Re: TI-H: Re: Laser Network (OT)
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: TI-H: Re: Laser Network (OT)
another note I was just thinking (and checking the local library for books
on quantum physics, just for fun) and this just clicked a laser network
would be possible and practical within a large building (ie. the late
kingdom and yet another moment of silence for the building that came down
before it's time
) just don't do it during laser shows lol (there's two more cents for free,
wow what a deal).
Bernard
----- Original Message -----
???: "Bernard" <npfs@cybcon.com>
???: <ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org>
????: Tuesday, March 28, 2000 15:32
??: Re: TI-H: Re: Laser Network (OT)
>
> I'm surprised that Globalstar didn't decide to buy the iridium Sats, it
> would have cost them a lot less than putting up twenty some odd new ones
and
> also by what I know they are totally compatibly saying that they both use
> Qualcomm systems but anyways its sad 3+ billion down the drain... ...you
> could check Globalstar (I think that's what they were called) their sats
are
> about the same as Iridium's were,well now a moment of silence to the loss
of
> a blooming company such as Iridium.........
>
>
>
> ...I don't think an laser would be good for any wireless comunications
> saying that it could be interupted easly by a Periguin flying right
through
> or even a crow or even the common rain shower would interupt lasers. I
think
> it'd be better to use an radio signal so it would be harder to interupt.
> You could even just buy one of then new 900Mhz cordless phones or one of
> those that have two sets and one base... ...or you might be able to get
> one of those new cells that you can use as two way radios when within i
> think it was five miles of an compatable phone well there's my two cents
for
> the day (where did that phrase come from).
> Bernard
> ----- Original Message -----
> ???: "Giles Pollock" <glp71s@mailandnews.com>
> ???: <ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org>
> ????: Tuesday, March 28, 2000 00:23
> ??: Re: TI-H: Re: Laser Network (OT)
>
>
> >
> > i suppose it would be like an ir serial port, but it could probably go
for
> > longer ranges, as for the uses, you could use it for city skyscraper
> > communication, just outside a window, and it couldn't be interuppted by
> other
> > communications, such as is the case with microwave transmitters... i saw
a
> news
> > article here mentioning something similar but for satellites, as
competing
> > businesses in neighboring buildings destroying the other buildings
> microwave
> > transmitter by sending a strong signal when the other is trying to
recieve
> data
> > from a satellite... on the subject of satelites, i wonder how much
> bandwidth the
> > iridium system could support... its unfortunate that they plan to dump
the
> > lot... i saw a site called www.saveiridium.com at least someone is
trying
> to
> > save the satelites, they make interesting flares at night if you look at
> the
> > right time... anyway, using cables to communicate between buildings
would
> > require many cables... all underground. Why not a set of laser
> transmitters on
> > the roof or on certain window ledges...
> >
> > Nick wrote:
> >
> > > it'd be kinda amusing, yeah, and it would work if you had the
> inclination.
> > >
> > > it would work like the IR serial ports most laptops already have; but
if
> you
> > > can already -see- the other computer, then the cable you string out
> between
> > > them ought to be secure already, no? ;)
> > >
> > > y'know what would be really really cool, is changing the IR port on a
> laptop
> > > to work with a laser; it would be VERY simple to do, and highly
amusing.
> > > change the LED in there to a laser diode, use a transistor to switch
the
> > > larger current the LED demands, and pow.
> > >
> > > a laser Ethernet would probably be a mite slower than fiber, and if
you
> ran
> > > a hub then all the computers would have to be able to -see- the hub,
> which
> > > could get interesting.
> > >
> > > and if i wanted to make it insecure, i'd pass a semisilvered mirror in
> the
> > > way of the beam, or semisilver one of the existing mirrors with a bias
> on
> > > the forward signal.
> > >
> > > or i could just tap the transciever at the hub.
> > >
> > > it'd still be wicked cool, though, i agree ;)
> > >
> > > ohohohoh hey, lookie what i found -- go to www.conversant.com & click
on
> the
> > > banner thing for PAV Data Systems.
> > > now THAT's amusing.
> > >
> > > and they're right here in boston, too! neat-o.
> > >
> > > --nick
> > >
> > > Nick Foster / Bistromath / zaphod@coe.neu.edu
> > > KeyID 2048/1024 0x663CB446
> > > 6CAF FFD4 F9BA 64BA ECF9 032E 7402 3886 663C B446
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Giles Pollock" <glp71s@mailandnews.com>
> > > To: <ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org>
> > > Sent: Monday, March 27, 2000 6:14 AM
> > > Subject: TI-H: Laser Network (OT)
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I had an idea earlier today, to make a secure and wireless
network...
> > > > You could use a 10BaseF tranciever (the ones that have two fiber
> > > > connections, i take it that one is transmit and one recieve) and
> replace
> > > > the transmitter with a laser diode (maybe extra circuitry) and use a
> > > > different reciever. With a few mirrors you could focus the laser
beam
> > > > into a reciever (say a photodiode...) and it wouldnt require much to
> > > > make an aiming device, if the entire arrangement was bolted to
> something
> > > > secure, say a window sill or something. I have a rough idea on how
you
> > > > could make an automatic aiming device using another mirror and
another
> > > > laser with a few photodiodes and small servos. The laser would be
> > > > completely secure, it would be almost impossible to infiltrate the
> beam.
> > > > The only disadvantage would be that it would be rather expensive...
> > > > anyone got any other ideas?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
References: