On Sun, 12 Aug 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marvelous idea...logical too...and flies in the face of operating
efficiently.
How so? The transmitter would be more efficient. If it's OK to use 6 to 9 kHz
for ESSB, why not 15 or 20 kHz for FM?
Ah good point...and once 20 kHz is established, we can go for subcarriers to
handle various types of data....
But, that notwithstanding, with limited spectrum space available, even
after the
expansion of the phone bands, why are we considering reducing the number of
channels available, by increasing the bandwidth?
I like how 15-20 kHz wide FM sounds. Why can't I use it?
Well, I feel good when I releive abdominal and/or bladder pressure. Why can't I
do it anytime I want in public?
If they don't want us to drive us fast, why do they make such cars? And why
do the speedometers go up so high?
'Cause consumers can be dumb as a box of rocks? Maybe it's a male thing
(remember the fins on cars, and the protuding front grilles?). Of course there
is the axiom "Mo' is bettah".
(devil's advocate mode = off)
Wow, another religious statment...
73 k3hrn
Thom,EIEIO
Email, Internet, Electronic Information Officer
www.baltimorehon.com/ Home of the Baltimore Lexicon
www.tlchost.net/hosting/ Web Hosting as low as 3.49/month
_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
