In article <hbd6f3$re...@news.eternal-september.org>, da...@ex.djwhome.demon.invalid says... > > John Hasler wrote: > > David Woolley writes: > >> EMI is at submultiples of the raw FSB side because instruction rates > >> and loop rates also introduce strong periodic elements. > > > > Which spread-spectrum (especially real spread spectrum, less so mere FM) > > mitigates. > > The problem is that it only mitigates it down to the statutory levels, > which are way too high for weak signal reception.
It doesnt "mitigate" it at all, all it does is move it about, so the measuring kit at the test house (that has a time constant) can't see it as well. The EMI is still there, and just as strong, just you're poluting even more spectrum. DJB. _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
