Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Silkroad -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ahhaha who wrote (335)	3/20/1999 9:36:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 626

>They have disclosed nothing that effectively superimposes or multiplexes data optically because that isn't the data encoding procedure.< When I stated multiplex or superimpose my intent was to describe a generic process of combining onto a single medium. You likely took it to mean some established method that you were familiar with, like TDM or FDM (the latter of which being closer to the actual case than the former). >Frank said we spend too much time trying to figure out how the technology works< If that's what you heard me say, then I failed to communicate. I've found each dialog having to do with angular momentum and spinning photons fascinating, although I could not contribute much there. Perhaps you mistook my silence for dissent? At the same time, each of these sidebar discussions, despite however interesting they may be, have resulted in significant distractions from the core issues from my perspective. Those being: How will SR in the final analysis demonstrate its ability to incorporate multiple mega-bit, giga-bit flows onto a single medium for transport over significant distances. I have neither said that it was possible nor impossible, rather I was working on the assumption that their claims were valid based on demonstrated capabilities, albeit limited ones thus far (citing the WS demo, for lack of any other empirical proof at this time; more on this below). >... but it is clear we haven't done enough. We must resolve the final piece of the puzzle, else you won't appreciate what SR has done.< Okay. No disagreement there. >SR takes an input RF frequency and a carefully prepared beam which admits vast embedding and through a special diode allows the input RF to build high density channels in the beam stream.< What you've done here is to begin to describe what the OSI crowd would characterize as physical layer convergence. If I took a comparable approach to synthesizing the various layers that converge for Frame Relay onto ATM, and then onto the physical medium of copper or silica, we might then conclude here that those technologies could never work. Or work on a theoretical basis, but nor in reality, or otherwise conclude that either tech was not viable for economic reasons. In other transmission models, information carrying media do actually embed, or superimpose a Layer 2 information-bearing bundle of various forms (cells, packets, intermediate frequency radio signals, undulating current, etc.) onto a Layer 1 medium. SR's approach is significantly different in texture than any of those, I hear you say, and I have surmised from their literature (otherwise they would have made use of an example of one of these) but the OSI template remains the same. Are we in synch on this thus far? What do others here think? Can we proceed on this premise, and continue to use the framework of the osi-rm (reference model) as a means to characterize the rest of SR's processes? Or, am I just too hung up on the need for a structured dialog which abides to some accepted conventions of representation? I'm not trying, simply, to draw you into my own court. Rather, I'm attempting to meet you at the 50-yard line. I don't want you in the end zone, because then I wont learn anything. From midfield we can each see each other's problem, which actually transcends whether or not SR will function as advertized. The more rooted problem in this thread for the moment, which needs to be remedied first, is recognizing the relevancy of the other person's views. ======== The claim that RF is used, at all, raises some new questions for me which I had not focused on prior to this point. One question that arises is, how does the RF get to be RF? The use of analog TV signals during a Wall Stree demo eliminates this problem, because TV feeds are readily available at the IF or RF stages. Binary data, however, enjoys no such state, unless it is put through some form of modulation (e.g., cable TV modulation using QAM, DPSK/QPSK, or vestigial sideband techniques). Probably through multiple stages of modulation, I would assume. Or is it your interpretation that baseband digital signals such as bipolar non-return to zero (T1-T3) and unipolar data signals will play (combine, embed with the optical stream) just as well as RF? This may appear to be a trivial point to you or others, but I view it as a significant quality (as an enabler or as an inhibitor, depending on the answer) for purposes of further discussion. Frank_C.