AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
Page 4 - AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency. Discuss AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency, on Wireless Forums.
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jul 1, 10:06 pm, Telamon
<telamon_spamshi...@pacbell.net.is.invalid> wrote:
> In article <PgZhi.908$eY....@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net>,
>
> cledus <cle...@noemail.net> wrote:
>
> < Snip >
>
- Would you please have the decency to snip
- rec.radio.shortwave and other groups from
- the newsgroup header. Thanks.
-
- --
- Telamon
- Ventura, California
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-lowcarrier frequency
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> Watch antennas:
> <http://www.c-max-time.com/products/productsOverview.php?catID=5>
> See the photos of the various antennas. Too bad there's no specs.
>
> I'll grind out the field strength numbers later. I've been living in
> the microwave region for so long, that I'm having problems with LF
> calcs.
> http://www.c-max-time.com/downloads/getFile.php?id=423
Gives dimensions,No of turns,Inductance etc.
> In article <PgZhi.908$eY.131@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net>,
> cledus <cledus@noemail.net> wrote:
>
> < Snip >
>
> Would you please have the decency to snip rec.radio.shortwave and other
> groups from the newsgroup header. Thanks.
Would you please come and ask nicely. I don't like how you put your order.
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on anastronomically-low carrier frequency
On 7/2/07 6:45 AM, in article f6avil$t30$1@news.albasani.net, "John Smith"
<assemblywizard@gmail.com> wrote:
> Don Bowey wrote:
>
>> ...
>> Would you please come and ask nicely. I don't like how you put your order.
>>
>
> Get back on your meds and cease and desist from bothering the other
> mental patients--else you get the straight jacket next! <grin>
>
> JS
Your attempts at presumed humor, are as bad as your AM knowledge. :^)
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on anastronomically-low carrier frequency
On 7/2/07 6:45 AM, in article f6avil$t30$1@news.albasani.net, "John Smith"
<assemblywizard@gmail.com> wrote:
> Don Bowey wrote:
>
>> ...
>> Would you please come and ask nicely. I don't like how you put your order.
>>
>
> Get back on your meds and cease and desist from bothering the other
> mental patients--else you get the straight jacket next! <grin>
>
> JS
By the way, I looked at the wiki link you posted and I can see why you are
misinformed by it; it's author was either simply not clear in his own mind,
or he did not understand that the "undulations" on the telephone line DC
voltage is NOT amplitude modulation in the multiplier sense. It is not AM
as it is being discussed in this thread of Radium's original post. If you
prefer the math proof, multiply the DC voltage frequency (0) by the audio
frequency (pick a number between 200 and 3000 Hz), and the product is zero -
No new frequencies are present. There's more to it than that but I probably
already lost you.
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
In message <46890C09.BBCAD369@earthlink.net>, Michael A. Terrell
<mike.terrell@earthlink.net> writes
>Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>
>> Conventional TV is VSB (visidual side band)
>
>
> Vestigal Sideband
>
>
Better still, Vestigial Sideband!
--
Ian
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
kev <invalid@invalid.invalid> hath wroth:
>Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>
>> Watch antennas:
>> <http://www.c-max-time.com/products/productsOverview.php?catID=5>
>> See the photos of the various antennas. Too bad there's no specs.
>>
>> I'll grind out the field strength numbers later. I've been living in
>> the microwave region for so long, that I'm having problems with LF
>> calcs.
Thanks. I downloaded that yesterday and got a file with no extension.
I eventually figured out it's a PDF file and renamed it.
The site also has a rather sketchy article on antenna design at:
<http://www.c-max-time.com/tech/antenna.php>
I also found the chip sensitivity somewhere at
0.5uv typical
0.8uv max
with a field strength range of:
15-20 uV/m using a 10mm x 60 mm rod.
I'm currently slogging through the NIST web pile trying to find the
historical or estimated field strengths for the left coast area.
<http://tf.nist.gov/timefreq/stations/lflibrary.htm>
Ah, foundit:
<http://tf.nist.gov/timefreq/general/pdf/1383.pdf>
Table 2.4 shows signal strength in San Diego varying from 180 uV/m to
1000 uV/m. Now all I need to do is figure out how much S/N ratio is
required at the receiver input to properly decode the time signals.
All the information needed is probably there, scattered among an
assortment of documents, but I'm at a loss on how to estimate the
actual field strength sensitivity given the rod antenna
specifications. The formula #1 at:
<http://www.c-max-time.com/tech/antenna.php>
has all the right parameters, but I keep getting insane results when I
try to plug in real and estimated values. Maybe some coffee will
help.
I'll work on it more during the next few daze. It should be easy
(famous last words). However, paying work comes first.
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> hath wroth:
>Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> Conventional TV is VSB (visidual side band)
> Vestigal Sideband
Ummm... How about Vestigial Sideband instead?
<http://www.javvin.com/hardware/VSB.html>
<http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_gci332235,00.html>
The last vestige of spelling abilities disappeared long ago and was
replaced by a spellin chequer that lacked the term. Sorry.
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 16:41:01 +0100, Ian Jackson <IanJacksonRemoveThisBit@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <46890C09.BBCAD369@earthlink.net>, Michael A. Terrell
> <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> writes
> >Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> >>
> >> Conventional TV is VSB (visidual side band)
> >
> >
> > Vestigal Sideband
> >
> >
> Better still, Vestigial Sideband!
You're both wrong. It is VIRTUAL SIDEBAND because it isn't completely
real and the other sideband which isn't virtual carries the missing high
frequency modulation info. Once it gets into your second detector then
it becomes real due to the laws of product modulation.
Next, you will be telling people that VGA doesn't stand for "virtual
graphics array."
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-lowcarrier frequency
John Smith wrote:
> [stuff]
And, by the way, when using plate modulation on a transmitter, the DC
input to plates of the transmitter has a modulated signal impressed upon
it by a modulation transformer (simply an audio transformer), every watt
of power to the xmitter is so impressed ... The DC voltage/current to
the xmitter contains the voice data--indeed, the exact same data which
is impressed onto the DC on a telephone line (voice/modulation.)
However, the real importance of this will only become clear to you when
you come out from under the influence of whatever it is you are smokin' ...
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on anastronomically-low carrier frequency
On 7/2/07 10:53 AM, in article f6be49$123$1@news.albasani.net, "John Smith"
<assemblywizard@gmail.com> wrote:
> Don Bowey wrote:
>
>> ...
>
> Yeah, idiot, lot a proof there.
>
> NO modulation at all, krist, the guy on the other end is only carrying
> on a "virtual conversation!"
>
> Excellent use of logic, keep up the good work ...
>
> JS
>
The problem is, you are too ignorant to understand the terms being used.
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on anastronomically-low carrier frequency
On 7/2/07 11:00 AM, in article f6beh4$18n$1@news.albasani.net, "John Smith"
<assemblywizard@gmail.com> wrote:
> John Smith wrote:
>
>> [stuff]
>
> And, by the way, when using plate modulation on a transmitter, the DC
> input to plates of the transmitter has a modulated signal impressed upon
> it by a modulation transformer (simply an audio transformer), every watt
> of power to the xmitter is so impressed ... The DC voltage/current to
> the xmitter contains the voice data--indeed, the exact same data which
> is impressed onto the DC on a telephone line (voice/modulation.)
>
> However, the real importance of this will only become clear to you when
> you come out from under the influence of whatever it is you are smokin' ...
>
> JS
>
But I know WHY the plate modulated rig creates sidebands, and you still
don't, because you refuse to learn.
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on anastronomically-low carrier frequency
On 7/2/07 11:53 AM, in article f6bhjs$4gs$1@news.albasani.net, "John Smith"
<assemblywizard@gmail.com> wrote:
> Don Bowey wrote:
>
>> But I know WHY the plate modulated rig creates sidebands, and you still
>> don't, because you refuse to learn.
>>
>
> Interesting, now you attempt to divert the conversation into the
> modulation having been, FINALLY, impressed into the sidebands ...
>
> Hell, it was just such a chore bringing your education up to speed on
> this one point, I'd have to be paid to continue your education!
>
> JS
You allude to knowing how the sidebands come into being yet you cannot
provide any clue that you really understand AM, and you continue to think
microphone current in a telephone loop is the same thing. You're as FOS as
they come.
I doubt you have fooled anyone on this board with your attempts to look like
you know more than you really do.
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-lowcarrier frequency
Don Bowey wrote:
> You allude to knowing how the sidebands come into being yet you cannot
> provide any clue that you really understand AM, and you continue to think
> microphone current in a telephone loop is the same thing. You're as FOS as
> they come.
>
> I doubt you have fooled anyone on this board with your attempts to look like
> you know more than you really do.
Buddy, you speak about these people being "fooled", interesting term,
implying you consider them fools!
I doubt that is true, they have seen through you in a heartbeat, most,
probably long before now ... I imagine they are just embarrassed for
you--having made such an A$$ of yourself ...
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on anastronomically-low carrier frequency
On 7/2/07 12:29 PM, in article f6bjn4$eja$1@news.albasani.net, "John Smith"
<assemblywizard@gmail.com> wrote:
> Don Bowey wrote:
>
>> You allude to knowing how the sidebands come into being yet you cannot
>> provide any clue that you really understand AM, and you continue to think
>> microphone current in a telephone loop is the same thing. You're as FOS as
>> they come.
>>
>> I doubt you have fooled anyone
Please point out, above, or wherever you wish, where I said they were
fooled. You can't you POS liar.
>
> Buddy, you speak about these people being "fooled", interesting term,
> implying you consider them fools!
>>on this board with your attempts to look like you know more than you really
do.
>
> I doubt that is true, they have seen through you in a heartbeat, most,
> probably long before now ... I imagine they are just embarrassed for
> you--having made such an A$$ of yourself ...
>
> JS
While you continue to allude to skills and knowledge you don't have.
Do you often get away with this useless chest beating?
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-lowcarrier frequency
Don Bowey wrote:
> ...
> While you continue to allude to skills and knowledge you don't have.
>
> Do you often get away with this useless chest beating?
>
>
You pathetically petty idiot ... I guess you call names because of your
age. Or, others have called you names and it has hurt your ego. Get an
education, grow-up and get off the drugs--you will be able to finally
respect yourself! :-(
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on anastronomically-low carrier frequency
On 7/2/07 2:12 PM, in article f6bpo3$tcn$1@news.albasani.net, "John Smith"
<assemblywizard@gmail.com> wrote:
> Don Bowey wrote:
>
>> ...
>> While you continue to allude to skills and knowledge you don't have.
>>
>> Do you often get away with this useless chest beating?
>>
>>
>
> You pathetically petty idiot ... I guess you call names because of your
> age. Or, others have called you names and it has hurt your ego. Get an
> education, grow-up and get off the drugs--you will be able to finally
> respect yourself! :-(
>
> Best hope in your therapy!
>
> JS
But POS was intended for guys like you.
Ok! Again, you win. Please enjoy your blissful ignorance with my good
wishes.
snip, Snip. SNIP ! the "Rec.Radio.Shortwave" Group from the Newsgroups {Distribution} Header - please, Please. PLEASE !
On Jul 2, 6:16 am, Don Bowey <dbo...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 7/1/07 10:06 PM, in article
> telamon_spamshield-142DD0.22065601072...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net ,
>
> "Telamon" <telamon_spamshi...@pacbell.net.is.invalid> wrote:
> > In article <PgZhi.908$eY....@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net>,
> > cledus <cle...@noemail.net> wrote:
>
> > < Snip >
>
> > Would you please have the decency to snip rec.radio.shortwave and other
> > groups from the newsgroup header. Thanks.
>
- Would you please come and ask nicely.
- I don't like how you put your order.
don bowey, Don Bowey. DON BOWEY !
Oh Please with Sugar and Spice and Everything Nice
snip, Snip. SNIP ! the "Rec.Radio.Shortwave" Group
from the Newsgroups {Distribution} Header when you
Post your Reply - It would be ever so decent of you
Kind and Wonder Sir. ;-)
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
In article <C2AE48C8.6D094%dbowey@comcast.net>,
Don Bowey <dbowey@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 7/1/07 10:06 PM, in article
> telamon_spamshield-142DD0.2206560107...ws.prodigy.net,
> "Telamon" <telamon_spamshield@pacbell.net.is.invalid> wrote:
>
> > In article <PgZhi.908$eY.131@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net>,
> > cledus <cledus@noemail.net> wrote:
> >
> > < Snip >
> >
> > Would you please have the decency to snip rec.radio.shortwave and other
> > groups from the newsgroup header. Thanks.
>
> Would you please come and ask nicely. I don't like how you put your order.
This is a stupid cross posted Troll thread so pretty please with sugar
on it snip the other news groups it does not originate from. Thank you
very, very much in advance.
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jul 2, 9:09 pm, Telamon <telamon_spamshi...@pacbell.net.is.invalid>
wrote:
> In article <C2AE48C8.6D094%dbo...@comcast.net>,
> Don Bowey <dbo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > On 7/1/07 10:06 PM, in article
> > telamon_spamshield-142DD0.22065601072...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net ,
> > "Telamon" <telamon_spamshi...@pacbell.net.is.invalid> wrote:
>
> > > In article <PgZhi.908$eY....@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net>,
> > > cledus <cle...@noemail.net> wrote:
>
> > > < Snip >
>
> > > Would you please have the decency to snip rec.radio.shortwave and other
> > > groups from the newsgroup header. Thanks.
>
> > Would you please come and ask nicely. I don't like how you put your order.
>
> This is a stupid cross posted Troll thread so pretty please with sugar
> on it snip the other news groups it does not originate from. Thank you
> very, very much in advance.
>
> --
> Telamon
> Ventura, California
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
"John Smith I" <assemblywizard@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f64hg5$d3j$1@nnrp.linuxfan.it...
> Radium wrote:
<snip>
Suppose you have a 1 MHz sine wave whose amplitude
is multiplied by a 0.1 MHz sine wave.
What would it look like on an oscilloscope?
What would it look like on a spectrum analyzer?
Then suppose you have a 1.1 MHz sine wave added
to a 0.9 MHz sine wave.
What would that look like on an oscilloscope?
What would that look like on a spectrum analyzer?
Re: snip, Snip. SNIP ! the "Rec.Radio.Shortwave" Group from the Newsgroups {Distribution} Header - please, Please. PLEASE !
On Mon, 02 Jul 2007 14:42:49 -0700, RHF <rhf-newsgroups@pacbell.net>
wrote:
>On Jul 2, 6:16 am, Don Bowey <dbo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On 7/1/07 10:06 PM, in article
>> telamon_spamshield-142DD0.22065601072...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net ,
>>
>> "Telamon" <telamon_spamshi...@pacbell.net.is.invalid> wrote:
>> > In article <PgZhi.908$eY....@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net>,
>> > cledus <cle...@noemail.net> wrote:
>>
>> > < Snip >
>>
>> > Would you please have the decency to snip rec.radio.shortwave and other
>> > groups from the newsgroup header. Thanks.
>>
>- Would you please come and ask nicely.
>- I don't like how you put your order.
>
>don bowey, Don Bowey. DON BOWEY !
>
>Oh Please with Sugar and Spice and Everything Nice
>snip, Snip. SNIP ! the "Rec.Radio.Shortwave" Group
>from the Newsgroups {Distribution} Header when you
>Post your Reply - It would be ever so decent of you
>Kind and Wonder Sir. ;-)
>
>thank you very much - most respectfully ~ RHF
---
Seems to me his posts are on topic for rrs, so why don't you just
learn how to use a filter?
>
>"John Smith I" <assemblywizard@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:f64hg5$d3j$1@nnrp.linuxfan.it...
>> Radium wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>Suppose you have a 1 MHz sine wave whose amplitude
>is multiplied by a 0.1 MHz sine wave.
>What would it look like on an oscilloscope?
---
LTSPICE circuit list:
Version 4
SHEET 1 1672 1576
WIRE 32 880 -256 880
WIRE 192 880 32 880
WIRE 528 912 336 912
WIRE 192 944 -112 944
WIRE -256 992 -256 880
WIRE -112 992 -112 944
WIRE -256 1120 -256 1072
WIRE -112 1120 -112 1072
WIRE -112 1120 -256 1120
WIRE -256 1168 -256 1120
FLAG -256 1168 0
FLAG 32 880 in
SYMBOL SPECIALFUNCTIONS\\MODULATE 192 880 R0
WINDOW 0 37 -55 Left 0
WINDOW 3 55 119 Center 0
SYMATTR InstName A1
SYMATTR Value mark=1e6 space=1e6
SYMBOL voltage -256 976 R0
WINDOW 123 0 0 Left 0
WINDOW 39 0 0 Left 0
SYMATTR InstName V1
SYMATTR Value 10
SYMBOL voltage -112 976 R0
WINDOW 3 24 160 Left 0
WINDOW 123 24 132 Left 0
WINDOW 39 0 0 Left 0
SYMATTR InstName V2
SYMATTR Value SINE(.5 .5 1e5)
SYMATTR Value2 AC 1
TEXT -96 1240 Left 0 !.tran 5e-5
TEXT -96 1208 Left 0 !.params w0=2*pi*1K Q=5
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jul 3, 12:50 pm, John Fields <jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 23:03:36 -0700, "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!"
>
> <t...@aint.me> wrote:
>
> >"John Smith I" <assemblywiz...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:f64hg5$d3j$1@nnrp.linuxfan.it...
> >> Radium wrote:
>
> ><snip>
>
> >Suppose you have a 1 MHz sine wave whose amplitude
> >is multiplied by a 0.1 MHz sine wave.
> >What would it look like on an oscilloscope?
>
<snip>
>
> >What would it look like on a spectrum analyzer?
>
> | |
> | | | |
> --------+--------------------+-------+------+----
> 100kHz 0.9MHz 1MHz 1.1MHz
>
> >Then suppose you have a 1.1 MHz sine wave added
> >to a 0.9 MHz sine wave.
> >What would that look like on an oscilloscope?
>
<snip>
>
> Tricky!!!
>
> It looks like AM but it isn't, it's just the phases sliding past
> each other slowly and algebraically adding which creates the
> illusion.
>
> >What would that look like on a spectrum analyzer?
>
> | |
> | |
> -----------------------------+--------------+----
> 0.9MHz 1.1MHz
>
> --
> JF
But if you remove the half volt bias you put on the
100 kHz signal in the multiplier version, the results
look exactly like the summed version, so I suggest
that results are the same when a 4 quadrant multiplier
is used.
And since the original request was for a "1 MHz sine
wave whose amplitude is multiplied by a 0.1 MHz sine
wave" I think a 4 quadrant multiplier is in order.
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Jul 3, 2:07 pm, Keith Dysart <Keith.Dys...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 3, 12:50 pm, John Fields <jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 23:03:36 -0700, "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!"
>
> > <t...@aint.me> wrote:
>
> > >"John Smith I" <assemblywiz...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > >news:f64hg5$d3j$1@nnrp.linuxfan.it...
> > >> Radium wrote:
>
> > ><snip>
>
> > >Suppose you have a 1 MHz sine wave whose amplitude
> > >is multiplied by a 0.1 MHz sine wave.
> > >What would it look like on an oscilloscope?
>
> <snip>
>
> > >What would it look like on a spectrum analyzer?
>
> > | |
> > | | | |
> > --------+--------------------+-------+------+----
> > 100kHz 0.9MHz 1MHz 1.1MHz
>
> > >Then suppose you have a 1.1 MHz sine wave added
> > >to a 0.9 MHz sine wave.
> > >What would that look like on an oscilloscope?
>
> <snip>
>
> > Tricky!!!
>
> > It looks like AM but it isn't, it's just the phases sliding past
> > each other slowly and algebraically adding which creates the
> > illusion.
>
> > >What would that look like on a spectrum analyzer?
>
> > | |
> > | |
> > -----------------------------+--------------+----
> > 0.9MHz 1.1MHz
>
> > --
> > JF
>
> But if you remove the half volt bias you put on the
> 100 kHz signal in the multiplier version, the results
> look exactly like the summed version, so I suggest
> that results are the same when a 4 quadrant multiplier
> is used.
>
> And since the original request was for a "1 MHz sine
> wave whose amplitude is multiplied by a 0.1 MHz sine
> wave" I think a 4 quadrant multiplier is in order.
>
> ...Keith-
Ooops. I misspoke. They are not quite the same.
The spectrum is the same, but if you want to get exactly
the same result, the lower frequency needs a 90 degree
offset and the upper frequency needs a -90 degree offset.
And the amplitudes of the the sum and difference
frequencies need to be one half of the amplitude of
the frequencies being multiplied.
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency
On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 12:05:52 -0700, Keith Dysart
<Keith.Dysart@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jul 3, 2:07 pm, Keith Dysart <Keith.Dys...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 3, 12:50 pm, John Fields <jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 23:03:36 -0700, "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!"
>>
>> > <t...@aint.me> wrote:
>>
>> > >"John Smith I" <assemblywiz...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> > >news:f64hg5$d3j$1@nnrp.linuxfan.it...
>> > >> Radium wrote:
>>
>> > ><snip>
>>
>> > >Suppose you have a 1 MHz sine wave whose amplitude
>> > >is multiplied by a 0.1 MHz sine wave.
>> > >What would it look like on an oscilloscope?
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> > >What would it look like on a spectrum analyzer?
>>
>> > | |
>> > | | | |
>> > --------+--------------------+-------+------+----
>> > 100kHz 0.9MHz 1MHz 1.1MHz
>>
>> > >Then suppose you have a 1.1 MHz sine wave added
>> > >to a 0.9 MHz sine wave.
>> > >What would that look like on an oscilloscope?
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> > Tricky!!!
>>
>> > It looks like AM but it isn't, it's just the phases sliding past
>> > each other slowly and algebraically adding which creates the
>> > illusion.
>>
>> > >What would that look like on a spectrum analyzer?
>>
>> > | |
>> > | |
>> > -----------------------------+--------------+----
>> > 0.9MHz 1.1MHz
>>
>> > --
>> > JF
>>
>> But if you remove the half volt bias you put on the
>> 100 kHz signal in the multiplier version, the results
>> look exactly like the summed version, so I suggest
>> that results are the same when a 4 quadrant multiplier
>> is used.
>>
>> And since the original request was for a "1 MHz sine
>> wave whose amplitude is multiplied by a 0.1 MHz sine
>> wave" I think a 4 quadrant multiplier is in order.
>>
>> ...Keith-
>
>Ooops. I misspoke. They are not quite the same.
---
That's right. They can't possibly be because the first instance
_was_ multiplication and the second instance addition.
---
>The spectrum is the same, but if you want to get exactly
>the same result, the lower frequency needs a 90 degree
>offset and the upper frequency needs a -90 degree offset.
---
That makes no sense since the frequencies are different and,
consequently, the phase difference between the signals will be
constantly changing.
Re: AM electromagnetic waves: 20 KHz modulation frequency on an astronomically-low carrier frequency 
Linear Mode
