SIC, NLM, etc...

I just was wondering why -everything- that transmits is blocked by the same interfearance… I honestly don't think that would be possbile. NLM devices would transmit at a different frequency than SIC would... now, if the interferance was too much 'noise' on a frequency, that wouldn't effect NLM... if interferance was a four foot concrete wall... then yes, it would be blocked...

It's just my personal opinion... but I think that certain things should be labeled as 'interferance' and 'blocked'... nothing electronic would work in blocked (except for possibly phones... then again, even that may be hit. Depends if they are satellite, or where the transmitters are...)

Interferance would be things like SIC, not sure if NLM or other transmitters would be effected.

Again, just wondering... seeing if I can get things cleared up for me and what not, and wanted to hear what everyone else thought...

(Edited by Jinkorei at 8:23 pm on Jan. 12, 2004)

In all seriousiness, you'll often find this in consumer electronics, turn the microwave on, the wifi speed drops, the lights flux and your cordless (not cellular) phone all pick it up. Same deal with vacuum (if you remember a time before cable, your rabbit ears would get interference when you ran it). High power devices that aren't shielded enough cause interference across the electromagnetic spectrum. Some devices are more prone then others. If you've ever noticed an FCC sticker on something, read it, it's talking about how the device (usually) is required to accept incoming interference and is tested to not cause interference over a certain level.

I've meerly taken into account the nature of interference when adding these changes to such devices. Is it perfect? No, gridphones and radios aren't affected yet, but they will be at some point.

That's so like…. 1999! Never heard of a time-sharing multiplexing scheme (pulse-time or pulse-position modulation)? Ultra Wideband? Carrier-free schemes? What about Spread Spectrum?

The FCC enforced concept of divying up the frequency spectrum into bands allocated for specific usages may be viable for a while still, but it's allready being made mostly irrelevant with the speed of modern DSP's. To think that the same limitations that plauged us 5 years ago but don't any would re-plauge us 85 years later is preposterous.

Rather I submit Withmore would be looking to maximize their throughput while minimizing costs. This means choosing a SINGLE standardized frequency range (to keep antenna manufacturing costs dirt cheap) which everything time-shares, and use low-power amps which are just powerful enough for 'normal consumer usage' which means 'standing on the street inside the dome'.

Depends if they are satellite

Ever used a satellite-only phone before? I bet it wasn't indoors… let alone with 2 city levels and a geodesic dome surrounding you. The latency's horrendus too, which technology can only go so far to solve: The time it takes for a radio wave to reach the Clarke Belt (35,786 kilometers (19,323 nautical miles or 22,241 statute miles) from present mean sea level, assuming the oceans havn't raised in 85 years) and back is noticable regardless of how fast your switches are. It's much cheaper and easier to use a low power low-latency system than it would be a satellite. And in 2088 where the hell would you go where there isn't coverage? And who would market to the consumers who could answer that question? I gaurentee it isn't NLM…

-Kevlar

(Edited by Kevlar at 7:25 pm on Jan. 13, 2004)