|
Let's not conflate signals
and information with knowledge and wisdom, people. It took me
two decades of ostensibly adult life before I developed the habit (still
observed more in the breach) of facing life's quandaries with the question:
"What would Dad do?" My batting average went up to match his level, modest
as that has been.
Anyway, I go with an acoustic solution, if it
turns out to be impossible to cable a submarine probe to surface
communications. Tap signals underneath, and listen for them on top.
If you tap hard enough (and remember, we're talking about a lot of power just to
get through the ice, so power will be available under the ice), the sound might
be picked out out all the noise from shifting, grinding ice. The bit rate
might be low, but eventually the message would get out.
However, is there any reason to think
optical fiber couldn't be made strong enough to withstand the crushing
pressures, as the bore closed up behind the probe melting its way through the
ice? Underwater acoustic communications with a transceiver attached to
that fiber on the underside of the ice might keep the probe in contact with the
surface.
-michael turner
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 11:35
PM
Subject: RE: How far can radio signals
penetrate through ice?
A skeptic that is not an acute observer of life? (Europan
or otherwise) ;-)
Obviously Mickey has not yet tried to get an idea
into a teenager's head...
It takes years, believe me! The
transmission rate doesn't seem to increase appreciably with age in some
subjects.
Paul
At 15:27 12/10/2004, you wrote:
I am skeptic about the signal in bone rate. Sound travels through
bone very rapidly akin to dense wood. Think of the hearing aids that send
signals through the bone. Diamond only slows light down 50% or
so.
Mickey
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Paul
Lavin
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2004 3:11 AM
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: How far can radio signals penetrate
through ice?
I'm not
sure that the whales "communicate" over 100s of miles but their
vocalisations can probably be heard that far away.
Let's not forget
that it takes some signals years to penetrate a quarter of an inch of
bone... even at close range.
;-)
Paul
At 02:41
11/10/2004, you wrote:
In the oil and gas business, seismic
(sonar) description of rock formations is pretty accurate down to around
20,000 feet, then starts to get a bit fuzzy.
On earth,
elephants use low frequency sound to communicate over 10's of miles, through
air.
In the oceans, many whale species utilize the lower
frequencies of sound to communicate over vast distances, apparently in the
100's of miles, perhaps further.
Best bet for sound answers
(sorry), check with a whale person.
Any whale people
listening? I'm typing at a really low frequency
...
Incidentally, I'm back in SE Asia, so I'll be sharing the
same clock as Michael T for a few years.
Jack W. Reeve
-----Original Message-----
From: LARRY KLAES [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday 09 October 2004 16:00
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: How far can radio signals penetrate
through ice?
So maybe we can drop a large flat antenna on
Icepick's landing site on Europa first, one that can be folded up for the
trip and deployed when on the moon's surface. No, I am not trying to
be funny.
But wait - how big will Icepick have to be to receive
and send data?
Larry
----- Original Message -----
From: James McEnanly
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, October
09, 2004 2:57 PM
Subject: Re: How far can radio signals penetrate through
ice?
Usually it is by way of Extremely Low Frequencies. The antennae
y=used for this are often acres, if not square miles in size.
LARRY KLAES
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I know
this may be under the Classified category, but have submarines found ways to
send signals through the ice packs when in the Arctic Ocean? I am just
wondering if a similar technique could be used for Icepick so it doesn't
have to drag a long cable after itself from the Europan
surface.
Thanks,
Larry
Sincerely
James
McEnanly
__________________________________________________
Do You
Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Paul Lavin
The
inventor of the phonograph thought he was inventing voicemail.
Alexander
Graham Bell was trying to invent muzak, not the telephone. What
is
obvious now was far from obvious then. What is obvious now is
very
likely to be wrong in twenty years.
+44 (0) 78 5541 1391
mobile
+44 (0) 20 7291 0991 London office
+44 (0) 15 8246 2720 home
office
+44 (0) 15 8246 2536 home fax
Paul Lavin
The inventor of the phonograph thought he was
inventing voicemail.
Alexander Graham Bell was trying to invent muzak, not
the telephone. What
is obvious now was far from obvious then.
What is obvious now is very
likely to be wrong in twenty
years.
+44 (0) 78 5541 1391 mobile
+44 (0) 20 7291 0991 London
office
+44 (0) 15 8246 2720 home office
+44 (0) 15 8246 2536 home fax
|
