WBahn, I understand that if I plug my parameters into the modulation equations, The results will be sidebands.

Consider this. In our present mod. schemes, the mod. effects the carrier envelope, not the carrier sine. The carrier sine remains constant, weather sidebands are present or not.

We have never tried to mod. a individual sine cycle, as far as I know.

We mod. a parameter of a stream of sines, not an individual sine cycle.

I believe we can mod. a single sine cycle, symmetrically, and not create a sideband.

The mod. change is too quick to effect an envelope parameter, such as amplitude, frequency or phase.

The only character of the envelope that changes, is the roundness of the envelope.

Wobble Modulation.

How do we generate a wobble within one sine cycle?

 

We have never tried to mod. a individual sine, as far as I know.

You are wrong.

 

WBahn, I understand that if I plug my parameters into the modulation equations, The results will be sidebands.

Consider this. In our present mod. schemes, the mod. effects the carrier envelope, not the carrier sine. The carrier sine remains constant, weather sidebands are present or not.

We have never tried to mod. a individual sine cycle, as far as I know.

We mod. a parameter of a stream of sines, not an individual sine cycle.

I believe we can mod. a single sine cycle, symmetrically, and not create a sideband.

The mod. change is too quick to effect an envelope parameter, such as amplitude, frequency or phase.

The only character of the envelope that changes, is the roundness of the envelope.

Wobble Modulation.

How do we generate a wobble within one sine cycle?

It does not matter what you believe. You can believe in Tooth Fairy Modulation for all the universe cares.

DO THE MATH!!!

Even if I accept your wishes as fact that the only thing that changes is the "roundness of the envelope" -- whatever the hell that means since you seem incapable to describing it mathematically -- you have something other than a pure sinewave, which means that it has sidebands. The ONLY thing that can not have sidebands is a pure sinewave.

If you want to claim that something other than a pure sinewave can have no sidebands, then the burden is on YOU to prove it -- and saying that you "believe" something is NOT a proof!

 

This means that the modulating(base-band) frequency must be at least equal to or multiples of, the carrier frequency.

I came late to the thread. I got stuck at the above.

 

I came late to the thread. I got stuck at the above.

Don't worry, you haven't missed much.

 

Well, I still can't find an example of this type of modulation. As a matter of fact, all the definitions of modulation says a carrier is varied with a lower baseband frequency. And of course I want to invert that. So maybe it can't be called modulation.

I did run across this. http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2016/mar/29/new-radio-antenna-avoids-unwanted-signals

This fella is attempting a similar thing for a different reason.

"The laws of electromagnetism work exactly the same way if you run time in the opposite direction. One logical consequence of this is that an antenna designed to broadcast at a certain radio frequency will also be very good at absorbing radiation at that frequency. This is problematic for broadcast radio antennas, which will absorb radiation that has bounced back from surrounding objects – something that can have a negative impact on their operation. While there are ways of minimizing the effect of these echoes, they can be expensive and reduce the performance of the antenna."

I had no idea that broadcast stations suffered from this. Maybe he means transmitting antenna. Is this a problem now due to digital transmission? I had not heard of this before. Maybe it's a problem with cell towers.

Anyhow, this fella is trying to shake his antenna too. The shaking rate is slower than the carrier, and is static and not emitted. Only the purpose of his shaking, is to change phase of antenna during transmission, so as not to absorb reflected(echoed) waves. Still using conventional modulation, and that produces bandwidth. Also the antenna is not resonant.

I want to "shake" the antenna at carrier multiples. I do not want the shaking rate to be emitted either, just the carrier. No bandwidth.

Don't think of pie as a number, think of pie as a symmetric shaped area. I believe this area can be varied symmetrically and maintain resonance.

These people say they have proved the shaking concept, and are attempting varactors and electromechanical resonators to implement this at the antenna.

Of course my shakes are 2 times the carrier. 2 completed shakes per carrier cycle.

This shaking would be like varying the area of pie. Now there is another way to do this. If instead of varying the shape of pie, ...during the sweep of pie, we vary the angle of the electric to the magnetic, which is normally 90 degrees.

This could be done by tilting the antenna. 2 tilts per cycle.

The antenna would look like spokes on a wagon wheel, and the signal to the spokes would alternate several times during the cycle. Hey, that might work.

The super fast modulating signal would not rotate the spokes, it would see-saw them.

What do you think of my solution?

 

Why do you keep referring to deserts? Does your theory depend on the flavor of the pie? Do cream pies shake better than fruit pies?

 

Just a comment, what the TS is referring to is polarization. An antenna needs to be polarized the same way for both transmitter and receiver for optimum performance. There are circular polarization schemes, but I don't know what they are used for.

 

Just a comment, what the TS is rIeferring to is polarization. An antenna needs to be polarized the same way for both transmitter and receiver for optimum performance. There are circular polarization schemes, but I don't know what they are used for.

Hi Wendy: If you get a chance, I hope you can get a copy of my ARRL book, "Propagation and Radio Science." In a magnetized plasma (such as our Ionosphere), H.F. signals become circularly polarized, creating two "characteristic waves", one being clockwise circular polarized, and the other being counterclockwise circular polarized. These two characteristic waves can be very clearly seen on any ionogram. Very few people, commercial or amateur, take advantage of circular polarization on H.F., however, which is a shame because you get an automatic 3dB advantage just by using a CPOL antenna for ionospheric signals.
Eric

 

I unfortunately had lots of experience with Ionospheric polarization back when I did TCF HF radio.
As is usually the case the military has investigated circular polarization on H.F. but found it not to be very useful in a typical station configuration.
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/872518.pdf

Our normal operational procedure was to have several pilot frequencies (with a standard test RTTY test signal) for the main HF communications channel (RTTY) when running Ionosphere skip links subject to extreme polarization rotation over time. (like from the Fla Keys to South America) We would watch the distortion levels on the high and low guard HF channels to see when and where to move the main channels in addition to the normal propagation charts. By staying ahead of propagation changes we could normally keep a 24/7 link going for weeks in shifts using high and low frequency diversity.

Outguessing atmospheric radio conditions was how we earned the paycheck.

 

Modulation is the justification of Maxwell's electromagnetic waves but the formation of a wave requires a medium, composed of matter, which proves the modulation theory is physically invalid or need some serious fixing unless one accepts being laugh at. Old news right! So the question is if there is no wave what is causing the radio induction effect which can be described in current formulation that are partially correct but since there is so much dogma of physics and science both rhetorically and mathematically that is simply not true it is difficult to determine what is true and what is not but the truth to the modulation problem can be obtain by using the forecast of the essence of the fundamental theory that has manifested in the past and probability in the future by the most smartest of these that are part of you'all but to see the pearls of wisdom that is separated by sand or maybe sand will become a pearl but certainly not pollen; therefore, we know even better that sand can form a pearl but the point is that the real enigma of modulation can be found by understanding the favor of the problem. To much of the essential fact and the technical nature of the phenomenon becomes obscured by the rhetorical punctuation that is so used to hide the true or it may be that this may if fact be then essence of science since as we have seen that this present time is extremely short since the theory that the earth was the center of the universe existed for more than 2,000 years wow. Such stamina for men. I would be existed if I were of the female gender. Just think never being bored. So what is the real cause of modulation if there is not ether, composed of matter, and we would have to identify this new ether has the electromagnetic induction effect since the old optical ether, composed of matter, would not correspond to the said induction modulation ether. Do you hear that that is the modulation of a two speed modulation device that I just activated an hoping that the people viewing this can reach. But some of the most difficult phenomenon of physics, I never really understood when I was a youngster, green a green catipllier, fresh as a daisy, new as a mattese puppy that being magnetic Hysteresis. Never could understand that funny curve since we have people like you know how trying to defend stuff that just simply untrue. So there explaination of simple fact becomes mystical, complex and extremely difficult to understand. Now, we can make the relationship between the explaination of modulation and magnetic hysteresis which are completely different effect but suffer the same faith under the juristication of physicists. I know that I got you hanging on your collective butts and will satisfy that edge that I have developed so that you can sleep tonight, and have a good nighty night.

 

Instead of babbling, design an experiment that proves your belief in a reproducible way, run the experiment, write the up the results, and publish it.

 

In addition, Maxwell's (modulation) equations, describe a disturbance within a three dimensional volume, that represent the formation of a spherical wave that produces a longitudinal wave which conflicts with Maxwell's transverse waves; consequently, the electromagnetic transverse wave equations of light cannot be derived using Maxwell's equations (equ 85 - 111).