|
|
Posted by Dave Platt on 09/30/07 03:59
In article <46fefb70$0$7493$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
Green Xenon [Radium] <glucegen1@excite.com> wrote:
> > Sure it is possible. It won't be of any assistance to you (or to
> > anyone else since you can't put 8 pounds in a 1-pound sack.
> > Bandwidth is bandwidth, no matter how you slice it. Do you
> > really think that nobody has thought of various methods of
> > transmitting video over low-bandwidth paths? If so, you need
> > to study not only science and engineering but the HISTORY
> > of science and engineering.
>
>There are 8-bits-per-symbol, only 1 baud. The symbol is split into 8
>parts. Each part is 1-bit.
>
>How is this putting 8 pounds in a 1-pound sack?
>
>Its more like putting 1 pound in a 1-pound sack
You are using the word "split" without defining what you are meaning,
and I think you may be using the word "bit" in two different ways (as
in "a single binary digit's worth of information" and "a part")...
maybe I'm wrong about the latter.
Sure, you can carry 8 bits of information per symbol, at a rate of one
baud. That's an information rate of 8 bits per second, which isn't a
terribly useful amount of information.
What I *think* you are saying is something along the lines of
"If there's no way to carry N bits of information per symbol (where
N is a large number) at a rate of 1 symbol per second, in a
specified bandwidth, over a channel having a certain amount of
dynamic range / signal-to-noise ratio available, then I'd
like to somehow divide each symbol into eight sub-symbols which
each carry N/8 of the information, but which still make up only one
symbol per second. My hope is that these eight sub-symbols could
be easier to transmit, somehow, than a single symbol carrying N
bits, and that I could thus transmit them more easily but without
using any more bandwidth. Can I do that?"
If that's what you're asking, the answer is "no".
Once you hit the theoretical information limit of the communication
channel (which is set by the bandwidth you use and by the amount of
noise on the channel) you can't do any better than that. No matter
how you modulate (changing the baud rate, the amount of information
per symbol, etc.) you can't do better than this.
And, as we've been trying to make clear, your goal is quite far beyond
the theoretical limit. You just can't get there. You're trying to
put all of Lake Erie in a water-glass.
Let it go, Radium.
--
Dave Platt <dplatt@radagast.org> AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|