even *close* to the BW that is needed.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike:

Let's stay relevant here, enough of your fancy dancing...

The question is, "What do you get when you modulate a HF RF signal
with a 5K audio (speech or modem) signal?

Answer:
A transmission highly acceptable to the FCC, the ARRL and probably GOD
himself!

ROFLOL!

John

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
John Smith wrote:
Mike:

The clock in a ~4GHz computer and DDR memory makes modem data xfr
look incredibly s-l-o-w.... with spaces miles long between marker
bits...

100Mbs nic cards are not even close to a challenge to that clock
speed...


Um, John, just as a simple experiment, what do you get when you
modulate say a 14 MHz signal with that 4 GHz signal?

note: not that you would do that for a live video system, but are
you starting to see my point? What happens at the computer is not
the issue. It is what happens at the frequency we are trying to use.

Computer clock speed is not relevant to the the issue. It is how
much data an HF signal can handle.

There have been a lot of engineers, mathematicians and programmers
working on this problem. If you have a method of doing this, I
*strongly* suggest that you hire a patent attorney, and get to work.
You are gonna be rich, man!

I'm willing to help you with the initial experiments. In fact, in
the interest of the furtherance of Ham radio, science, and mankind,
I have challenged you to produce such a system.

- Mike KB3EIA -

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike:

Yanno. Have you ever even seen a 56K USRobotics Courier Modem (the
very first ones were 36K and upgraded with a simple 56K flash--upgrade
from software to their internal static memory--when the upgrade
finally became available)

As, there was "controversy" back then if a 56K modem ran on phone
lines would cause interference, "cross talk", etc., it all turned out
to be a ridiculous argument--one akin to the one posed of hooking a
fast modem to a xmitter...

It sold for ~$350.00+ when new (about 1995-1999) and does ALL data
processing within itself (it has a 8086 intel processor onboard), this
includes compaction/de-compaction, error control, line-signal power
adjustments, feeding/pulling data, etc. It virtually "pumps" data to
the computer buffers and virtually "yanks" data from them (I think I
have heard the data screaming at times! grin)

It virtually is a standalone computer with but one function in life,
send and recv data. It is a black box about 6 inches wide, 12 inches
long and under 2 inches high. During the usefulness of 56K modems it
had no equal--that stands to this very day.

It virtually puts NO demand/load on the computers processor, and
insists on doing EVERYTHING itself...

.... one reason it is termed the "v.everything" by USR... it is
software upgradeable with 512,000 bytes of read-only flash memory. It
was a marvel of technology in the data transmission field, it really
still is...

A piece of hardware like that simplifies the project from the very
beginning... you might be lucky enough to find an old one on ebay...
the "sportster" models are NOT ONE-HALF the modem a courier is...

.... when it hits error free transmission of data in the "kludged use"
of it, the data throughput is actually just a hair (few bytes) less
than 57K. It can actually keep logs and display data throughput to
your screen all on its own...

John

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
John Smith wrote:
Mike:

The clock in a ~4GHz computer and DDR memory makes modem data xfr
look incredibly s-l-o-w.... with spaces miles long between marker
bits...

100Mbs nic cards are not even close to a challenge to that clock
speed...


Um, John, just as a simple experiment, what do you get when you
modulate say a 14 MHz signal with that 4 GHz signal?

note: not that you would do that for a live video system, but are
you starting to see my point? What happens at the computer is not
the issue. It is what happens at the frequency we are trying to use.

Computer clock speed is not relevant to the the issue. It is how
much data an HF signal can handle.

There have been a lot of engineers, mathematicians and programmers
working on this problem. If you have a method of doing this, I
*strongly* suggest that you hire a patent attorney, and get to work.
You are gonna be rich, man!

I'm willing to help you with the initial experiments. In fact, in
the interest of the furtherance of Ham radio, science, and mankind,
I have challenged you to produce such a system.

- Mike KB3EIA -

- Mike KB3EIA -

John Smith wrote:
cmd buzz off:

Occasionally there are good reasons for a nice name call, such as in
your case...

John


I see, so you are part of the 'ill-bred lot".