How to get envelope from AM signal without phase shift
in [DSP]
|
Prev: How Rune Allnor can attend the COMP.DSP Conference
Next: Inertial navigation (anyone familiar with this stuff here?)
From: steveu on 23 Mar 2010 09:58 >Rune, > >No one is interested in your emotional rantings. If you have something >intelligent to say about the system in discussion then lets talk. But >support your ideas with logic. I have given you logical arguments >supporting the superluminal conclusion, which ones can you prove are wrong. >If you can't then be quiet. Emotional rantings only make you look foolish. You are the one looking foolish up to now. If you want to claim you have perpetual motion, you need an *exceedingly* powerful argument before anyone will stop laughing. If you want to claim you have infinite gain bandwidth product you need an *exceedingly* powerful argument before anyone will stop laughing. If you want to claim you can carry information faster than light you need to a) prove that people like Shannon and others were wrong, and that information and energy are not interchangeable terms, or b) that you have found a way to carry energy faster than light. So far, all you've done it describe a variety of things that look like the phantom fast moving phase effects we all meet quite regularly. When amplitude or phase manipulation is really carrying information, its because those things are directly related to real energy manipulation. Steve
From: WWalker on 23 Mar 2010 11:42 You still have not come up with any intelligent comments refuting my arguments. Your resort to insults does not help. >On 23 Mar, 13:40, "WWalker" <william.walker(a)n_o_s_p_a_m.imtek.de> >wrote: >> Rune, >> >> No one is interested in your emotional rantings. If you have something >> intelligent to say about the system in discussion then lets talk. But >> support your ideas with logic. I have given you logical arguments >> supporting the superluminal conclusion, which ones can you prove are wrong. > >What you have showed in this thread, is that you > >1) Consistently fail to use the simplest terminology > wrt to wave propagation >2) Do not have the faintest clue about data analysis >3) Do not know or understand the implications of > the speed of light as an absolute limit in physics >4) Do not know or understand the basics of dipole > antennae >5) Do not know or understand how to set up a simulation >6) Do not know or understand how to analyze the data > from said simulation >7) Do not know or undesrtand how to criticise the results > of said simulation >8) Do not know or understand the basics of information > theory > >...and those are just the ones I remember off the top >of my head. > >As for fools and proofs - well, it's more than a century since >Einstein presented his relativity theory, where the speed of >light is established as a fundamental limit in physics. When I >say that you ought not to have been admitted as a student >to a technical university, it's because anyone who passes a >high-school level class in physics should know this, and >at least stop and think through their own ideas and arguments >once one starts talking about exceeding the speed of light. > >You have failed blatantly on that point. So if anyone her is >a fool, it would be you. > >Apart from that, it is up to the person that makes the >extraordinary claim to argue in his own support. *If* you >were to be right, it would mean that anything and everything >that is based on Einstein's relativity theory - nuclear >weapons and powerplants, cosmogology, the stuff they do at >CERN - would turn out to be wrong. > >By all means - it's up to you to make that claim. Just be >prepared to be asked thay *you* prove that your are right. >It would take a lot more than a mere simulation you don't >know how to do, of stuff you don't know, to convince anyone >outside NTNU. > >Rune >
From: Rune Allnor on 23 Mar 2010 12:02 On 23 Mar, 16:42, "WWalker" <william.walker(a)n_o_s_p_a_m.imtek.de> wrote: > You still have not come up with any intelligent comments refuting my > arguments. There is avery good reasons for that: You have presented no arguments to refute. > Your resort to insults does not help. What insults? I have only listed the factual errors, blunders and misconceptions you have displayed througout this thread. The person(s) you *really* want to chat with are 1) The guy you see in the mirror each morning 2) Whoever might have led you down this path in the first place 3) Whoever you might have encountered in your work, who did *not* point out the obvious to you, as I have done over the last couple of days. The facts remain: You don't have the faintest clue what you are doing, at any level. Rune
From: WWalker on 23 Mar 2010 13:45 Steve, The only thing one has to do to prove that information can be propagated faster than light, is to simply demonstate it. The simulation below clearly denonstrates that this is possible. Check it for yourself. Simply copy and paste it into Mathematica. The simulation generates a random modulated 100ns span signal by adding a 50MHz,1V Peak Cosine to a 22.7MHz, 1.7V peak Cosine. Then the Modulation is multiplied with 500MHz, 1V peak Cosine carrier. The reference envelope is extracted by dividing by the carrier. The AM signal is then run through the transfer function of a light speed propagating system [e^(iwr/c)] by adding phase terms (wr/c) to each harmonic of the signal, where i is the complex number, w is the radial frequency, r is the distance of field propagation (r=20cm). The envelope of this light propagated signal is then determined by dividing by a phase shifted (wr/c) carrier. The AM signal is then run through the Magnetic field component transfer function of an electric dipole antenna with the known transfer function: [e^(iwr/c)[-kr-i]] by adding phase terms (wr/c-ArcCos[(-wr/c)/Sqrt[1+(wr/c)^2]]) to each harmonic of the signal. The envelope of this dipole propagated signal is determined by dividing by a phase shifted (wr/c-ArcCos[(-wr/c)/Sqrt[1+(wr/c)^2]]) carrier. Plots are shown for all three signals with their extracted envelopes which align perfectly with their signal. Finally the envelopes are plotted and a zoom of the plot clearly shows that the information (modulation envelope) arrives earlier than a light speed propagated signal. William ---------Begin Mathematica code (checked on ver 5.2 and ver7)--------- Signal Sig = (A1*Cos[wm1 t] + A2*Cos[wm2 t] + 3) 2 Cos[wc t] TrigReduce[Sig] Carrier = Cos[wc t]; wc = 2 \[Pi] fc; wm1 = 2 \[Pi] fm1; wm2 = 2 \[Pi] fm2; c = 3*10^8; fc = 500*10^6; fm1 = 50*10^6; fm2 = 22.7*10^6; A1 = 1; A2 = 1.7; r = 0.2; Plot[Sig, {t, 0, 100*10^-9}, PlotPoints -> 300] Plot[Carrier, {t, 0, 100*10^-9}, PlotPoints -> 300] Signal Envelope SigEnv = Sig/Carrier; Plot[SigEnv, {t, 0, 100*10^-9}, PlotPoints -> 300] Plot[{Sig, SigEnv}, {t, 0, 100*10^-9}, PlotPoints -> 300] Light Light = 6 Cos[t wc - Lth1] + A1 Cos[t wc - t wm1 - Lth2] + A1 Cos[t wc + t wm1 - Lth3] + A2 Cos[t wc - t wm2 - Lth4] + A2 Cos[t wc + t wm2 - Lth5]; Lth1 = 2 \[Pi] fc r/c; Lth2 = 2 \[Pi] (fc - fm1) r/c; Lth3 = 2 \[Pi] (fc + fm1) r/c; Lth4 = 2 \[Pi] (fc - fm2) r/c; Lth5 = 2 \[Pi] (fc + fm2) r/c; Plot[Light, {t, 0, 100*10^-9}, PlotPoints -> 300] Light Envelope LightEnv = Light/Cos[t wc - Lth1]; Plot[LightEnv, {t, 0, 100*10^-9}, PlotPoints -> 300] Plot[{Light, LightEnv}, {t, 0, 100*10^-9}, PlotPoints -> 300] Ant Ant = 6 Cos[t wc - Antth1] + A1 Cos[t wc - t wm1 - Antth2] + A1 Cos[t wc + t wm1 - Antth3] + A2 Cos[t wc - t wm2 - Antth4] + A2 Cos[t wc + t wm2 - Antth5]; Antth1 = 2 \[Pi] fc r/c - ArcCos[-2 \[Pi] fc r/c/Sqrt[1 + (2 \[Pi] fc r/c)^2]]; Antth2 = 2 \[Pi] (fc - fm1) r/c - ArcCos[-2 \[Pi] (fc - fm1) r/c/ Sqrt[1 + (2 \[Pi] (fc - fm1) r/c)^2]]; Antth3 = 2 \[Pi] (fc + fm1) r/c - ArcCos[-2 \[Pi] (fc + fm1) r/c/ Sqrt[1 + (2 \[Pi] (fc + fm1) r/c)^2]]; Antth4 = 2 \[Pi] (fc - fm2) r/c - ArcCos[-2 \[Pi] (fc - fm2) r/c/ Sqrt[1 + (2 \[Pi] (fc - fm2) r/c)^2]]; Antth5 = 2 \[Pi] (fc + fm2) r/c - ArcCos[-2 \[Pi] (fc + fm2) r/c/ Sqrt[1 + (2 \[Pi] (fc + fm2) r/c)^2]]; Plot[Ant, {t, 0, 100*10^-9}, PlotPoints -> 300] Ant Envelope AntEnv = Ant/Cos[t wc - Antth1]; Plot[AntEnv, {t, 0, 100*10^-9}, PlotPoints -> 300] Plot[{Ant, AntEnv}, {t, 0, 100*10^-9}, PlotPoints -> 300] Envelope Plots Plot[{SigEnv, AntEnv, LightEnv}, {t, 0, 100*10^-9}, PlotStyle -> {RGBColor[1, 0, 0], RGBColor[0, 1, 0], RGBColor[0, 0, 1]}] Plot[{SigEnv, AntEnv, LightEnv}, {t, 3.5*10^-8, 3.6*10^-8}, AxesOrigin -> {3.5*10^-8, 7}, PlotStyle -> {RGBColor[1, 0, 0], RGBColor[0, 1, 0], RGBColor[0, 0, 1]}] ----------------End Mathematica code------------------------ >>Rune, >> >>No one is interested in your emotional rantings. If you have something >>intelligent to say about the system in discussion then lets talk. But >>support your ideas with logic. I have given you logical arguments >>supporting the superluminal conclusion, which ones can you prove are >wrong. >>If you can't then be quiet. Emotional rantings only make you look >foolish. > >You are the one looking foolish up to now. If you want to claim you have >perpetual motion, you need an *exceedingly* powerful argument before anyone >will stop laughing. If you want to claim you have infinite gain bandwidth >product you need an *exceedingly* powerful argument before anyone will stop >laughing. If you want to claim you can carry information faster than light >you need to a) prove that people like Shannon and others were wrong, and >that information and energy are not interchangeable terms, or b) that you >have found a way to carry energy faster than light. So far, all you've done >it describe a variety of things that look like the phantom fast moving >phase effects we all meet quite regularly. When amplitude or phase >manipulation is really carrying information, its because those things are >directly related to real energy manipulation. > >Steve > >
From: Tim Wescott on 23 Mar 2010 14:20
WWalker wrote: (top posting fixed) >>> Rune, >>> >>> No one is interested in your emotional rantings. If you have something >>> intelligent to say about the system in discussion then lets talk. But >>> support your ideas with logic. I have given you logical arguments >>> supporting the superluminal conclusion, which ones can you prove are >> wrong. >>> If you can't then be quiet. Emotional rantings only make you look >> foolish. >> >> You are the one looking foolish up to now. If you want to claim you have >> perpetual motion, you need an *exceedingly* powerful argument before > anyone >> will stop laughing. If you want to claim you have infinite gain bandwidth >> product you need an *exceedingly* powerful argument before anyone will > stop >> laughing. If you want to claim you can carry information faster than > light >> you need to a) prove that people like Shannon and others were wrong, and >> that information and energy are not interchangeable terms, or b) that you >> have found a way to carry energy faster than light. So far, all you've > done >> it describe a variety of things that look like the phantom fast moving >> phase effects we all meet quite regularly. When amplitude or phase >> manipulation is really carrying information, its because those things are >> directly related to real energy manipulation. >> > Steve, > > The only thing one has to do to prove that information can be propagated > faster than light, is to simply demonstate it. The simulation below clearly > denonstrates that this is possible. Check it for yourself. Simply copy and > paste it into Mathematica. > > The simulation generates a random modulated 100ns span signal by adding a > 50MHz,1V Peak Cosine to a 22.7MHz, 1.7V peak Cosine. Then the Modulation is > multiplied with 500MHz, 1V peak Cosine carrier. The reference envelope is > extracted by dividing by the carrier. > > The AM signal is then run through the transfer function of a light speed > propagating system [e^(iwr/c)] by adding phase terms (wr/c) to each > harmonic of the signal, where i is the complex number, w is the radial > frequency, r is the distance of field propagation (r=20cm). The envelope of > this light propagated signal is then determined by dividing by a phase > shifted (wr/c) carrier. > > The AM signal is then run through the Magnetic field component transfer > function of an electric dipole antenna with the known transfer function: > [e^(iwr/c)[-kr-i]] by adding phase terms > (wr/c-ArcCos[(-wr/c)/Sqrt[1+(wr/c)^2]]) to each harmonic of the signal. The > envelope of this dipole propagated signal is determined by dividing by a > phase shifted (wr/c-ArcCos[(-wr/c)/Sqrt[1+(wr/c)^2]]) carrier. Plots are > shown for all three signals with their extracted envelopes which align > perfectly with their signal. > > Finally the envelopes are plotted and a zoom of the plot clearly shows that > the information (modulation envelope) arrives earlier than a light speed > propagated signal. By that logic, we can already _travel_ faster than light, and I can prove it -- just watch any episode of Star Trek! But I'm not holding my breath for a scenic tour of Antares. -- Tim Wescott Control system and signal processing consulting www.wescottdesign.com |