A mobile phone forum. Mobile-Forum

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Mobile-Forum forum » Airtime providers » Cingular
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

How I would like to change the cell phone industry [was AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency]



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 15th 07, 10:24 PM posted to sci.electronics.basics,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.cellular.cingular,alt.internet.wireless
Radium[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 48
Default How I would like to change the cell phone industry [was AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency]

On Jul 1, 7:24 am, wrote in
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
:

how would u like to change the cell phone industry?


Analog cells phones should stop using FM and should start using AM
with SHF frequencies - at least 3 GHz and at most 30 GHz.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_high_frequency

I choose SHF frequencies because SHF seems to be the sweet spot
between frequencies that are high-enough to rip through charged
particles & provide large amounts of bandwidth, yet low-enough to be
wireless and long-distance. At EHF and above, it starts to get into
the IR range where long-distance wireless reception is not possible
and atmospheric opacity begins to dominate.

Equally important, SHF frequencies can efficiently transmit signals
using extremely small transmitters. Longer wavelengths require larger
transmitters.

Obviously there are frequencies lower than SHF -- VHF and above --
that can easily penetrate charged particles [e.g. anything resembling
the ionosphere or heliosphere]. However, lower-frequencies tend to
result in less bandwidth, so it is better to use higher-frequencies
when the application requires significant bandwidth.

I choose AM because it requires less bandwidth than FM. In addition,
AM tends to retain reception of rather weak signals, while FM
"considers" such signals to be absent.

  #2  
Old July 15th 07, 10:45 PM posted to sci.electronics.basics,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.cellular.cingular,alt.internet.wireless
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22
Default How I would like to change the cell phone industry [was AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency]

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Radium wrote:
On Jul 1, 7:24 am, wrote in
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...0c8ed13?hl=en&
:


how would u like to change the cell phone industry?


Analog cells phones should stop using FM and should start using AM
with SHF frequencies - at least 3 GHz and at most 30 GHz.


Analog cell phones are going away.

Cell phones already use frequencies in the 3 GHz region.

You are an idiot.

snip crap

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.
  #3  
Old July 15th 07, 10:56 PM posted to sci.electronics.basics,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.cellular.cingular,alt.internet.wireless
Brenda Ann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11
Default How I would like to change the cell phone industry [was AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency]


wrote in message
...

Cell phones already use frequencies in the 3 GHz region.


Really? Which ones? I'm only aware of cell systems using 800, 900, 1800 and
1900 MHz. There are some (very few) multisystem phones that use all four of
those ranges.


  #4  
Old July 15th 07, 11:14 PM posted to sci.electronics.basics,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.cellular.cingular,alt.internet.wireless
Jeff Liebermann[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 421
Default How I would like to change the cell phone industry [was AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency]

Radium hath wroth:

how would u like to change the cell phone industry?


Analog cells phones should stop using FM and should start using AM
with SHF frequencies - at least 3 GHz and at most 30 GHz.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_high_frequency


Maybe if the entire cellular infrastructure would move up to the LMDS
26-30GHz band, I might recover some of the money I sunk into an LMDS
startup. Great idea. I like it.

Of course, there are problems. Nobody makes an economical mm wave
handset. There will probably need to be 8-10 times more cell sites
built than are currently in use on 800/900 and 1800/1900MHz. Of
course mm wave propagation is affected by just about everything, so it
probably won't work indoors. No problem, just add more cell sites and
repeaters. Of course you couldn't get away with the existing
relatively low power output handsets and insipid gain antennas, so
we'll just crank up the power and antenna gain on the handset and fry
a few peoples brains. It's a small sacrifice to make so I watch TV on
my cell phone.

Equally important, SHF frequencies can efficiently transmit signals
using extremely small transmitters. Longer wavelengths require larger
transmitters.


They do? I didn't know that. My 49MHz automobile alarm dongle isn't
much larger than my 2400MHz USB wi-fi dongle. Are you sure the
transmitter has to be bigger or were you thinking of the antenna?

Obviously there are frequencies lower than SHF -- VHF and above --
that can easily penetrate charged particles [e.g. anything resembling
the ionosphere or heliosphere].


I don't know of any wireless service provider that charges for
particles. What are they charging and what's the stock symbol? I've
always suspected that charged particles might be worth selling.

However, lower-frequencies tend to
result in less bandwidth, so it is better to use higher-frequencies
when the application requires significant bandwidth.


Hint: It doesn't matter what you're doing, there's never enough
bandwidth available. If you provide XX MHz of available bandwidth,
someone will immediately supply an application that required 10 times
the available bandwidth. More simply, applications tend to fill up
available bandwidth quite rapidly.

I choose AM because it requires less bandwidth than FM. In addition,
AM tends to retain reception of rather weak signals, while FM
"considers" such signals to be absent.


I'll make it really simple for you. FM is "hi-fi", while AM is noisy
"no-fi". Don't you want to be cool strutting down the street with
your iPhone watching HDTV with 7.1 sound? It wouldn't do to have it
sound like the typical AM broadcast station. For decent quality, you
gotta have FM.

This is fun. Kinda reminds me of some of the business plans I
reviewed during the dot com boom.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
  #5  
Old July 15th 07, 11:24 PM posted to sci.electronics.basics,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.cellular.cingular,alt.internet.wireless
Don Bowey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 68
Default Troll alert - was How I would like to change the cell phone

On 7/15/07 1:24 PM, in article
, "Radium"
wrote:

On Jul 1, 7:24 am, wrote in
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...bf90c8ed13?hl=
en&
:

how would u like to change the cell phone industry?


Analog cells phones should stop using FM and should start using AM
with SHF frequencies - at least 3 GHz and at most 30 GHz.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_high_frequency

I choose SHF frequencies because SHF seems to be the sweet spot
between frequencies that are high-enough to rip through charged
particles & provide large amounts of bandwidth, yet low-enough to be
wireless and long-distance. At EHF and above, it starts to get into
the IR range where long-distance wireless reception is not possible
and atmospheric opacity begins to dominate.

Equally important, SHF frequencies can efficiently transmit signals
using extremely small transmitters. Longer wavelengths require larger
transmitters.

Obviously there are frequencies lower than SHF -- VHF and above --
that can easily penetrate charged particles [e.g. anything resembling
the ionosphere or heliosphere]. However, lower-frequencies tend to
result in less bandwidth, so it is better to use higher-frequencies
when the application requires significant bandwidth.

I choose AM because it requires less bandwidth than FM. In addition,
AM tends to retain reception of rather weak signals, while FM
"considers" such signals to be absent.


Too much time on your hands again?

  #6  
Old July 15th 07, 11:28 PM posted to sci.electronics.basics,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.cellular.cingular,alt.internet.wireless
RHF
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 68
Default . . . How I would like to change the cell phone industry [was AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency]

On Jul 15, 1:24 pm, Radium wrote:
On Jul 1, 7:24 am, wrote inhttp://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.basics/msg/696d6abf90c...
:

how would u like to change the cell phone industry?


Analog cells phones should stop using FM and should start using AM
with SHF frequencies - at least 3 GHz and at most 30 GHz.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_high_frequency

I choose SHF frequencies because SHF seems to be the sweet spot
between frequencies that are high-enough to rip through charged
particles & provide large amounts of bandwidth, yet low-enough to be
wireless and long-distance. At EHF and above, it starts to get into
the IR range where long-distance wireless reception is not possible
and atmospheric opacity begins to dominate.

Equally important, SHF frequencies can efficiently transmit signals
using extremely small transmitters. Longer wavelengths require larger
transmitters.

Obviously there are frequencies lower than SHF -- VHF and above --
that can easily penetrate charged particles [e.g. anything resembling
the ionosphere or heliosphere]. However, lower-frequencies tend to
result in less bandwidth, so it is better to use higher-frequencies
when the application requires significant bandwidth.

I choose AM because it requires less bandwidth than FM. In addition,
AM tends to retain reception of rather weak signals, while FM
"considers" such signals to be absent.


.. . .

  #7  
Old July 15th 07, 11:29 PM posted to sci.electronics.basics,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.cellular.cingular,alt.internet.wireless
RHF
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 68
Default . . . How I would like to change the cell phone industry [was AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency]

On Jul 15, 1:45 pm, wrote:
In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Radium wrote:

On Jul 1, 7:24 am, wrote in
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...sg/696d6abf90c...
:
how would u like to change the cell phone industry?

Analog cells phones should stop using FM and should start using AM
with SHF frequencies - at least 3 GHz and at most 30 GHz.


Analog cell phones are going away.

Cell phones already use frequencies in the 3 GHz region.

You are an idiot.

snip crap

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.


.. . .

  #8  
Old July 15th 07, 11:30 PM posted to sci.electronics.basics,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.cellular.cingular,alt.internet.wireless
RHF
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 68
Default . . . How I would like to change the cell phone industry [was AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency]

On Jul 15, 2:14 pm, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Radium hath wroth:

how would u like to change the cell phone industry?


Analog cells phones should stop using FM and should start using AM
with SHF frequencies - at least 3 GHz and at most 30 GHz.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_high_frequency


Maybe if the entire cellular infrastructure would move up to the LMDS
26-30GHz band, I might recover some of the money I sunk into an LMDS
startup. Great idea. I like it.

Of course, there are problems. Nobody makes an economical mm wave
handset. There will probably need to be 8-10 times more cell sites
built than are currently in use on 800/900 and 1800/1900MHz. Of
course mm wave propagation is affected by just about everything, so it
probably won't work indoors. No problem, just add more cell sites and
repeaters. Of course you couldn't get away with the existing
relatively low power output handsets and insipid gain antennas, so
we'll just crank up the power and antenna gain on the handset and fry
a few peoples brains. It's a small sacrifice to make so I watch TV on
my cell phone.

Equally important, SHF frequencies can efficiently transmit signals
using extremely small transmitters. Longer wavelengths require larger
transmitters.


They do? I didn't know that. My 49MHz automobile alarm dongle isn't
much larger than my 2400MHz USB wi-fi dongle. Are you sure the
transmitter has to be bigger or were you thinking of the antenna?

Obviously there are frequencies lower than SHF -- VHF and above --
that can easily penetrate charged particles [e.g. anything resembling
the ionosphere or heliosphere].


I don't know of any wireless service provider that charges for
particles. What are they charging and what's the stock symbol? I've
always suspected that charged particles might be worth selling.

However, lower-frequencies tend to
result in less bandwidth, so it is better to use higher-frequencies
when the application requires significant bandwidth.


Hint: It doesn't matter what you're doing, there's never enough
bandwidth available. If you provide XX MHz of available bandwidth,
someone will immediately supply an application that required 10 times
the available bandwidth. More simply, applications tend to fill up
available bandwidth quite rapidly.

I choose AM because it requires less bandwidth than FM. In addition,
AM tends to retain reception of rather weak signals, while FM
"considers" such signals to be absent.


I'll make it really simple for you. FM is "hi-fi", while AM is noisy
"no-fi". Don't you want to be cool strutting down the street with
your iPhone watching HDTV with 7.1 sound? It wouldn't do to have it
sound like the typical AM broadcast station. For decent quality, you
gotta have FM.

This is fun. Kinda reminds me of some of the business plans I
reviewed during the dot com boom.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558


.. . .

  #9  
Old July 15th 07, 11:31 PM posted to sci.electronics.basics,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.cellular.cingular,alt.internet.wireless
RHF
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 68
Default . . . Troll alert - was How I would like to change the cell phone industry [was AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency]

On Jul 15, 2:24 pm, Don Bowey wrote:
On 7/15/07 1:24 PM, in article
. com, "Radium"





wrote:
On Jul 1, 7:24 am, wrote in
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...sg/696d6abf90c...
en&
:


how would u like to change the cell phone industry?


Analog cells phones should stop using FM and should start using AM
with SHF frequencies - at least 3 GHz and at most 30 GHz.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_high_frequency


I choose SHF frequencies because SHF seems to be the sweet spot
between frequencies that are high-enough to rip through charged
particles & provide large amounts of bandwidth, yet low-enough to be
wireless and long-distance. At EHF and above, it starts to get into
the IR range where long-distance wireless reception is not possible
and atmospheric opacity begins to dominate.


Equally important, SHF frequencies can efficiently transmit signals
using extremely small transmitters. Longer wavelengths require larger
transmitters.


Obviously there are frequencies lower than SHF -- VHF and above --
that can easily penetrate charged particles [e.g. anything resembling
the ionosphere or heliosphere]. However, lower-frequencies tend to
result in less bandwidth, so it is better to use higher-frequencies
when the application requires significant bandwidth.


I choose AM because it requires less bandwidth than FM. In addition,
AM tends to retain reception of rather weak signals, while FM
"considers" such signals to be absent.


Too much time on your hands again?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


.. . .

  #10  
Old July 15th 07, 11:31 PM posted to sci.electronics.basics,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.cellular.cingular,alt.internet.wireless
RHF
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 68
Default . . . How I would like to change the cell phone industry [was AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency]

On Jul 15, 1:56 pm, "Brenda Ann" wrote:
wrote in message

...



Cell phones already use frequencies in the 3 GHz region.


Really? Which ones? I'm only aware of cell systems using 800, 900, 1800 and
1900 MHz. There are some (very few) multisystem phones that use all four of
those ranges.


.. . .

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency Radium[_2_] Cingular 335 July 20th 07 08:10 AM
AM electromagnetic waves: astronomically-high modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency Radium[_2_] Cingular 35 June 30th 07 09:43 PM
6800 Frequency Change [email protected] Nokia 1 February 3rd 06 06:35 PM
Another survey on Cell phones, driving & accident frequency Bob Smith Sprint 7 July 19th 05 01:52 AM
WTB: Unlocked GSM cell phone for 900 frequency inno Fido 6 October 24th 03 02:43 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2017 Mobile-Forum.
The comments are property of their posters.