|
Post by dwight on Jul 17, 2006 14:44:18 GMT -4
Sorry I have been out of the loop for a while. The constant banging-head-against-wall in dealing with some posters here, made me flip my lid, and therefore I decided I needed a break before I got overly agro.
The problem with beaming to a lunar orbit satellite would be the receiving antenna and subsequent transmitting antenna. What type of spacecraft is Jarrah proposing was placed there? We would have a satellite with 1.5 seconds delay being controlled from earth receiving TX from a LO Apollo spacecraft which can't be detected in the sky. Not only that but a fairly large rocket would have to be launched to get the lunar sat out there. How come no one picked up on the tracking and so forth that would be absolutely necessary for correct control of the sat?
This falls into the "NASA didn't have the technology to land a man on the moon but they had advanced technology good enough to hide LO spacecraft , and to control a concealed sat near the moon.
What about all the bouncing of TV signals and the degredation that would bring? As far as the frequency problems go, the above posts have answered it. (To be honest I didn't have the time to look up the results myself, but that was due to my long absence from this board...sorry about that)
|
|
|
Post by Joe Durnavich on Jul 17, 2006 15:32:04 GMT -4
The description of the unified S-band communication system here indicates that the video signal had a bandwidth of 10 Hz-500 kHz and frequency modulated the S-band carrier directly.
An FM signal has sidebands, so the RF spectrum space occupied will be at least twice the video bandwidth. If the carrier, say, was at 2300.0 MHz, then you would find a TV signal in the 2300.0 to 2300.5 MHz band and a mirror image of it in the 2299.5 to 2300.0 MHz band. There could be extra sidebands beyond this depending on how well the transmitter filtered them out. Also, there can be multiplier effect on FM that can increase the bandwidth by some multiple, but it seems that this value was 1 for Apollo USB FM.
I guess that finding ways to fit a usable though not hi-fidelity video signal into the bandwidth the designers of the USB system could allocate to it is an example of the "problem-solving within constraints" principle Jay has often spoken of.
Yeah, and I like how whenever you design limits into a system, you too often to find yourself having to work outside them a few years later.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Jul 17, 2006 15:53:41 GMT -4
Yeah. Who's ever gonna need more than 640 KB of RAM on their computers?
|
|
|
Post by hplasm on Jul 17, 2006 20:10:54 GMT -4
Yeah. Who's ever gonna need more than 640 KB of RAM on their computers? unless you mean the AGC... 640k! luxury...
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jul 17, 2006 23:35:43 GMT -4
Who's ever gonna need more than 640 KB of RAM on their computers?
Does that means that WinXP is a hoax?
|
|
|
Post by Tanalia on Jul 17, 2006 23:48:09 GMT -4
Does that means that WinXP is a hoax? Yes, but so many people believe in it that we'll never get rid of it. Most likely it will just change it's name and outward appearance and continue to cause trouble. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Joe Durnavich on Jul 18, 2006 9:54:56 GMT -4
My favorite comment about Vista, from CPU magazine: "I can't wait to see Microsoft security dialogs in 3D."
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Jul 18, 2006 12:46:58 GMT -4
Is there any truth to the rumour that the reason that HAL9000 went birko was because he was running on Win XP?
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Jul 18, 2006 13:56:59 GMT -4
No, Hal wouldn't have stayed running long enough under Windows XP to go psycho.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jul 18, 2006 18:59:25 GMT -4
Is there any truth to the rumour that the reason that HAL9000 went birko was because he was running on Win XP?Nope, Win XP was released in 2002, so HAL had to being Running either WinMil or Win2k.
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Jul 18, 2006 22:06:13 GMT -4
It was the beta 2 version of XP. That’s why HAL was so insecure.
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Jul 19, 2006 9:30:59 GMT -4
No, no, no. HAL clearly was not running any version of Windows. Otherwise, instead of merely attempting to kill the entire crew, he would have bombarded them with error messages and pop-up ads for ***FREEE*** p0rN sites, CHEAP STOCK TIPZ, and VI@GR@ - then crashed.
|
|
|
Post by Apollo Gnomon on Jul 19, 2006 19:43:39 GMT -4
Uh, this actually suggests a whole other explanation for what HAL was doing with the pod bay door closed.
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Jul 20, 2006 11:22:25 GMT -4
You had to go there...
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jul 20, 2006 17:12:29 GMT -4
he would have bombarded them with error messages and pop-up ads for ***FREEE*** p0rN sites, CHEAP STOCK TIPZ, and VI@GR@ - then crashed.
One really has to wonder about the sites you visit. I use IE and have for the past 5 years since I got onto the net. I've never had that happen unless I caused it by clicking on a link that turned out to be a detour trap, and these days I tend to be able to spot them.
|
|