Ham Radio and Moonbounce

  • 451 Replies
  • 96645 Views
?

dyno

  • 562
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #270 on: July 10, 2009, 02:16:56 AM »
I think we should be seeking responses from other FE's. TB doesn't understand and apparently lacks the capacity to.
Robosteve, Dogplatter, Neeman etc. What are your opinions?

*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #271 on: July 10, 2009, 02:12:51 PM »
TB doesn't understand and apparently lacks the capacity to.

Or the desire to ...
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)

*

julianmartin

  • 109
  • Rationalism is the epitome of life.
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #272 on: July 12, 2009, 04:15:55 PM »
Quote
If we say that antennae can be directional we really do know what we are talking about, OK?

Not if it's a solid piece of bare metal is isn't.

Quote
If we say that antennae can be directional we really do know what we are talking about, OK?

Please tell me again how the metal antenna pictured above knows which direction the photons are hitting it from.


Hey guys - sorry for my delay in addition to this thread - my housemate got banned for abusing some flat-earthers and our IP got banned so I cannot participate easily.


As for Tom Bishop:

FOR FUCKS SAKE!!


Tom, many people have alluded to the technology I have been speaking of in the posts I have made.

It seems you think Yagi beams, or any other directional beams that rely on amplificational or "gain" technology are beyond you. Yet these designs have been used for many years to improve the strength of signals that from a dipole transmission perspective, are well out of reach.

You are having ago because you cannot understand how an antenna can "tell" that photons are being absorbed in the right direction. Sorry to break it to you, antennas aren't sentient beings. No-one asked them to "tell" when they know what is going on. All that was asked of yagi arranged antennas or otherwise, was to perform like ordinary pieces of metal, arranged like they are, in accordances with very ordinary known physics.

End of story Tom, stop being a Troll, and stop being a dick.


On top of this, in extraordinary circumstances, CIRCUMNAVIGATIONAL PROPAGATION, DOESN'T REQUIRE DIRECTIONAL ANTENNAS. That's right. The first time I ever experienced this, was with a Cushcraft R8. A thoroughly OMNIDIRECTIONAL antenna. It's more easily reproducible with directional propagators, but it doesn't require it.

End of story guys - there is nothing more to this argument. Physics wins, and thus round earth.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2009, 10:40:42 PM by julianmartin »

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17814
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #273 on: July 13, 2009, 12:49:40 AM »
There's nothing "directional" about HAM and AM signals. Those signals bounce off the environment and ionosphere many millions of times in many different directions. It's a field signal. It's not a directional signal like FM and conventional radar are. It's impossible to gauge a direction for HAM and AM because the signals are coming from ALL DIRECTIONS.

Please educate yourself.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2009, 01:23:20 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #274 on: July 13, 2009, 01:19:30 AM »
julianmartin, I'm gonna give you a week to cool yourself down.

*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #275 on: July 13, 2009, 01:53:51 AM »
julianmartin, I'm gonna give you a week to cool yourself down.

Please bear in mind that Tom is goading him into losing his temper by being obstinate in his refusal to acknowledge opinions other than his own.
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)

?

dyno

  • 562
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #276 on: July 13, 2009, 04:07:33 AM »
JulianMartin, your contributions have been valuable so don't be disheartened. I believe it is widely acknowledged that this is another weakness in the FE argument.
Tom is a king of trolls so you will never receive recognition from him. Take heart that no other FEr has tried to argue you.

If you want to make yourself feel better, go and read some posts from a year or two ago and watch him getting owned.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42250
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #277 on: July 13, 2009, 06:34:24 AM »
There's nothing "directional" about HAM and AM signals. Those signals bounce off the environment and ionosphere many millions of times in many different directions. It's a field signal. It's not a directional signal like FM and conventional radar are. It's impossible to gauge a direction for HAM and AM because the signals are coming from ALL DIRECTIONS.

Please educate yourself.

Tom, if a radio signal is bouncing around many millions of times in many different directions, then why is it not garbled into random noise?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #278 on: July 13, 2009, 08:06:50 AM »
@ mods...Seems there are two sets rules governing proper posting behavior here.  Levee has been far more direct in his posts than anything Julian has done, with no "cooling off" period, and he's a mod!  Shouldn't mods be held to a higher standard?  Not to mention the simple fact that Tom has set new standards for being thickheaded here.  No small feat in these parts.

@ Julian.  Hope you're reading this. Personally just wanted to add, nice thread.  You showed more restraint than most would have, under the circumstances.

Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #279 on: July 13, 2009, 08:36:40 AM »
There's nothing "directional" about HAM and AM signals. Those signals bounce off the environment and ionosphere many millions of times in many different directions. It's a field signal. It's not a directional signal like FM and conventional radar are. It's impossible to gauge a direction for HAM and AM because the signals are coming from ALL DIRECTIONS.

Please educate yourself.

This is simply not true Tom, and you know it.  It is you who needs an education here.  People are able to hone in on the location of HAM and AM signal transmitters with the proper equiopment all the time..

Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #280 on: July 13, 2009, 08:43:01 AM »
But Tom, if you want to go on showing ignorance on this, by all means, do so.  It's entertaining to say the least.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17814
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #281 on: July 13, 2009, 10:07:53 AM »
Quote
Tom, if a radio signal is bouncing around many millions of times in many different directions, then why is it not garbled into random noise?

A lot of it is random noise. AM is notorious for having significantly more static and distortion than FM. That's because, unlike a directional FM signal, the signals are bouncing all over the place as a field signal. The advantages of AM over FM are longer range (thousands of miles) but lesser quality. It also takes a lot more power to run an AM broadcaster than an FM one.

Quote
This is simply not true Tom, and you know it.  It is you who needs an education here.  People are able to hone in on the location of HAM and AM signal transmitters with the proper equiopment all the time..

Please show us an example then. A statement is not an example.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2009, 02:34:03 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42250
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #282 on: July 13, 2009, 10:44:45 AM »
Quote
Tom, if a radio signal is bouncing around many millions of times in many different directions, then why is it not garbled into random noise?

A lot of it is random noise. AM is notorious for having significantly more static and distortion than FE. That's because, unlike a directional FM signal, the signals are bouncing all over the place as a field signal. The advantages of AM over FM are longer range (thousands of miles) but lesser quality. It also takes a lot more power to run an AM broadcaster than an FM one.

I'm sorry Tom, but what makes FM more directional than AM?  Also, you do realize that many HAM radio operators use FM equipment, right?
Quote from: http://vk1od.net/FM/FM.htm
Frequency modulation (FM) is widely applied in Amateur Radio for voice, telegraphy and data modulation. This article gives an overview of the theory of FM, its application, and applied test and measurement techniques.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17814
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #283 on: July 13, 2009, 12:24:40 PM »
Quote
I'm sorry Tom, but what makes FM more directional than AM?

FM signals are directional and cannot bounce off of the environment or ionosphere. AM signals can bounce off the environment and ionosphere, which means that they can bounce their way to far off destinations.

The only problem with AM is the quality, distortion, and static. That's why most of the music stations are on FM.

Quote
Also, you do realize that many HAM radio operators use FM equipment, right?

HAM is an AM broadcast, not FM.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2009, 12:26:44 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42250
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #284 on: July 13, 2009, 01:03:34 PM »
Quote
I'm sorry Tom, but what makes FM more directional than AM?

FM signals are directional and cannot bounce off of the environment or ionosphere. AM signals can bounce off the environment and ionosphere, which means that they can bounce their way to far off destinations.

The only problem with AM is the quality, distortion, and static. That's why most of the music stations are on FM.

Quote
Also, you do realize that many HAM radio operators use FM equipment, right?

HAM is an AM broadcast, not FM.

And you know this because you're a HAM radio operator, right Tom?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17814
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #285 on: July 13, 2009, 01:06:17 PM »
Quote
And you know this because you're a HAM radio operator, right Tom?

I've used HAM. It's common knowledge that it uses an AM band.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42250
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #286 on: July 13, 2009, 01:15:29 PM »
Quote
And you know this because you're a HAM radio operator, right Tom?

I've used HAM. It's common knowledge that it uses an AM band.

Then you should also know that HAM radio uses a variety of frequencies, not all of which are in the AM band.  And just because a signal is in the AM band does not mean that its frequency can't be modulated (FM in an AM band  :o).
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17814
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #287 on: July 13, 2009, 01:20:09 PM »
Quote
Then you should also know that HAM radio uses a variety of frequencies, not all of which are in the AM band.

HAM radio operators primarily use AM because AM can bounce off the environment to reach far off destinations. While different bands may be possible with various equipment, AM is the most widely used (and is the primary band on any HAM equipment) for its distance capabilities.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2009, 01:27:13 PM by Tom Bishop »

Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #288 on: July 13, 2009, 01:48:12 PM »
Please show us an example then. A statement is not an example.

Julian gave examples, and has personal experience with this, but you simply said "No" and played dumb.  (nice job, by the way).

Also, do you mind if I use your quote above?  You know the one, it's right there...
Quote
Please show us an example then. A statement is not an example.

It may come in quite handy responding to many of your posts.  You're quite the master of posting statements as though they are automatically some sort of truth.


*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17814
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #289 on: July 13, 2009, 02:26:20 PM »
Quote
It may come in quite handy responding to many of your posts.  You're quite the master of posting statements as though they are automatically some sort of truth.

The field properties of AM is truth.

No one did any experiment o determine the direction of an AM radio wave. And no one can, because the waves are coming from the surrounding environment, not the broadcasting antenna.

Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #290 on: July 13, 2009, 03:13:56 PM »
when talking about field properties, could you post some maths on the different behaviour of am and fm em-waves concerning reflection ?

*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #291 on: July 13, 2009, 03:45:05 PM »
This thread has descended into farce ...

No really: the bishop will turn up at any moment and find the vicar without his trousers on!

(I have been in this play, by the waw: it was "I'll Get My Man".)
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42250
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #292 on: July 13, 2009, 03:50:28 PM »
Quote
Then you should also know that HAM radio uses a variety of frequencies, not all of which are in the AM band.

HAM radio operators primarily use AM because AM can bounce off the environment to reach far off destinations. While different bands may be possible with various equipment, AM is the most widely used (and is the primary band on any HAM equipment) for its distance capabilities.

Is the bounce a property of the wavelength or the modulation?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #293 on: July 13, 2009, 06:01:29 PM »
Kee it up Tom!  Your incredible obstinancy in refusing to acknowledging your ignorance of radio wave propogation and refusing to educate yourself about how it really works only further damages the credibility of both yourself and FET.  Most things that interfere with radio wave propogation affect the amplitude of the signal, not its frequency, and this is the main reason why FM signals tend to be inherently clearer and more nearly distortion free than AM signals.  The directionality of radio signals and their ability to bounce off the ionsphere depends on the frequency and wavelength of the broadcast signal, not on how it is modulated.

As I said, though, keep up the good work!  The more you continue to display your wilful ignorance in this thread, the more you weaken your credibility and that of FET!
« Last Edit: July 13, 2009, 06:10:02 PM by Rational U.S. Viking »

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17814
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #294 on: July 13, 2009, 07:07:01 PM »
Is the bounce a property of the wavelength or the modulation?

What does it matter?

All that matters is that AM waves bounce off of the environment and atmosphere, attacking an antenna from many different sides.

*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #295 on: July 14, 2009, 03:09:26 AM »
All that matters is that AM waves bounce off of the environment and atmosphere, attacking an antenna from many different sides.

"Attacking"?

That is an unbelievably unscientific word to use!
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)

?

Squat

Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #296 on: July 14, 2009, 03:29:19 AM »
Is the bounce a property of the wavelength or the modulation?

What does it matter?


Answering a question with a question just demonstrates that you are inept.

?

dyno

  • 562
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #297 on: July 14, 2009, 03:59:25 AM »
Why are you people still arguing with TB? You should be pursuing other members that have the ability to see your point of view.
Dogplatter(maybe)
Neeman
Ski
Username I think
to name a few.(sorry about forgetting your new names)

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17814
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #298 on: July 14, 2009, 07:31:36 AM »
Quote
Why are you people still arguing with TB? You should be pursuing other members that have the ability to see your point of view.

If your point of view is unsupported fantasy, no I don't want to see it.

When you have some evidence to support your ideas, let me know so we can continue this discussion.

*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: Ham Radio and Moonbounce
« Reply #299 on: July 14, 2009, 07:35:44 AM »
Why are you people still arguing with TB?

Because, as previously suggested, his pig-headed ignorance is discrediting FET by association?

Edit:

Kee it up Tom!  Your incredible obstinancy in refusing to acknowledging your ignorance of radio wave propogation and refusing to educate yourself about how it really works only further damages the credibility of both yourself and FET. 

As I said, though, keep up the good work!  The more you continue to display your wilful ignorance in this thread, the more you weaken your credibility and that of FET!
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)