Connect with us

AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier

Discussion in 'Electronic Basics' started by Radium, Jun 28, 2007.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. Radium

    Radium Guest

    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
     
  2. John Smith I

    John Smith I Guest

    ROFLOL!!!

    JS
     
  3. Eeyore

    Eeyore Guest

    Why not ?

    You're a trolling IDIOT.

    Graham
     
  4. RHF

    RHF Guest

     
  5. RHF

    RHF Guest

     
  6. RHF

    RHF Guest

     
  7. K7ITM

    K7ITM Guest

    AM = k*(1+f(t))*cos(w*t+theta) Eqn. 1

    where k is the desired carrier amplitude
    f(t) is the modulating signal, scaled so that negative peaks are
    greater than -1
    w is the radian carrier frequency
    t is time
    theta is whatever carrier phase offset you want; a constant.

    Now you go figure it out. Is there anything in your incomprehensible
    problem statement that can't be accommodated by Eqn. 1? Actually
    accomplishing it is left as an exercise for you to spend the rest of
    your life on.
     
  8. Why? Would you expect facts to change if I were annoyed or offended?
    Oh, that's easy. The worlds supply of zeros, nulls, and comma
    separators is strictly limited. The galactic supply of such things
    were created by the big bang and are not being made any more. If you
    consume a substantial number of zeros, the zeros must be borrowed from
    somewhere. While it is mathematically possible to bury the reader in
    zeros, it is ecologically incorrect to do so. Also, be advised that
    the government budget and trade deficits have cornered the supply of
    zeros, and may soon approach an astronomical accumulation of zeros. At
    the present rate of zero depletion, you may soon be forced to use
    large exponentials, in order to avoid consuming zeros.
    Would defense be acceptable?
    There are about 10^80 particles in the universe. Do with them as you
    please but do save the zeros for those that need them.
     
  9. RHF

    RHF Guest

     
  10. m II

    m II Guest


    an a-null-ment is in order.




    mike
     
  11. RHF

    RHF Guest

     


  12. Didn't you pull something like this crap in the sci.engr.television.advanced
    newsgroup a few years ago? The correct anwer then and now is that the
    output signal is the modulating signal with a slow phase change impressed on
    it proportional to the instantaneous amplitude of the carrier. Think
    "rotating vector."

    No further replies forthcoming, as my troll-o-meter is edging into the red
    zone.
     
  13. Mike Kaliski

    Mike Kaliski Guest

    Radium

    The answer is no. It takes a finite time for even so called 'instantaneous'
    quantum interactions to occur, so the frequencies quoted are a nonsense.
    Essentially frequencies above around 10 ^ 30 Hz may (as) well not exist. I
    am probably a few orders of magnitude out here, but that is the general
    idea.

    For a detailed explaination see "The Road to Reality: A complete Guide to
    the Laws of the Universe by Roger Penrose - ISBN 0739458477". Available from
    Amazon and all good booksellers. Mr. Penrose has collaborated with some of
    the greatest theoretical mathamaticians and physicists of the last fifty
    years and if you can follow the maths, all will become clear. This book will
    explain a lot of the maths required anyway, so worth giving it a go.

    Most mathematicians prefer to simplify equations by removing superfluous
    zeroes and exponents by cancellation on either side of the equation. :)

    Mike G0ULI
     
  14. Cecil Moore

    Cecil Moore Guest

    Mike, does he say anything about quantum entanglement?
     
  15. Martin

    Martin Guest

    Your troll-o-meter is defective, it should be pegged hard in the red
    zone.
    Please have it recalibrated to a proper sensitivity.
     
  16. Mike Kaliski

    Mike Kaliski Guest

    Cecil

    Yes indeed he does. This book is about as leading edge as it gets. The
    author has worked closely with Stephen Hawking and people of similar
    academic credentials. It doesn't get any better than that.

    It is clear from reading this book that we have reached a plateau in our
    capability of understanding how the universe works and we need to await the
    arrival of new technology and techniques to be able to test the latest
    theories. The theory has outstripped the technology for the time being.

    Mike G0ULI
     
  17. RHF

    RHF Guest

    ? . . .
     
  18. RHF

    RHF Guest

    .. . . ? . . .
     
  19. RHF

    RHF Guest

    .. . . ? . . .
     
  20. RHF

    RHF Guest

    .. . . ? . . .
     
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day

-