On 7/28/2015 6:10 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:> On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 18:03:42 -0400, Phil Hobbs > <hobbs@electrooptical.net> Gave us: > >> On 7/28/2015 5:41 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>> On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 16:29:10 -0500, ChesterW <iamsnoozin@yahoo.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> These guys claim a new modulation method that exceeds the data >>>> transmission rate set by the Shannon limit. Any opinions? Opinions on >>>> this topic that is, I KNOW you all have considerable opinions on other >>>> issues ;) >>>> >>>> http://www.astrapi-corp.com >>>> >>>> ChesterW >>> >>> Probably just another "perpetual motion" fraudulent scheme like this >>> one... >>> >>> <http://tmtechinc.com/> >>> >>> ...Jim Thompson >>> >> >> Oh, dear, the orbital angular momentum folks have come to microwave. A >> few years back the original OAM people were claiming that there was this >> vast number of completely untapped propagation modes in fibres that >> would allow some ridiculous gross bandwidth increase. >> >> Then some saner folks published this beautiful >> letter-to-the-journal-editor that I can't lay my hands on...it showed >> that if the OAM people were correct, the blackbody radiation from a hot >> object would go up by a similar ridiculously large factor, which is not >> observed. The OAM states aren't new-and-different, they're just another >> basis set for the EM field. Nothing to see here folks, show's over, >> move along. >> >> Cheers >> >> Phil Hobbs > > Even sqpsk is closing in on the limits. > > But just when folks thought that optical chip mask burning was near > its limit somewhere up around 30nm, somebody stepped in with a new idea > and they all do it through a layer of water now and are down near a few > nm.. >Immersion litho, multiple exposures, computational mask design, and extreme UV. Semiconductor manufacturing is ridiculous, but fun. Cheers Phil Hobbs -- Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal Consultant ElectroOptical Innovations LLC Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics 160 North State Road #203 Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 hobbs at electrooptical dot net http://electrooptical.net
Breaking the Shannon Channel Capacity Limit
Started by ●July 28, 2015
Reply by ●July 28, 20152015-07-28
Reply by ●July 28, 20152015-07-28
On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 18:00:24 -0400, rickman wrote:> On 7/28/2015 5:41 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >> On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 16:29:10 -0500, ChesterW <iamsnoozin@yahoo.com> >> wrote: >> >>> These guys claim a new modulation method that exceeds the data >>> transmission rate set by the Shannon limit. Any opinions? Opinions on >>> this topic that is, I KNOW you all have considerable opinions on other >>> issues ;) >>> >>> http://www.astrapi-corp.com >>> >>> ChesterW >> >> Probably just another "perpetual motion" fraudulent scheme like this >> one... >> >> <http://tmtechinc.com/> > > I don't see a description of how TM works, so how can you say it doesn't > surpass the Shannon limit? I will acknowledge it is unlikely to be > real, but until you know what it is, how can you say it is a fraud?The proof of the Shannon limit is pretty straightforward, and very clear cut: http://web.stanford.edu/class/ee104/shannonpaper.pdf The paper tries to disprove it for non-periodic signals, but they base their claims on the notion that the Fourier transform doesn't work for non-periodic signals -- which it does, admirably. At that point my BS detectors started ringing loudly, and I stopped reading. I suspect that if you go deep enough into their paper they'll be making all these claims about their exponential or polynomial functions or whatever, and you'll find that at they're taking some infinitely-long signal in time and lopping it off to finite length -- which will increase the bandwidth, which will blow their argument all to hell, etc., etc. -- Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services http://www.wescottdesign.com
Reply by ●July 28, 20152015-07-28
On Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 5:29:17 PM UTC-4, ChesterW wrote:> These guys claim a new modulation method that exceeds the data > transmission rate set by the Shannon limit. Any opinions? Opinions on > this topic that is, I KNOW you all have considerable opinions on other > issues ;) > > http://www.astrapi-corp.com > > ChesterWAt home w/ limited download. Quantum mechanically you can "squeeze" states, which if perfect would be 3dB (I think) and in practice much less. George H.
Reply by ●July 28, 20152015-07-28
On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 15:43:33 -0700, John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:>On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 16:29:10 -0500, ChesterW <iamsnoozin@yahoo.com> >wrote: > >>These guys claim a new modulation method that exceeds the data >>transmission rate set by the Shannon limit. Any opinions? Opinions on >>this topic that is, I KNOW you all have considerable opinions on other >>issues ;) >> >>http://www.astrapi-corp.com >> >>ChesterW > >From their white paper: > >Definition: A �periodic channel� is a communication channel that >supports only periodic waveforms. > >What can that mean?And what is the information rate of a periodic waveform? Sounds like zero to me. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc picosecond timing precision measurement jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Reply by ●July 28, 20152015-07-28
On 7/28/2015 7:52 PM, John Larkin wrote:> On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 15:43:33 -0700, John Larkin > <jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 16:29:10 -0500, ChesterW <iamsnoozin@yahoo.com> >> wrote: >> >>> These guys claim a new modulation method that exceeds the data >>> transmission rate set by the Shannon limit. Any opinions? Opinions on >>> this topic that is, I KNOW you all have considerable opinions on other >>> issues ;) >>> >>> http://www.astrapi-corp.com >>> >>> ChesterW >> >>From their white paper: >> >> Definition: A �periodic channel� is a communication channel that >> supports only periodic waveforms. >> >> What can that mean? > > And what is the information rate of a periodic waveform? Sounds like > zero to me. >We have exceeded the Shannon limit by transmitting our data with a 100% loss rate! Brilliant! Patent that shit!
Reply by ●July 28, 20152015-07-28
On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 20:30:13 -0400, bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> Gave us:>On 7/28/2015 7:52 PM, John Larkin wrote: >> On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 15:43:33 -0700, John Larkin >> <jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 16:29:10 -0500, ChesterW <iamsnoozin@yahoo.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> These guys claim a new modulation method that exceeds the data >>>> transmission rate set by the Shannon limit. Any opinions? Opinions on >>>> this topic that is, I KNOW you all have considerable opinions on other >>>> issues ;) >>>>snip>>> >>>From their white paper: >>> >>> Definition: A �periodic channel� is a communication channel that >>> supports only periodic waveforms. >>> >>> What can that mean? >> >> And what is the information rate of a periodic waveform? Sounds like >> zero to me. >> > >We have exceeded the Shannon limit by transmitting our data with a 100% >loss rate! Brilliant! Patent that shit!Hey at least nothing was lost in translation. Eight different "witnesses" still have trouble describing a zero criminal in the same way though. Even with a ninth "parity witness". Maybe they achieve it by having a parade of RNGs lined up to provide the "decrypted" code stream... of zeros.
Reply by ●July 28, 20152015-07-28
On 7/28/2015 6:34 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:> On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 18:00:24 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 7/28/2015 5:41 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>> On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 16:29:10 -0500, ChesterW <iamsnoozin@yahoo.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> These guys claim a new modulation method that exceeds the data >>>> transmission rate set by the Shannon limit. Any opinions? Opinions on >>>> this topic that is, I KNOW you all have considerable opinions on other >>>> issues ;) >>>> >>>> http://www.astrapi-corp.com >>>> >>>> ChesterW >>> >>> Probably just another "perpetual motion" fraudulent scheme like this >>> one... >>> >>> <http://tmtechinc.com/> >> >> I don't see a description of how TM works, so how can you say it doesn't >> surpass the Shannon limit? I will acknowledge it is unlikely to be >> real, but until you know what it is, how can you say it is a fraud? > > I was involved, as a contractor... until I asked too many questionslol Not a job you want to put on your resume. -- Rick
Reply by ●July 28, 20152015-07-28
On 7/28/2015 6:36 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:> On 7/28/2015 6:00 PM, rickman wrote: >> On 7/28/2015 5:41 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>> On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 16:29:10 -0500, ChesterW <iamsnoozin@yahoo.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> These guys claim a new modulation method that exceeds the data >>>> transmission rate set by the Shannon limit. Any opinions? Opinions on >>>> this topic that is, I KNOW you all have considerable opinions on other >>>> issues ;) >>>> >>>> http://www.astrapi-corp.com >>>> >>>> ChesterW >>> >>> Probably just another "perpetual motion" fraudulent scheme like this >>> one... >>> >>> <http://tmtechinc.com/> >> >> I don't see a description of how TM works, so how can you say it doesn't >> surpass the Shannon limit? I will acknowledge it is unlikely to be >> real, but until you know what it is, how can you say it is a fraud? >> > > You might look up the derivation of the Shannon limit, for a start. Not > too many assumptions involved.That's not the question I am asking. -- Rick
Reply by ●July 28, 20152015-07-28
On 7/28/2015 7:33 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:> On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 18:00:24 -0400, rickman wrote: > >> On 7/28/2015 5:41 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>> On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 16:29:10 -0500, ChesterW <iamsnoozin@yahoo.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> These guys claim a new modulation method that exceeds the data >>>> transmission rate set by the Shannon limit. Any opinions? Opinions on >>>> this topic that is, I KNOW you all have considerable opinions on other >>>> issues ;) >>>> >>>> http://www.astrapi-corp.com >>>> >>>> ChesterW >>> >>> Probably just another "perpetual motion" fraudulent scheme like this >>> one... >>> >>> <http://tmtechinc.com/> >> >> I don't see a description of how TM works, so how can you say it doesn't >> surpass the Shannon limit? I will acknowledge it is unlikely to be >> real, but until you know what it is, how can you say it is a fraud? > > The proof of the Shannon limit is pretty straightforward, and very clear > cut: > > http://web.stanford.edu/class/ee104/shannonpaper.pdf > > The paper tries to disprove it for non-periodic signals, but they base > their claims on the notion that the Fourier transform doesn't work for > non-periodic signals -- which it does, admirably. > > At that point my BS detectors started ringing loudly, and I stopped > reading. I suspect that if you go deep enough into their paper they'll > be making all these claims about their exponential or polynomial > functions or whatever, and you'll find that at they're taking some > infinitely-long signal in time and lopping it off to finite length -- > which will increase the bandwidth, which will blow their argument all to > hell, etc., etc.But until you see what they are doing, you can't really say... I remember a paper many years ago that was looking at data which might show discrepancies from the laws of gravity. Yes, we have done lots and lots of work with those laws and they seem solid enough. But this was taken seriously at the time. At some point they will have to protect their work with a patent. Then we will all get to see just what they are doing. -- Rick
Reply by ●July 28, 20152015-07-28
On 07/28/2015 02:29 PM, ChesterW wrote:> These guys claim a new modulation method that exceeds the data > transmission rate set by the Shannon limit. Any opinions? Opinions on > this topic that is, I KNOW you all have considerable opinions on other > issues ;) > > http://www.astrapi-corp.com > > ChesterWPerhaps they left out a hyphen in the name? astra-pi-corp? The ultimate pie-in-the sky?
