Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #634501 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ckeho Baùkora <unukn@owyqar.og> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-05-27 10:37 +0000 |
| Last post | 2017-06-09 13:35 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 115 — 26 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: GPS Again. Ckeho Baùkora <unukn@owyqar.og> - 2017-05-27 10:37 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-30 09:57 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Helmut Wabnig <hwabnig@.- --- -.dotat> - 2017-05-30 20:52 +0200
Re: GPS Again. Ernest Rivers <erwm@weicnne.ac> - 2017-05-30 19:17 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-30 15:23 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Helmut Wabnig <hwabnig@.- --- -.dotat> - 2017-05-30 22:53 +0200
Re: GPS Again. Ernest Schwanenflügel <erwm@wanenf.oa> - 2017-05-30 20:59 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-05-31 00:42 +0200
Re: GPS Again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-30 19:03 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-05-30 21:30 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-05-30 19:01 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Ernest Rivers <erwm@weicnne.ac> - 2017-05-30 19:15 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-09 11:37 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Jim Limey <eeug@dnne.ri> - 2017-06-09 14:32 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-09 12:51 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Kitubu Nkyaku <akntuu@buwkau.kk> - 2017-06-09 18:52 +0000
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-10 09:23 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-10 11:23 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-10 11:21 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Kitubu Nkyaku <akntuu@buwkau.kk> - 2017-06-10 10:42 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-10 19:38 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Nými Icelulózy <ejienm@wzsfwe.ul> - 2017-06-16 11:30 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Sегgi о <iinvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-16 10:40 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-11 11:11 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-10 21:20 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-11 12:31 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-06-10 22:40 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-10 23:20 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-11 05:14 +1000
Re: GPS Again. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-06-10 22:16 +0200
Re: GPS Again. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-11 07:19 +1000
Re: GPS Again. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-06-11 22:35 +0200
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-11 15:44 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-11 18:03 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-11 19:00 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-12 11:39 +1000
Re: GPS Again. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-12 02:33 +0000
Re: GPS Again. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-06-12 10:15 -0700
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-12 13:40 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-06-12 14:19 -0700
Re: GPS Again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-06-11 22:42 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-11 23:27 -0500
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-12 04:47 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-12 08:20 -0500
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-12 17:18 +0000
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-12 18:15 -0400
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-12 22:32 +0000
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-12 20:48 -0400
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-13 01:52 +0000
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-13 19:57 -0400
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-14 00:46 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-06-12 09:58 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> - 2017-06-12 15:08 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-12 10:37 -0500
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-12 17:21 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> - 2017-06-12 17:40 +0000
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-12 18:05 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> - 2017-06-12 18:19 +0000
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-12 19:16 +0000
Re: GPS Again. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-12 19:43 +0000
Re: GPS Again. pcardinale@volcanomail.com - 2017-06-12 12:22 -0700
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-12 20:01 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-12 18:32 -0500
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-13 01:54 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-12 22:28 -0500
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-13 19:59 -0400
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-14 00:48 +0000
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-13 21:35 -0400
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-14 02:11 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-06-13 19:50 -0700
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-13 23:53 -0400
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-14 05:27 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Sегg iо <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-14 09:10 -0500
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-14 17:10 -0400
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-14 21:33 +0000
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-14 18:19 -0400
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-14 22:33 +0000
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-15 17:01 -0400
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-15 23:09 +0000
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-13 23:49 -0400
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-14 05:29 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Sегg iо <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-13 20:29 -0500
Re: GPS Again. pcardinale@volcanomail.com - 2017-06-13 12:33 -0700
Re: GPS Again. Серг ио <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-13 16:39 -0500
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-12 18:25 -0400
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-12 18:45 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-12 10:35 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-12 11:05 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-11 23:29 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-12 20:12 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-06-12 13:54 +0200
Re: GPS Again. Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> - 2017-06-12 12:47 +0000
Re: GPS Again. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-13 04:13 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-13 12:59 +1000
Re: GPS Again. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-13 04:22 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-13 13:00 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-06-13 13:32 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-14 10:09 +1000
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-14 09:34 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Серг ио <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-13 18:42 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-14 12:40 +1000
Re: GPS Again. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-14 04:06 +0000
Re: GPS Again. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-06-13 23:01 -0700
Re: GPS Again. Sегg iо <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-13 23:19 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Sегg iо <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-13 23:46 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-14 20:07 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Sегg iо <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-14 09:17 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-17 08:26 +1000
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-16 20:40 -0400
Re: GPS Again. Ecembre Abin <umueuu@eibbwaw.ee> - 2017-06-17 08:05 +0000
Re: GPS Again. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-17 22:20 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Sегgi о <iinvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-17 07:58 -0500
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-14 17:06 -0400
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-05-31 09:58 +1000
Re: GPS Again. pcardinale@volcanomail.com - 2017-06-09 13:35 -0700
Page 3 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 Next page →
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-11 22:42 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <w-Cdnc-4S5QokKPEnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #636098 |
On 6/11/17 6/11/17 6:03 PM, Serg io wrote: > GPS signals are "spread spectrum", they are all on the same frequency... TYPO: GPS signals are NOT spread spectrum, they are all on the same frequency. Well, same two frequencies (originally, with three more added later). Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-11 23:27 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ohl57t$eto$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #636118 |
On 6/11/2017 10:42 PM, Tom Roberts wrote: > On 6/11/17 6/11/17 6:03 PM, Serg io wrote: >> GPS signals are "spread spectrum", they are all on the same frequency... > > TYPO: GPS signals are NOT spread spectrum, they are all on the same > frequency. Well, same two frequencies (originally, with three more added > later). > > Tom Roberts yes they are, it is what GPS is based upon Spread Spectrum, this is fundimental gps stuff here, google it and educate yourself for a few hours. https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog862/node/1753
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-12 04:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <a0j11e-478.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #636120 |
In sci.physics Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: > On 6/11/2017 10:42 PM, Tom Roberts wrote: >> On 6/11/17 6/11/17 6:03 PM, Serg io wrote: >>> GPS signals are "spread spectrum", they are all on the same frequency... >> >> TYPO: GPS signals are NOT spread spectrum, they are all on the same >> frequency. Well, same two frequencies (originally, with three more added >> later). >> >> Tom Roberts > > > yes they are, it is what GPS is based upon Spread Spectrum, You haven't a clue what spread spectrum is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_spectrum Though posting this is likely a waste of time as you are probably also clueless about bandwidth and the frequency domain and too stupid to read the definitions in the link. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-12 08:20 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ohm4en$3m6$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #636122 |
On 6/11/2017 11:47 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > In sci.physics Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >> On 6/11/2017 10:42 PM, Tom Roberts wrote: >>> On 6/11/17 6/11/17 6:03 PM, Serg io wrote: >>>> GPS signals are "spread spectrum", they are all on the same frequency... >>> >>> TYPO: GPS signals are NOT spread spectrum, they are all on the same >>> frequency. Well, same two frequencies (originally, with three more added >>> later). >>> >>> Tom Roberts >> >> >> yes they are, it is what GPS is based upon Spread Spectrum, > > You haven't a clue what spread spectrum is. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_spectrum > > Though posting this is likely a waste of time as you are probably also > clueless about bandwidth and the frequency domain and too stupid to > read the definitions in the link. > > have some OJ, Jimp + read up; Chip rate for C/A is 1.023 10^6, chip rate for P code is 10.23 10^6 (chip rate is SS) The GPS signal is said to have a spread spectrum because of its intentionally increased bandwidth. In other words the overall bandwidth of the GPS signal is much wider than the bandwidth of the information it is carrying. In other words while L1 is centered on 1575.42 MHz, L2 on 1227.60 MHz and L5 on 1176.45 MHz but the width of these signals takes up a good deal of space on each side of these frequencies than might be expected. For example, the C/A code signal is spread over a width of 2.046 MHz or so, the P(Y) code signal is spread over a width about 20.46 MHz on L1 and the coming L1C signal will be spread over 4.092 MHz as shown in the image above. from the link; https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog862/node/1753 Because GPS is SS, you get more RF system gain, you can pick it up under an automobile, or a cellphone with very poor antenna. Look at Iridium, global sattilite com system, it is not SS, and coverage does not reach as far.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-12 17:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <b0v21e-ltc.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #636136 |
In sci.physics Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: > On 6/11/2017 11:47 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> In sci.physics Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >>> On 6/11/2017 10:42 PM, Tom Roberts wrote: >>>> On 6/11/17 6/11/17 6:03 PM, Serg io wrote: >>>>> GPS signals are "spread spectrum", they are all on the same frequency... >>>> >>>> TYPO: GPS signals are NOT spread spectrum, they are all on the same >>>> frequency. Well, same two frequencies (originally, with three more added >>>> later). >>>> >>>> Tom Roberts >>> >>> >>> yes they are, it is what GPS is based upon Spread Spectrum, >> >> You haven't a clue what spread spectrum is. >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_spectrum >> >> Though posting this is likely a waste of time as you are probably also >> clueless about bandwidth and the frequency domain and too stupid to >> read the definitions in the link. >> >> > > have some OJ, Jimp + read up; > > Chip rate for C/A is 1.023 10^6, chip rate for P code is 10.23 10^6 > (chip rate is SS) Like I said, you haven't a clue what spread spectrum is. <snip remaining illiterate babble> -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-12 18:15 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <593f127e$0$22721$c3e8da3$33881b6a@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #636122 |
On 6/12/2017 12:47 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com drooled: > In sci.physics Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >> On 6/11/2017 10:42 PM, Tom Roberts wrote: >>> On 6/11/17 6/11/17 6:03 PM, Serg io wrote: >>>> GPS signals are "spread spectrum", they are all on the same frequency... >>> >>> TYPO: GPS signals are NOT spread spectrum, they are all on the same >>> frequency. Well, same two frequencies (originally, with three more added >>> later). >>> >>> Tom Roberts >> >> >> yes they are, it is what GPS is based upon Spread Spectrum, > > You haven't a clue what spread spectrum is. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_spectrum > > Though posting this is likely a waste of time as you are probably also > clueless about bandwidth and the frequency domain and too stupid to > read the definitions in the link. > As usual Chimp is the one with the total lack of understanding and experience. He has only his technician level ideas of what these advanced concepts mean. He's still ignorant. However, there are a couple of fine points here. While Sergio's article terms the GPS modulation "spread spectrum" in my experience this is not precisely named correctly. PSBK modulation in a general communication theory sense is actually considered rather narrow band modulation and in the GPS application shows a wider spectrum due to the higher encoding rate of the higher clock frequencies. But in a general comparison to other spread spectrum schemes such as frequency hopping or sequency modulation it is still quite narrow. The advantage of Binary Biphase Modulation is that it can attain low error transmissions at relatively low S/N (Even in cases as previous demonstrated by me) when there is actually more noise than signal. Don't ask, it's highly technical. Chimp as usual is still wrong.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-12 22:32 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <tch31e-mpe.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #636185 |
In sci.physics benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: > On 6/12/2017 12:47 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com drooled: >> In sci.physics Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >>> On 6/11/2017 10:42 PM, Tom Roberts wrote: >>>> On 6/11/17 6/11/17 6:03 PM, Serg io wrote: >>>>> GPS signals are "spread spectrum", they are all on the same frequency... >>>> >>>> TYPO: GPS signals are NOT spread spectrum, they are all on the same >>>> frequency. Well, same two frequencies (originally, with three more added >>>> later). >>>> >>>> Tom Roberts >>> >>> >>> yes they are, it is what GPS is based upon Spread Spectrum, >> >> You haven't a clue what spread spectrum is. >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_spectrum >> >> Though posting this is likely a waste of time as you are probably also >> clueless about bandwidth and the frequency domain and too stupid to >> read the definitions in the link. >> > As usual Chimp is the one with the total lack of understanding and The troll chimes in with his usual ad hominems and blithering nonsense. <snip troll babble> -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-12 20:48 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <593f365a$0$59576$c3e8da3$460562f1@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #636195 |
On 6/12/2017 6:32 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com drooled: > In sci.physics benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >> On 6/12/2017 12:47 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com drooled: >>> In sci.physics Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >>>> On 6/11/2017 10:42 PM, Tom Roberts wrote: >>>>> On 6/11/17 6/11/17 6:03 PM, Serg io wrote: >>>>>> GPS signals are "spread spectrum", they are all on the same frequency... >>>>> >>>>> TYPO: GPS signals are NOT spread spectrum, they are all on the same >>>>> frequency. Well, same two frequencies (originally, with three more added >>>>> later). >>>>> >>>>> Tom Roberts >>>> >>>> >>>> yes they are, it is what GPS is based upon Spread Spectrum, >>> >>> You haven't a clue what spread spectrum is. >>> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_spectrum >>> >>> Though posting this is likely a waste of time as you are probably also >>> clueless about bandwidth and the frequency domain and too stupid to >>> read the definitions in the link. >>> >> As usual Chimp is the one with the total lack of understanding and > > The troll chimes in with his usual ad hominems and blithering nonsense. > > <snip troll babble> > Chimp as usual just mumbles to himself drooling on his shirt and totally ignores all the valid information swirling about his confused pointy head. But always manages a 6th grade "come-back" so he can feel he "won".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-13 01:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <b4t31e-vag.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #636213 |
In sci.physics benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: > On 6/12/2017 6:32 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com drooled: >> In sci.physics benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>> On 6/12/2017 12:47 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com drooled: >>>> In sci.physics Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >>>>> On 6/11/2017 10:42 PM, Tom Roberts wrote: >>>>>> On 6/11/17 6/11/17 6:03 PM, Serg io wrote: >>>>>>> GPS signals are "spread spectrum", they are all on the same frequency... >>>>>> >>>>>> TYPO: GPS signals are NOT spread spectrum, they are all on the same >>>>>> frequency. Well, same two frequencies (originally, with three more added >>>>>> later). >>>>>> >>>>>> Tom Roberts >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> yes they are, it is what GPS is based upon Spread Spectrum, >>>> >>>> You haven't a clue what spread spectrum is. >>>> >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_spectrum >>>> >>>> Though posting this is likely a waste of time as you are probably also >>>> clueless about bandwidth and the frequency domain and too stupid to >>>> read the definitions in the link. >>>> >>> As usual Chimp is the one with the total lack of understanding and >> >> The troll chimes in with his usual ad hominems and blithering nonsense. >> >> <snip troll babble> >> > Chimp The troll chimes in again with his usual ad hominems and blithering nonsense. <snip troll babble> -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-13 19:57 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <59407be5$0$55367$b1db1813$145976f0@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #636217 |
On 6/12/2017 9:52 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > In sci.physics benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >> On 6/12/2017 6:32 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com drooled: >>> In sci.physics benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>> On 6/12/2017 12:47 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com drooled: >>>>> In sci.physics Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >>>>>> On 6/11/2017 10:42 PM, Tom Roberts wrote: >>>>>>> On 6/11/17 6/11/17 6:03 PM, Serg io wrote: >>>>>>>> GPS signals are "spread spectrum", they are all on the same frequency... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> TYPO: GPS signals are NOT spread spectrum, they are all on the same >>>>>>> frequency. Well, same two frequencies (originally, with three more added >>>>>>> later). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Tom Roberts >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> yes they are, it is what GPS is based upon Spread Spectrum, >>>>> >>>>> You haven't a clue what spread spectrum is. >>>>> >>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_spectrum >>>>> >>>>> Though posting this is likely a waste of time as you are probably also >>>>> clueless about bandwidth and the frequency domain and too stupid to >>>>> read the definitions in the link. >>>>> >>>> As usual Chimp is the one with the total lack of understanding and >>> >>> The troll chimes in with his usual ad hominems and blithering nonsense. >>> >>> <snip troll babble> >>> >> Chimp > > The troll chimes in again with his usual ad hominems and blithering nonsense. > > <snip troll babble> > > When ever you point out (and prove) that Chimp is totally ignorant of a subject he always quickly posts that this is an "ad hominem". Well, yeah, Chimp, it is "to the man". It's to the stupid ignorant man who thinks he knows it all! Pretty funny really!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-14 00:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2kd61e-rqp.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #636291 |
In sci.physics benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: > On 6/12/2017 9:52 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> In sci.physics benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>> On 6/12/2017 6:32 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com drooled: >>>> In sci.physics benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>>> On 6/12/2017 12:47 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com drooled: >>>>>> In sci.physics Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On 6/11/2017 10:42 PM, Tom Roberts wrote: >>>>>>>> On 6/11/17 6/11/17 6:03 PM, Serg io wrote: >>>>>>>>> GPS signals are "spread spectrum", they are all on the same frequency... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> TYPO: GPS signals are NOT spread spectrum, they are all on the same >>>>>>>> frequency. Well, same two frequencies (originally, with three more added >>>>>>>> later). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Tom Roberts >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> yes they are, it is what GPS is based upon Spread Spectrum, >>>>>> >>>>>> You haven't a clue what spread spectrum is. >>>>>> >>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_spectrum >>>>>> >>>>>> Though posting this is likely a waste of time as you are probably also >>>>>> clueless about bandwidth and the frequency domain and too stupid to >>>>>> read the definitions in the link. >>>>>> >>>>> As usual Chimp is the one with the total lack of understanding and >>>> >>>> The troll chimes in with his usual ad hominems and blithering nonsense. >>>> >>>> <snip troll babble> >>>> >>> Chimp >> >> The troll chimes in again with his usual ad hominems and blithering nonsense. >> >> <snip troll babble> >> >> > When ever The troll continues to chime in with his usual ad hominems and blithering nonsense. <snip troll droppings> -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-12 09:58 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <3Zedna9x8vdkNqPEnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #636120 |
On 6/11/17 6/11/17 - 11:27 PM, Serg io wrote: > On 6/11/2017 10:42 PM, Tom Roberts wrote: >> On 6/11/17 6/11/17 6:03 PM, Serg io wrote: >>> GPS signals are "spread spectrum", they are all on the same frequency... >> >> TYPO: GPS signals are NOT spread spectrum, they are all on the same frequency. >> Well, same two frequencies (originally, with three more added later). > > yes they are, it is what GPS is based upon Spread Spectrum, > this is fundimental gps stuff here, google it and educate yourself for a few hours. > https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog862/node/1753 That is NOT the usual meaning of "spread spectrum", and that website is WRONG in using the term that way. In particular that site claims "The GPS signal is said to have a spread spectrum because of its intentionally increased bandwidth." -- this is NONSENSE, because EVERY method of modulation increases the bandwidth of the transmitted signal, and the bandwidth of GPS signals is simply that due to their phase modulation and chip rate. The usual meaning of "spread spectrum" is intentional frequency hopping to either transmit information or provide more robust communication. The GPS does NOT do this. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-12 15:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ohmapf$1v0d$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #636140 |
Tom Roberts wrote: > The usual meaning of "spread spectrum" is intentional frequency hopping > to either transmit information or provide more robust communication. The > GPS does NOT do this. This neither. That spread is fixed, hence no variation of the bandwidth takes place.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-12 10:37 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ohmcf5$jvu$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #636140 |
On 6/12/2017 9:58 AM, Tom Roberts wrote: > On 6/11/17 6/11/17 - 11:27 PM, Serg io wrote: >> On 6/11/2017 10:42 PM, Tom Roberts wrote: >>> On 6/11/17 6/11/17 6:03 PM, Serg io wrote: >>>> GPS signals are "spread spectrum", they are all on the same >>>> frequency... >>> TYPO: GPS signals are NOT spread spectrum, they are all on the same >>> frequency. Well, same two frequencies (originally, with three more >>> added later). >> >> yes they are, it is what GPS is based upon Spread Spectrum, >> this is fundimental gps stuff here, google it and educate yourself for >> a few hours. >> https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog862/node/1753 > > That is NOT the usual meaning of "spread spectrum", and that website is > WRONG in using the term that way. > > In particular that site claims "The GPS signal is said to have a spread > spectrum because of its intentionally increased bandwidth." -- this is > NONSENSE, because EVERY method of modulation increases the bandwidth of > the transmitted signal, and the bandwidth of GPS signals is simply that > due to their phase modulation and chip rate. > > The usual meaning of "spread spectrum" is intentional frequency hopping > to either transmit information or provide more robust communication. The > GPS does NOT do this. > > Tom Roberts nope, the website is correct. GPS is classic SS, was develped in the early 70s, everybody was interested in the P code, if the code could be guessed. SS is one thing, frequency hopping is another, and the combination SS+frequency hopped is yet another. GPS is SS. (or DSSS) WIFI was initially combo, frequency hopping spread spectrum (FHSS) WIFI has moved on DSSS, OFDM etc... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11 why do all that fancy modultion? to minimize inteference of others in the same coverage area, and reduce multipath. Else you could use OOK and go faster, cheaper.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-12 17:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <85v21e-ltc.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #636142 |
In sci.physics Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: > On 6/12/2017 9:58 AM, Tom Roberts wrote: >> On 6/11/17 6/11/17 - 11:27 PM, Serg io wrote: >>> On 6/11/2017 10:42 PM, Tom Roberts wrote: >>>> On 6/11/17 6/11/17 6:03 PM, Serg io wrote: >>>>> GPS signals are "spread spectrum", they are all on the same >>>>> frequency... > >>>> TYPO: GPS signals are NOT spread spectrum, they are all on the same >>>> frequency. Well, same two frequencies (originally, with three more >>>> added later). >>> >>> yes they are, it is what GPS is based upon Spread Spectrum, >>> this is fundimental gps stuff here, google it and educate yourself for >>> a few hours. >>> https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog862/node/1753 >> >> That is NOT the usual meaning of "spread spectrum", and that website is >> WRONG in using the term that way. >> >> In particular that site claims "The GPS signal is said to have a spread >> spectrum because of its intentionally increased bandwidth." -- this is >> NONSENSE, because EVERY method of modulation increases the bandwidth of >> the transmitted signal, and the bandwidth of GPS signals is simply that >> due to their phase modulation and chip rate. >> >> The usual meaning of "spread spectrum" is intentional frequency hopping >> to either transmit information or provide more robust communication. The >> GPS does NOT do this. >> >> Tom Roberts > > nope, the website is correct. > > GPS is classic SS, was develped in the early 70s, Spread spectrum was actually developed in the 40's. <snip remaining ignorant, illiterate babble> -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-12 17:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ohmjn0$10mj$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #636150 |
jimp wrote: >> GPS is classic SS, was develped in the early 70s, > > Spread spectrum was actually developed in the 40's. Rather purposed, as an idea. You don't know. You don't know what it is. Explain the clocking of data in such an arrangement. You don't know. I was right all the time.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-12 18:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pn131e-06d.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #636151 |
In sci.physics Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> wrote: > jimp wrote: > >>> GPS is classic SS, was develped in the early 70s, >> >> Spread spectrum was actually developed in the 40's. > > Rather purposed, as an idea. You don't know. You don't know what it is. > Explain the clocking of data in such an arrangement. You don't know. I was > right all the time. You are clueless. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_spectrum -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-12 18:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ohmlvh$10mj$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #636153 |
jimp wrote: > In sci.physics Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> wrote: >> jimp wrote: >> >>>> GPS is classic SS, was develped in the early 70s, >>> >>> Spread spectrum was actually developed in the 40's. >> >> Rather purposed, as an idea. You don't know. You don't know what it is. >> Explain the clocking of data in such an arrangement. You don't know. I >> was right all the time. > > You are clueless. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_spectrum Another malnutrited wikipedia freak. Can't you see they are parallel to spread spectrum, no diagrams, no drawings whatsoever. Only crap, diffused. When you see such page, you have to be careful. But you are a fool.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-12 19:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <st531e-dkd.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #636154 |
In sci.physics Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> wrote: > jimp wrote: > >> In sci.physics Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> wrote: >>> jimp wrote: >>> >>>>> GPS is classic SS, was develped in the early 70s, >>>> >>>> Spread spectrum was actually developed in the 40's. >>> >>> Rather purposed, as an idea. You don't know. You don't know what it is. >>> Explain the clocking of data in such an arrangement. You don't know. I >>> was right all the time. >> >> You are clueless. >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_spectrum > > Another malnutrited wikipedia freak. Can't you see they are parallel to Yet another clueless, babbling half wit for the kill file. <snip nonsense babble> *PLONK* -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-12 19:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ohmqtg$9e1$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #636159 |
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com writes: >In sci.physics Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> wrote: >> Another malnutrited wikipedia freak. Can't you see they are parallel to >Yet another clueless, babbling half wit for the kill file. Not "another", just the nymshifting troll again.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web