That's a good point to bring out. Point source radiation drops off at the
inverse square rate, but line source only drops off at the inverse linear
rate. In other words, for a point source, doubling the distance causes the
signal to drop to 1/4 the original value, but for a line source, doubling
the distance would only cause the signal to drop to 1/2 the original value.
Carl Moreschi N4PY
Franklinton, NC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stuart Rohre" <rohre@arlut.utexas.edu>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:24 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] ARRL's BPL NPRM response is out
> Accumulated BPL interfering noise was addressed in the ARRL document as
> something that had not been tested by BPL proponents. A strong point was
> made that part 15 applies to point sources like a device, while BPL is a
> line source since it is continuously radiated by the lines. They also
made
> good point that FCC was overlooking the laws of physics in neglecting the
> continuous radiation from a line.
> Stuart
> K5KVH
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|