Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Don Bowey wrote:
They don't know how to tie strings together? When some of them have only one end, it becomes bothersome. thankfully my shoelaces were spared this metaphysical ambiguity. mike |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jun 28, 12:38 am, Radium wrote:
Hi: Please don't be annoyed/offended by my question. I have a very weird question about electromagnetic radiation, carriers, and modulators. Is it mathematically-possible to carry a modulator signal with a frequency of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles every 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond and an amplitude of 1-watt-per-meter-squared on a AM carrier signal whose frequency is 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanocycle* every 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 giga- eons and whose amplitude is a minimum of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000 gigaphotons per 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond? If it is not mathematically-possible, then please explain why. 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) second is an extremely short amount of time. 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond is even shorter because a nanosecond is shorter than a second. 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 cycles is an extremely large amount of cycles. 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles is even more because a gigacycle is more than a cycle. Giga-eon = a billion eons Eon = a billion years Gigacycle = a billion cycles. *nanocycle = billionth of a cycle Gigaphoton = a billion photons 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 -- now that is one large large number. 10^1,000,000,000 = 10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000 So you get: (10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000) 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) = 10^-(10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000)-to-the-power-(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) 10^-(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000) is an extremely small number at it equals 10-to- the-power-NEGATIVE-[(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10- to-the-power-1,000,000,000)] No offense but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am really interested in this. Thanks, Radium I guess you could have some real problems when the rise time of your modulated envelope becomes faster than the speed of light. |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Radium wrote:
Hi: Please don't be annoyed/offended by my question. Is it mathematically-possible to carry a modulator signal with a frequency of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles every 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond and Ah our village idiot is back again. Also crossposting like all welbehaving village idiots. |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:38:01 -0700, Radium
wrote: Hi: Please don't be annoyed/offended by my question. I have a very weird question about electromagnetic radiation, carriers, and modulators. Is it mathematically-possible to carry a modulator signal with a frequency of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles every 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond and an amplitude of 1-watt-per-meter-squared on a AM carrier signal whose frequency is 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanocycle* every 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 giga- eons and whose amplitude is a minimum of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000 gigaphotons per 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond? If it is not mathematically-possible, then please explain why. 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) second is an extremely short amount of time. 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond is even shorter because a nanosecond is shorter than a second. 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 cycles is an extremely large amount of cycles. 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles is even more because a gigacycle is more than a cycle. Giga-eon = a billion eons Eon = a billion years Gigacycle = a billion cycles. *nanocycle = billionth of a cycle Gigaphoton = a billion photons 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 -- now that is one large large number. 10^1,000,000,000 = 10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000 So you get: (10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000) 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) = 10^-(10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000)-to-the-power-(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) 10^-(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10-to-the- power-1,000,000,000) is an extremely small number at it equals 10-to- the-power-NEGATIVE-[(10-to-the-power-1,000,000,000) to the power (10- to-the-power-1,000,000,000)] No offense but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am really interested in this. --- No offense but all you're really interested in is getting unsuspecting people with good hearts to respond to your inane trolls. It's painfully obvious that you're not even a neophyte when it comes to science, so your persistence in wasting everyone's time with your foolishness indicates that you're not looking for answers, only attention. -- JF |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Radium wrote:
Is it mathematically-possible to carry a modulator signal with a frequency of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 gigacycles every 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond and an amplitude of 1-watt-per-meter-squared on a AM carrier signal whose frequency is 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000) nanocycle* every 10^1,000,000,000-to-the-power-10^1,000,000,000 giga- eons and whose amplitude is a minimum of 10^1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000 gigaphotons per 10^-(1,000,000,000-to-the- power-10^1,000,000,000) nanosecond? No. If it is not mathematically-possible, then please explain why. No. -- We can't possibly imprison 300 million Americans for not paying their taxes, so let's grant all of them amnesty NOW! |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|