Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.93.2 with SMTP id cq2csp323095igb; Thu, 5 Sep 2013 17:17:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.180.79.131 with SMTP id j3mr8421350wix.0.1378426660967; Thu, 05 Sep 2013 17:17:40 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id lu10si12162894wjb.74.1969.12.31.16.00.00; Thu, 05 Sep 2013 17:17:40 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) client-ip=195.171.43.25; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) smtp.mail=owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; dkim=fail header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=fail (p=NONE dis=NONE) d=gmail.com Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1VHinH-0001tD-7O for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 06 Sep 2013 00:16:55 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1VHinG-0001t4-MN for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 06 Sep 2013 00:16:54 +0100 Received: from mail-ob0-f179.google.com ([209.85.214.179]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1VHinE-0007eW-9K for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 06 Sep 2013 00:16:53 +0100 Received: by mail-ob0-f179.google.com with SMTP id fb19so2757540obc.10 for ; Thu, 05 Sep 2013 16:16:49 -0700 (PDT) X-DKIM-Result: Domain=gmail.com Result=Good and Known Domain DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=NQrf7PBUs5eUNJuAUpiHTn0LuyxRtkGKnY88Ssd5UbM=; b=rDhlTFfPz4WGe3k6VHStZXoHdsQo95r4KoVIm8B/NbnvbUc3Gc3algwTxpEv2drUdK oeVHFLHYOhGzTpR+kqjGclDBirZL+PVLzOHj2l4PGhMqdUnVb40rZt1OCxRxLB7IRvFS Pb+HsDuXq2AK6XfUR8yFff1V41CRE8wFlh+ynPFhikmQzTitGi2/Hho8KBILh9CMQkVU s7lKUEWV8HRAoO68ZBHbQswziyVpnntyi+QrsenduxxQrTVSxpR56DzXQB3JcSeQDTXV NWOIMnfbviSR9kiefSNLutyvGWlN6+eAwG2iT0HgD6eXLgFgUDeL5GdtV05OJFJokwNX cBkQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.227.136 with SMTP id sa8mr8439398obc.39.1378423009528; Thu, 05 Sep 2013 16:16:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.182.213.42 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Sep 2013 16:16:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 09:16:49 +1000 Message-ID: From: Dimitrios Tsifakis To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Hello group, have a look at this: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/hijuno/ [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [209.85.214.179 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (dtsifakis[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: 4ad5f3f1a9241b934aaa5d0e23c9dc57 Subject: LF: Say HI to Juno (or VK on LF)? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 1039 Hello group, have a look at this: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/hijuno/ Now, can we use this technique to combine the efforts of many transmitters to produce a collective, higher EIRP? Individually seen, each transmitter does not break the law by sticking to the limit. If, say, I have two equally configured transmitters on two slightly different FFT bins, can I combine the two bins in order to get a better S/N? Would that be a 3 dB improvement? What if I have more than two (a whole continent?) worth of transmitters? :-) 73, Dimitris VK1SV