nerd On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 11:15 AM Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote:
> Oh...I don't mean the Grok AI thing. I meant the older meaning > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* AF <[email protected]> on behalf of Ken Hohhof < > [email protected]> > *Sent:* Thursday, August 21, 2025 12:10 PM > *To:* 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Help me Grok this - tolerance to reflected power > > > I don’t know the answer (your reasoning sounds persuasive), but seriously > are saying “Grok this” now instead of “Google this”? > > > > If so, we’re starting to sound like cavemen. > > > > Or this: > > *https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbiEPxCto7E > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbiEPxCto7E>* > > > > *From:* AF <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Adam Moffett > *Sent:* Thursday, August 21, 2025 10:54 AM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]> > *Subject:* [AFMUG] Help me Grok this - tolerance to reflected power > > > > > > Definition from ITU G.987: > > 3.3.15 tolerance to reflected power (transmitter): A transmitter parameter > that characterizes the > > maximum admissible ratio of the average reflected optical transmit power > incident at the transmitter > > to the average optical transmit power. > > > > If my average transmit power is +6dBm and the tolerance to reflected power > is -15dB, then 6 - 15 = -9, so reflected power as strong as -9dBm won't > harm the transmitter? > > Is it that easy or am I misunderstanding the definition? > > > > -Adam > > > > > > > -- > AF mailing list > [email protected] > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >
-- AF mailing list [email protected] http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
