From: Eric Jacobsen on
On 3/27/2010 3:47 AM, WWalker wrote:
> Eric,
>
> Since a pulse distorts in the nearfield, one can not determin it's group
> speed in the nearfield. But if you take the same pulse and send it through
> a low pass filter, mix it with a carrier, and send it though a dipole you
> get the same superluminal results. Because the filtered pulse is narrow
> band, it propagates undistorted and arrives sooner than a light propagated
> pulse.

I'm not following this argument, especially the last statement.


> I have done a Vee Pro simulation and it clearly shows this. In this program
> I used a pulse with the following characteristics: 1Hz Freq, 50ns pulse
> width, 10ns rise and fall time, 1V amplitude. the Lowpass filter had the
> following characteristics: 50MHz cutoff frequency (fc), 6th order, Transfer
> function: 1/(j(f/fc)+1)^6. Then I multiplied this narrowbanded signal with
> a 500MHz carrier and sent it though a light speed propagating transfer
> function [e^(ikr)] and though the magnetic component of a electric dipole
> transfer function [e^(ikr)*(-kr-i)]. Finally I extracted the modulation
> envelopes of the tranmitted signal, light speed signal, and the dipole
> signal. To extract the envelopes I squared the signal and then passed it
> through a 300MHz cutoff (fc), 12th order LPF with the following transfer
> function [1/(j(f/fc)+1)^12]. The pulse envelope from the dipole arrives
> 0.16ns earlier than the light speed propagated pulse. This corresponds
> exactly with theoretical expectations (0.08/fc=0.16ns).
>
> I think perhaps this is the evidence you have all been looking for.
>
> William

Although I probably shouldn't be, I was thinking about this a bit more
and wanted to add some thoughts.

Although the following is certainly not a rigorous analysis, in general
as the signal bandwidth goes up the time resolution one can achieve in
correlation measurements gets smaller. The information update rate for
typical comm systems is the symbol period, Ts, and generally Ts = 1/BW
where BW is the 3dB signal bandwidth. It is possible to resolve time
more finely than Ts and synchronization systems have to do this to
recover the symbols, but a reasonable benchmark for how fast information
is updating is Ts = 1/BW. I think it is arguable that if one wants to
measure how fast information is propagating with very fine time
resolution one needs to use a signal with a very wide bandwidth.
Otherwise one risks measuring a phase offset due to phenomena like
negative group delay rather than accelerated information propagation.

You said:

> The pulse envelope from the dipole arrives
> 0.16ns earlier than the light speed propagated pulse. This corresponds
> exactly with theoretical expectations (0.08/fc=0.16ns).

What theory creates an expectation that the signal propagates faster
than light? I don't know of any.

Since you've filtered your signal to 50 MHz BW there will be no
significant frequency components with periods shorter than 20ns. You're
claiming that a time difference of 0.16ns (or 1/125th of the length of
the smallest period in the signal) is a difference in information
propagation. I think it's far more likely to be a phase shift due to
the dispersion (as shown in the Sten paper), since that is only 360/125
= 2.88 degrees of phase advance. A signal experiencing 2.88 degrees of
phase advance through a dispersive medium is far more believable than
propagation faster than light. This is what I've been saying, what
Andor's blog demonstrates, and what my reading of the Sten paper indicates.

As mentioned long ago, I think a good experiment would be to interrupt
the input signal at some point, perhaps even the modulated signal at a
carrier zero crossing. The propagation of the interruption (which has
infinite bandwidth if it's a hard stop) should be revealing.


--
Eric Jacobsen
Minister of Algorithms
Abineau Communications
http://www.abineau.com
From: Vladimir Vassilevsky on


Eric Jacobsen wrote:

> As mentioned long ago, I think a good experiment would be to interrupt
> the input signal at some point, perhaps even the modulated signal at a
> carrier zero crossing. The propagation of the interruption (which has
> infinite bandwidth if it's a hard stop) should be revealing.

Interesting question. What should be a good narrowband test signal to
demonstrate the information propagation speed in dispersive media?
Obviously it should not be an eigenfunction of linear system; i.e.
sinusoids and exponentials are not suitable.
I suggest windowed sinc or RRC pulse modulated BPSK.
But, you may have to put the equalization filter into the picture as well.

Vladimir Vassilevsky
DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant
http://www.abvolt.com


From: glen herrmannsfeldt on
Eric Jacobsen <eric.jacobsen(a)ieee.org> wrote:
(snip)

> Although the following is certainly not a rigorous analysis, in general
> as the signal bandwidth goes up the time resolution one can achieve in
> correlation measurements gets smaller. The information update rate for
> typical comm systems is the symbol period, Ts, and generally Ts = 1/BW
> where BW is the 3dB signal bandwidth. It is possible to resolve time
> more finely than Ts and synchronization systems have to do this to
> recover the symbols, but a reasonable benchmark for how fast information
> is updating is Ts = 1/BW. I think it is arguable that if one wants to
> measure how fast information is propagating with very fine time
> resolution one needs to use a signal with a very wide bandwidth.
> Otherwise one risks measuring a phase offset due to phenomena like
> negative group delay rather than accelerated information propagation.

I agree. I was indirectly mentioning this a few days ago, with
the suggestion of very low bandwidth, and so low information
transmission rates. Also, for efficient communication, you have
to make good use of the bandwidth that you do have. There should
be signal components throughout the whole bandwidth. As Jerry was
mentioning, with a single sinewave modulating the carrier there
is pretty much zero information flowing.

> You said:

> > The pulse envelope from the dipole arrives
> > 0.16ns earlier than the light speed propagated pulse. This corresponds
> > exactly with theoretical expectations (0.08/fc=0.16ns).

> What theory creates an expectation that the signal propagates faster
> than light? I don't know of any.

> Since you've filtered your signal to 50 MHz BW there will be no
> significant frequency components with periods shorter than 20ns. You're
> claiming that a time difference of 0.16ns (or 1/125th of the length of
> the smallest period in the signal) is a difference in information
> propagation.

With enough averaging, it can be done. The average should be over
a wide distribution of input signals, though.

> I think it's far more likely to be a phase shift due to
> the dispersion (as shown in the Sten paper), since that is only 360/125
> = 2.88 degrees of phase advance. A signal experiencing 2.88 degrees of
> phase advance through a dispersive medium is far more believable than
> propagation faster than light. This is what I've been saying, what
> Andor's blog demonstrates, and what my reading of the Sten paper indicates.

This was done optically some years ago, but the experimenters
knew exactly what was happening. If you have a narrow bandwidth
system, then it is pretty much resonant at that frequency. As the
beginning of the Gaussian envelope wave comes through, it excites
the resonant system and generates an output with a peak earlier than
you would expect due to the velocity of light. If you change the
shape of the pulse, then the resulting time is different.
I don't know the reference anymore, though.

> As mentioned long ago, I think a good experiment would be to interrupt
> the input signal at some point, perhaps even the modulated signal at a
> carrier zero crossing. The propagation of the interruption (which has
> infinite bandwidth if it's a hard stop) should be revealing.

Well, you can't really do that with a narrow band system.
The modulation has to be within the bandwidth, which limits how
fast you can change the signal.

-- glen
From: Eric Jacobsen on
On 3/27/2010 10:59 AM, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
> Eric Jacobsen<eric.jacobsen(a)ieee.org> wrote:
> (snip)
>
>> Although the following is certainly not a rigorous analysis, in general
>> as the signal bandwidth goes up the time resolution one can achieve in
>> correlation measurements gets smaller. The information update rate for
>> typical comm systems is the symbol period, Ts, and generally Ts = 1/BW
>> where BW is the 3dB signal bandwidth. It is possible to resolve time
>> more finely than Ts and synchronization systems have to do this to
>> recover the symbols, but a reasonable benchmark for how fast information
>> is updating is Ts = 1/BW. I think it is arguable that if one wants to
>> measure how fast information is propagating with very fine time
>> resolution one needs to use a signal with a very wide bandwidth.
>> Otherwise one risks measuring a phase offset due to phenomena like
>> negative group delay rather than accelerated information propagation.
>
> I agree. I was indirectly mentioning this a few days ago, with
> the suggestion of very low bandwidth, and so low information
> transmission rates. Also, for efficient communication, you have
> to make good use of the bandwidth that you do have. There should
> be signal components throughout the whole bandwidth. As Jerry was
> mentioning, with a single sinewave modulating the carrier there
> is pretty much zero information flowing.
>
>> You said:
>
>>> The pulse envelope from the dipole arrives
>>> 0.16ns earlier than the light speed propagated pulse. This corresponds
>>> exactly with theoretical expectations (0.08/fc=0.16ns).
>
>> What theory creates an expectation that the signal propagates faster
>> than light? I don't know of any.
>
>> Since you've filtered your signal to 50 MHz BW there will be no
>> significant frequency components with periods shorter than 20ns. You're
>> claiming that a time difference of 0.16ns (or 1/125th of the length of
>> the smallest period in the signal) is a difference in information
>> propagation.
>
> With enough averaging, it can be done. The average should be over
> a wide distribution of input signals, though.
>
>> I think it's far more likely to be a phase shift due to
>> the dispersion (as shown in the Sten paper), since that is only 360/125
>> = 2.88 degrees of phase advance. A signal experiencing 2.88 degrees of
>> phase advance through a dispersive medium is far more believable than
>> propagation faster than light. This is what I've been saying, what
>> Andor's blog demonstrates, and what my reading of the Sten paper indicates.
>
> This was done optically some years ago, but the experimenters
> knew exactly what was happening. If you have a narrow bandwidth
> system, then it is pretty much resonant at that frequency. As the
> beginning of the Gaussian envelope wave comes through, it excites
> the resonant system and generates an output with a peak earlier than
> you would expect due to the velocity of light. If you change the
> shape of the pulse, then the resulting time is different.
> I don't know the reference anymore, though.
>
>> As mentioned long ago, I think a good experiment would be to interrupt
>> the input signal at some point, perhaps even the modulated signal at a
>> carrier zero crossing. The propagation of the interruption (which has
>> infinite bandwidth if it's a hard stop) should be revealing.
>
> Well, you can't really do that with a narrow band system.
> The modulation has to be within the bandwidth, which limits how
> fast you can change the signal.
>
> -- glen

Yes, but turning the signal off abruptly at the input to the antenna
provide the widest bandwidth stimulus that you're going to get, and
therefore, I think, a good reference signal. An wideband impulse at
the input to the antenna would be better, but some don't seem to like
doing this analysis with a pulse. The Sten paper did, and showed the
dispersion with it. That seems logical to me.

--
Eric Jacobsen
Minister of Algorithms
Abineau Communications
http://www.abineau.com
From: Eric Jacobsen on
On 3/27/2010 10:05 AM, Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote:
>
>
> Eric Jacobsen wrote:
>
>> As mentioned long ago, I think a good experiment would be to interrupt
>> the input signal at some point, perhaps even the modulated signal at a
>> carrier zero crossing. The propagation of the interruption (which has
>> infinite bandwidth if it's a hard stop) should be revealing.
>
> Interesting question. What should be a good narrowband test signal to
> demonstrate the information propagation speed in dispersive media?
> Obviously it should not be an eigenfunction of linear system; i.e.
> sinusoids and exponentials are not suitable.
> I suggest windowed sinc or RRC pulse modulated BPSK.
> But, you may have to put the equalization filter into the picture as well.
>
> Vladimir Vassilevsky
> DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant
> http://www.abvolt.com

Yeah, it's an interesting problem. I now see why Ander referred to his
blog article as "pouring oil in the fire and causing yet more
confusion." I've not thought this out completely, but I'm starting to
think you just can't get there with a narrowband signal if you want good
time resolution and you don't want to get fooled by group delay hijinks.

Clearly an impulse is a preferrable stimulus, and any filtering in the
system will degrade that to a sinc of some sort, so starting with a
windowed sinc isn't a bad idea.

Likewise a BPSK signal, with the highest symbol rate possible, and then
compare the phases of the transmit and recovered symbol clocks, would
work. The time resolution would be no better than the clock jitter
window, but if the symbol rate was high enough that could be made pretty
small. But, as you mention, whether or not the signal was equalized
would affect the result as the clock may lock somewhere other than the
center of the eye.

Tough problem.

--
Eric Jacobsen
Minister of Algorithms
Abineau Communications
http://www.abineau.com