 |
Search Sci.Electronics.Basics |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Sci.Electronics.Basics -> AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
There are 269 messages in this thread.
You are currently looking at messages 80 to 100.
|
Author: Porgy TirebiterDate: 15:50 01-07-07
|
|
"Radium" <glucegen1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1183317395.152563.144060@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 1, 7:24 am, shawn.cormi...@gmail.com wrote:
> Analog cells phones should stop using FM and should start using AM
> between frequencies of 40,000 to 285,000 Hz.
>
> I chose 285 KHz to be the highest radio frequency for cell-phones
> because it is roughly the highest-frequency categorized as "long wave"
> radio.
IDIOT!......complete idiot......
|
|
|
|
Author: John FieldsDate: 16:01 01-07-07
|
|
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 12:16:35 -0700, Radium <glucegen1@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Jul 1, 7:24 am, shawn.cormi...@gmail.com wrote:
>> radium, I applaud you in your interest generating discussion.
>>
>> if there are no questions there are no answers; dumb or smart!
>>
>> to me your questions came across wonderfully, and generated both
>> responses.
>>
>> as humans we stand on two legs, most of us that is.
>>
>> men get the honor and privilage to stand on three legs from time to
>> time.
>>
>> this is our blessing and our curse!
>>
>
>Thanks for your understanding.
>
>> ps. how would u like to change the cell phone industry?
>
>Analog cells phones should stop using FM and should start using AM
>between frequencies of 40,000 to 285,000 Hz.
---
Good idea. The available spectrum between 40kHz and 285kHz is
245kHz wide, so at a little less than 3kHz per channel the maximum
number of channels available would be 82. That means that no more
than 82 people can be on the air at the same time.
Probably all over the world, to boot, what with those frequencies
being able to propagate over long distances.
That's probably a good thing, because with those 1875 meter long 1/4
wave whips at 40kHz and those 263 meter 1/4 wave whips at 285kHz on
the mobiles, any more people on the air than that would certainly
create a hazardous situation.
--
JF
|
|
|
|
Author: Don BoweyDate: 17:04 01-07-07
|
|
On 7/1/07 11:53 AM, in article f68t7o$glp$1@nnrp.linuxfan.it, "John Smith I"
<assemblywizard@gmail.com> wrote:
> Don Bowey wrote:
>
>> [more crap!]
>
> Oh, that explains it, your understanding of amplitude modulation is:
>
> AM = Black Magic.
>
> ROFLOL!
>
> JS
>
OK you stupid shit, I'm almost out of patience with your ignorance. I was
hoping you might learn something, but I see that is unlikely.
AM is a process of frequency multiplication. Now you tell me where you
think such multiplication takes place on a phone line, and I'll follow-uo by
telling why you're full of crap.
SIMECS!
|
|
|
|
Author: Don BoweyDate: 17:09 01-07-07
|
|
On 7/1/07 12:16 PM, in article
1183317395.152563.144060@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com, "Radium"
<glucegen1@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 1, 7:24 am, shawn.cormi...@gmail.com wrote:
>> radium, I applaud you in your interest generating discussion.
>>
>> if there are no questions there are no answers; dumb or smart!
>>
>> to me your questions came across wonderfully, and generated both
>> responses.
>>
>> as humans we stand on two legs, most of us that is.
>>
>> men get the honor and privilage to stand on three legs from time to
>> time.
>>
>> this is our blessing and our curse!
>>
>
> Thanks for your understanding.
>
>> ps. how would u like to change the cell phone industry?
>
> Analog cells phones should stop using FM and should start using AM
> between frequencies of 40,000 to 285,000 Hz.
>
> As I learned recently, 40 KHz is the minimum radio frequency required
> to coherently transmit/receive audio signals. The highest sound a
> human can hear is 20 KHz. The radio-frequency used must be at least 2x
> the intended frequency of the information being transmitted/received.
>
> I chose 285 KHz to be the highest radio frequency for cell-phones
> because it is roughly the highest-frequency categorized as "long wave"
> radio.
>
>> and your
>> discussion group of course!
>
> You mean the anti-yahoo group?
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/yahoo_stinks?lnk=li&hl=en
>
Darn it Radium, you just hit a new low.
See that teeney antenna on cell phones? Just how well do you think it will
radiate 285 kHz?
|
|
|
|
Author: RHFDate: 17:11 01-07-07
|
|
On Jul 1, 12:50 pm, "Porgy Tirebiter" <bit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Radium" <gluceg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1183317395.152563.144060@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Jul 1, 7:24 am, shawn.cormi...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Analog cells phones should stop using FM and should start using AM
> > between frequencies of 40,000 to 285,000 Hz.
>
> > I chose 285 KHz to be the highest radio frequency for cell-phones
> > because it is roughly the highest-frequency categorized as "long
wave"
> > radio.
>
- IDIOT!......complete idiot......
PT - Once again why waste your time replying
to his posts ? ? ? {Oops Like I Am Doing Too !}
Actually "Radium" would appear to be an
In-Complete-Want-To-Be driven by the 'urge'
to Post these Forever Ponding Questions
for others to charge at like Don Quijote's
quest to slay Windmills {a fool's errand}
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Quixote
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fool%27s_errand
FWIW - While many of his Post might fit into
the "sci.electronics.basics" NewsGroup; often
they would be consider OFF-TOPIC in other
NewsGroups like : rec.radio.shortwave,
rec.radio.amateur.antenna, alt.cellular.cingular,
alt.internet.wireless, etc
IMHO - In another life "Radium" would have
made a great High School Science Teacher :
Who's Students when on to do great things
with their lives :
Because "Radium" Touched Them With A Thirst
For Knowledge And A Quest For Answers.
-but- These NewsGroups are NOT a High School
Science Class -and- "Radium" is just being 'radium'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radium
-alas- Our "Radium's" Half-Life of Readable Interest
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-life
is at best about 16.04 Seconds ~ RHF
.
.
. .
|
|
|
|
Author: Jeff LiebermannDate: 17:22 01-07-07
|
|
Radium <glucegen1@gmail.com> hath wroth:
>> ps. how would u like to change the cell phone industry?
>
>Analog cells phones should stop using FM and should start using AM
>between frequencies of 40,000 to 285,000 Hz.
Analog cell phones are going to be history in the US on Feb 18, 2008.
Japan killed off analog around June 1999, Korea in Jan 2000, most of
Europe in 1997, etc.
40KHz thru 285Khz? Great idea. Just one minor problem. A 1/4 wave
antenna at about 100Khz frequency is 750 meters long. That's going to
be a rather large antenna for literally dragging behind you. Maybe a
balloon? Maybe a loop like this one?
<http://www.dxzone.com/cgi-bin/dir/jump2.cgi?ID=10850>;
Of course propagation might be a problem, as it will only work at
night and you'll have to connect to a cell site on the opposite coast
for those frequencies to work. The customers can be ignored when they
complain about atmospheric static and noise.
Of course, 240KHz of usable bandwidth is much less than the hundreds
of MHz currently in use by cellular providers, so there will
substantially fewer users. Let's see.... there are 240 million
subscribers in the US. Your AM system can handle about 40 users (6KHz
channels), so your cell phone bill will only be 6 million times larger
than it is currently. Now do you see why the microwave bands are so
in demand for cellular.
>As I learned recently, 40 KHz is the minimum radio frequency required
>to coherently transmit/receive audio signals.
Coherently? I would be worried if you planned to incoherently
transmit/receive audio signals. Perhaps if you added 40KHz to your
word salad, it would make your blather more coherent. (Hint: Look
up the definition of coherent and then use it where appropriate).
Actually, you're close. 40KHz is the common frequency used by
ultrasonic TV remote controls. I've seen PWM modulation system using
a pair of these to act as a crude cordless phone (that doesn't require
FCC type certification). You could probably go down to 20KHz, but
then intermodulation products (mixes) between the audio and the
carrier will begin to be a problem. Congratulations, you got one
thing mostly correct.
>The highest sound a
>human can hear is 20 KHz.
Voice is from 300 to 3000Hz. You could probably get away with 300 to
2400Hz. If you're planning to transmitting AM hi-fi or data, then you
might need the 20KHz.
>The radio-frequency used must be at least 2x
>the intended frequency of the information being transmitted/received.
Ummm... no. You're apparently thinking of the Shannon rule for
information bandwidth:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist%E2%80%93Shannon_sampling_theorem>;
If your input audio is perhaps bandwidth limited to 3KHz, a 6KHz
carrier will not work. You'll get considerable mixing (aliasing) and
audio intermodulation crud. The carrier would need to be somewhat
higher in frequency as limited by whatever output RF filtering is
used.
>I chose 285 KHz to be the highest radio frequency for cell-phones
>because it is roughly the highest-frequency categorized as "long wave"
>radio.
Nope. See details at:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longwave>;
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
|
|
|
|
Author: Don BoweyDate: 17:28 01-07-07
|
|
On 7/1/07 2:11 PM, in article
1183324276.703651.17260@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com, "RHF"
<rhf-newsgroups@pacbell.net> wrote:
> On Jul 1, 12:50 pm, "Porgy Tirebiter" <bit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> "Radium" <gluceg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1183317395.152563.144060@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> On Jul 1, 7:24 am, shawn.cormi...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Analog cells phones should stop using FM and should start using AM
>>> between frequencies of 40,000 to 285,000 Hz.
>>
>>> I chose 285 KHz to be the highest radio frequency for cell-phones
>>> because it is roughly the highest-frequency categorized as "long
wave"
>>> radio.
>>
> - IDIOT!......complete idiot......
>
> PT - Once again why waste your time replying
> to his posts ? ? ? {Oops Like I Am Doing Too !}
>
> Actually "Radium" would appear to be an
> In-Complete-Want-To-Be driven by the 'urge'
> to Post these Forever Ponding Questions
> for others to charge at like Don Quijote's
> quest to slay Windmills {a fool's errand}
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Quixote
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fool%27s_errand
>
> FWIW - While many of his Post might fit into
> the "sci.electronics.basics" NewsGroup; often
> they would be consider OFF-TOPIC in other
> NewsGroups like : rec.radio.shortwave,
> rec.radio.amateur.antenna, alt.cellular.cingular,
> alt.internet.wireless, etc
>
> IMHO - In another life "Radium" would have
> made a great High School Science Teacher :
> Who's Students when on to do great things
> with their lives :
> Because "Radium" Touched Them With A Thirst
> For Knowledge And A Quest For Answers.
But a teacher MUST be rational. You rate Radium with more potential than I
can. This most recent post is really off the wall.
>
> -but- These NewsGroups are NOT a High School
> Science Class -and- "Radium" is just being 'radium'.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radium
>
> -alas- Our "Radium's" Half-Life of Readable Interest
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-life
> is at best about 16.04 Seconds ~ RHF
> .
> .
> . .
>
|
|
|
|
Author: Ron Baker, Pluralitas!Date: 17:44 01-07-07
|
|
"Ian Jackson" <IanJacksonRemoveThisBit@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote in
message
news:3s9WZMIfx2hGFwvm@g3ohx.demon.co.uk...
> In message <EXChi.23350$C96.1422@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net>, cledus
> <cledus@noemail.net> writes
<snip>
>>
>>The fundamental answer is no, it is not possible to generate AM where the
>>baseband signal is a pure 20 kHz sinewave and Fc<20kHz. The reason is
>>that the modulated waveform consists of the sum of a sinewave at Fc, a
>>sinewave at Fc+20kHz, and a sinewave at Fc-20kHz. If Fc<20kHz then one of
>>the components becomes a "negative" frequency. So the carrier must be
>>greater than the baseband signal to prevent this.
>>
> I'm afraid that this is not correct. The 'laws of physics' don't suddenly
> stop working if the carrier is lower than the modulating frequency.
> However, there's no need to get into complicated mathematics to illustrate
> this. Here is a simple example:
>
> (a) If you modulate a 10MHz carrier with a 1MHz signal, you will produce
> two new signals (the sidebands) at the difference frequency of 10 minus 1
> = 9MHz, and the sum frequency of 10 plus 1 = 11MHz. So you have the
> original carrier at 10MHz, and sideband signals at 9 and 11MHz (with a
> balanced modulator - no carrier - only 9 and 11MHz).
>
> (b) If you modulate a 1MHz carrier with a 10MHz signal, you will produce
> two new signals (the sidebands) at the difference frequency of 1 minus 10
> = minus 9MHz, and the sum frequency of 1 plus 10 = 11MHz. The implication
> of the negative 'minus 9' MHz signal is that the phase of the 9MHz signal
> is inverted, ie 180 degrees out-of-phase from 9MHz
Actually there would be no phase flip.
cos(-a) = cos(a)
> produced in (a). So you have the original carrier at 1MHz, and sidebands
> at 9 and 11MHz (again, with a balanced modulator - no carrier - only 9 and
> 11MHz).
>
> The waveforms of the full composite AM signals of (a) and (b) will look
> quite different. The carriers are at different frequencies, and the phase
> of the 9MHz signal is inverted. However, with a double-balanced modulator,
> you will only have the 9 and 11MHz signal so, surprisingly, the resulting
> signals of (a) and (b) will look the same.
A double-balanced mixer is a multiplier. A * B = B * A
>
> [Note that, in practice, many double-balanced modulators/mixers put loads
> of unwanted signals - mainly due the effects of harmonic mixing. However,
> the basic 'laws of physics' still apply.]
>
> Finally, although I have spoken with great authority, when I get a chance
> I WILL be doing at test with a tobacco-tin double-balanced mixer,
What's a tobacco-tin double-balanced mixer?
> a couple of signal generators and a spectrum analyser - just to make sure
> that I'm not talking rubbish. In the meantime, I'm sure that some will
> correct me if I'm wrong.
You did pretty good.
>
> Ian.
> --
>
--
rb
|
|
|
|
Author: Tommy TootlesDate: 17:54 01-07-07
|
|
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> 40KHz thru 285Khz? Great idea. Just one minor problem. A 1/4 wave
> antenna at about 100Khz frequency is 750 meters long. That's going to
> be a rather large antenna for literally dragging behind you.
Well, your math is correct. However, the so-called "atomic" wrist
watches receive their time signal from WWVB which transmits at 60kHz.
How do they get that 1250 meter long antenna ( 1/4 wave at 60 kHz)
inside that itty bitty wrist watch case? ;-)
|
|
|
|
Author: John Smith IDate: 17:57 01-07-07
|
|
Don Bowey wrote:
> AM is a process of frequency multiplication. Now you tell me where you
> think such multiplication takes place on a phone line, and I'll follow-uo by
> telling why you're full of crap.
>
> SIMECS!
>
It is all right before your eyes, if you can't see it by now, forget it
... perhaps at a later date. I know your frustration, I have seen the
mentally handicapped attempt to deal with the real world and it end only
in frustration ... perhaps a change of meds is in order ...
JS
|
|
|
|
Author: John Smith IDate: 18:00 01-07-07
|
|
Radium wrote:
> ...
You and your buddies are a hopeless mess, a thread plonk is in order here.
PLONK!
JS
|
|
|
|
Author: Don BoweyDate: 18:57 01-07-07
|
|
On 7/1/07 2:57 PM, in article f69805$f9d$1@nnrp.linuxfan.it, "John Smith I"
<assemblywizard@gmail.com> wrote:
> Don Bowey wrote:
>
>> AM is a process of frequency multiplication. Now you tell me where you
>> think such multiplication takes place on a phone line, and I'll follow-uo by
>> telling why you're full of crap.
>>
>> SIMECS!
>>
>
> It is all right before your eyes, if you can't see it by now, forget it
> ... perhaps at a later date. I know your frustration, I have seen the
> mentally handicapped attempt to deal with the real world and it end only
> in frustration ... perhaps a change of meds is in order ...
>
> JS
I see..... You finally admit you don't understand AM at all and can't
justify your statement. It's what I expected.
Now, run off and play in the street with your tinker toys.
|
|
|
|
Author: RHFDate: 19:05 01-07-07
|
|
On Jul 1, 2:28 pm, Don Bowey <dbo...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 7/1/07 2:11 PM, in article
> 1183324276.703651.17...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com, "RHF"
>
>
>
>
>
> <rhf-newsgro...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > On Jul 1, 12:50 pm, "Porgy Tirebiter" <bit...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >> "Radium" <gluceg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:1183317395.152563.144060@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>> On Jul 1, 7:24 am, shawn.cormi...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> Analog cells phones should stop using FM and should start using AM
> >>> between frequencies of 40,000 to 285,000 Hz.
>
> >>> I chose 285 KHz to be the highest radio frequency for cell-phones
> >>> because it is roughly the highest-frequency categorized as "long
wave"
> >>> radio.
>
> > - IDIOT!......complete idiot......
>
> > PT - Once again why waste your time replying
> > to his posts ? ? ? {Oops Like I Am Doing Too !}
>
> > Actually "Radium" would appear to be an
> > In-Complete-Want-To-Be driven by the 'urge'
> > to Post these Forever Ponding Questions
> > for others to charge at like Don Quijote's
> > quest to slay Windmills {a fool's errand}
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Quixote
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fool%27s_errand
>
> > FWIW - While many of his Post might fit into
> > the "sci.electronics.basics" NewsGroup; often
> > they would be consider OFF-TOPIC in other
> > NewsGroups like : rec.radio.shortwave,
> > rec.radio.amateur.antenna, alt.cellular.cingular,
> > alt.internet.wireless, etc
>
> > IMHO - In another life "Radium" would have
> > made a great High School Science Teacher :
> > Who's Students when on to do great things
> > with their lives :
> > Because "Radium" Touched Them With A Thirst
> > For Knowledge And A Quest For Answers.
>
- But a teacher MUST be rational.
- You rate Radium with more potential than I can.
- This most recent post is really off the wall.
"Radium" -and- 'Rational' now there is an Oxymoron !
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxymoron
>
>
>
>
>
> > -but- These NewsGroups are NOT a High School
> > Science Class -and- "Radium" is just being 'radium'.
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radium
>
> > -alas- Our "Radium's" Half-Life of Readable Interest
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-life
> > is at best about 16.04 Seconds ~ RHF
> > .
> > .
> > . .- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
DB remember that I did write :
Actually "Radium" would appear to be an
In-Complete-Want-To-Be driven by the 'urge'
to Post these Forever Ponding Questions
for others to charge at like Don Quijote's
quest to slay Windmills {a fool's errand}
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Quixote
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fool%27s_errand
.
.
. .
|
|
|
|
Author: cledusDate: 22:19 01-07-07
|
|
Ian Jackson wrote:
> In message <EXChi.23350$C96.1422@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net>, cledus
> <cledus@noemail.net> writes
>> Radium wrote:
>>> Hi:
>>> Please don't be annoyed/offended by my question as I decreased the
>>> modulation frequency to where it would actually be realistic.
>>> I have a very weird question about electromagnetic radiation,
>>> carriers, and modulators.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> No offense but please respond with reasonable answers & keep out the
>>> jokes, off-topic nonsense, taunts, insults, and trivializations. I am
>>> really interested in this.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Radium
>>>
>>
>>
>> The fundamental answer is no, it is not possible to generate AM where
>> the baseband signal is a pure 20 kHz sinewave and Fc<20kHz. The
>> reason is that the modulated waveform consists of the sum of a
>> sinewave at Fc, a sinewave at Fc+20kHz, and a sinewave at Fc-20kHz.
>> If Fc<20kHz then one of the components becomes a "negative"
>> frequency. So the carrier must be greater than the baseband signal to
>> prevent this.
>>
> I'm afraid that this is not correct. The 'laws of physics' don't
> suddenly stop working if the carrier is lower than the modulating
> frequency. However, there's no need to get into complicated mathematics
> to illustrate this. Here is a simple example:
>
> (a) If you modulate a 10MHz carrier with a 1MHz signal, you will produce
> two new signals (the sidebands) at the difference frequency of 10 minus
> 1 = 9MHz, and the sum frequency of 10 plus 1 = 11MHz. So you have the
> original carrier at 10MHz, and sideband signals at 9 and 11MHz (with a
> balanced modulator - no carrier - only 9 and 11MHz).
>
> (b) If you modulate a 1MHz carrier with a 10MHz signal, you will produce
> two new signals (the sidebands) at the difference frequency of 1 minus
> 10 = minus 9MHz, and the sum frequency of 1 plus 10 = 11MHz. The
> implication of the negative 'minus 9' MHz signal is that the phase of
> the 9MHz signal is inverted, ie 180 degrees out-of-phase from 9MHz
> produced in (a). So you have the original carrier at 1MHz, and sidebands
> at 9 and 11MHz (again, with a balanced modulator - no carrier - only 9
> and 11MHz).
>
> The waveforms of the full composite AM signals of (a) and (b) will look
> quite different. The carriers are at different frequencies, and the
> phase of the 9MHz signal is inverted. However, with a double-balanced
> modulator, you will only have the 9 and 11MHz signal so, surprisingly,
> the resulting signals of (a) and (b) will look the same.
>
> [Note that, in practice, many double-balanced modulators/mixers put
> loads of unwanted signals - mainly due the effects of harmonic mixing.
> However, the basic 'laws of physics' still apply.]
>
> Finally, although I have spoken with great authority, when I get a
> chance I WILL be doing at test with a tobacco-tin double-balanced mixer,
> a couple of signal generators and a spectrum analyser - just to make
> sure that I'm not talking rubbish. In the meantime, I'm sure that some
> will correct me if I'm wrong.
>
> Ian.
Ian,
I believe your analysis is correct. But if you expect to build a
receiver that uses a filter centered at 1 MHz with a BW of 20+ MHz to
recover a DSB AM signal, I don't believe that the DBM approach will
accomplish this. With your approach, you could filter out the sidebands
by centering a filter around 10 MHz (the baseband freq). This could be
used to recover the baseband 10 MHz signal. But the OP asked about AM
of a carrier at very low frequencies. Good explanation of what happens
when using a DBM, though.
Regards,
-C
|
|
|
|
Author: TelamonDate: 01:06 02-07-07
|
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Bob MyersDate: 01:27 02-07-07
|
|
"John Smith I" <assemblywizard@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f6772q$aot$1@nnrp.linuxfan.it...
> Listen to a "strong--pure am signal" on an fm receiver, turn up the
volume
> on the fm receiver, something is responsible for that ... repeat
> experiment with the reverse ... "imperfect world theory" proof!
What is responsible for that is not that AM somehow also
produces FM, but simply that the type of demodulator used
by the FM receiver in question will also demodulate AM to
a usable degree. Ditto the reverse (look up "slope detection"
for an example of how a very common AM demodulator
can also demodulate FM).
Bob M.
|
|
|
|
Author: RHFDate: 04:12 02-07-07
|
|
On Jul 1, 10:06 pm, Telamon
<telamon_spamshi...@pacbell.net.is.invalid> wrote:
> In article <PgZhi.908$eY....@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net>,
>
> cledus <cle...@noemail.net> wrote:
>
> < Snip >
>
- Would you please have the decency to snip
- rec.radio.shortwave and other groups from
- the newsgroup header. Thanks.
-
- --
- Telamon
- Ventura, California
Telamon,
Off-Topic + Cross-Posting -and- 'Decency'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxymoron
Wow - Now There Is A Real Oxymoron !
~ RHF
.
.
. .
|
|
|
|
Author: Don BoweyDate: 09:16 02-07-07
|
|
|
|
|
|
Author: John SmithDate: 09:45 02-07-07
|
|
Don Bowey wrote:
> ...
> Would you please come and ask nicely. I don't like how you put your order.
>
Get back on your meds and cease and desist from bothering the other
mental patients--else you get the straight jacket next! <grin>
JS
|
|
|
|
Author: Michael A. TerrellDate: 10:30 02-07-07
|
|
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>
> Conventional TV is VSB (visidual side band)
Vestigal Sideband
--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact | Electronic Portal
|
|
|
