Cost of Space Travel (and communication)

William Mook wrote:
On Feb 23, 8:34 pm, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:
William Mook wrote:
David Spain said, "Problem is that in the most affluent areas that
would actually subscribe, "

William Mook replies;

The world is rich enough to subscribe generally. Average global
income is $10,350 per person per year.

RANK INCOME PEOPLE SERVICE PACKAGE

Low income: $1,407 1.5 billion $1/year - 2 MHz - $20
handset
Middle income: $6,157 3.8 billion $1/month - 10 MHz - $200
netbook
High income: $37,141 1.5 billion $12/month - 60 MHz - $2000
laptop

You've got to be kidding. You expect someone to spend $2000/year for
your connectivity?

No - I expect someone to spend about $144 per yer for connectivity in
Europe, Japan, Australia, North America.

Remind me for what bandwidth?





With 33% market penetration $85 billion per year is earned.

And with 100% market penetration you earn $255 B per year.

Yes. Put that's the entire population, so it is very unlikely that
figure will be reached quickly.

Umm, try at all. Show me a single vendor that has achieved even 33% market
penetration of the ENTIRE population.



And with 0% you earn nothing.

That is unlikely with the system available at $12 per month for
unlimited bandwidth for the highest paying customer and $1 per month
for most customers and $1 per year for lowest paying customer.

Unlimited bandwidth? Now I know you're really smoking dope. So if I want
100Gig of bandwidth for $12/month, you can provide it? Excuse me while I
stop to laugh my ass off.


My costs are substantially lower, my product is substantially
superior.

Right, which is why so many people out there are building it. Oh wait, NO
ONE is. Hell, Sirius and XM can't make a profit on a cheaper idea.


Anyone in a competitive market with a superior product offering and
lower costs would not be laughed at by any serious investor.

Right. Unfortunately you're offering neither.


After pointing out you have confused "market" with population.

No I have not you have with your remarks above.

Umm, yes, you did. You assumed a market penetration of 33% into a
population of 6.8 billion. Unless you're somehow saying the population of
the planet is NOT 6.8 billion but is substantially higher.

Again, show me a single vendor that has achieved market penetration of 33%
of a 6.8 billion person market.

You don't understand
what I'm saying and don't know enough to know you don't know. haha -
and blame me. That is the very quintessence of idiocy.

Umm. When you keep repeating your mistakes, I'd be careful who is calling
who an idiot.

You continue making observations founded upon illogical argument.
This one is listed under 'false choice'


No, I continue to make observations based on facts. You keep dreaming up
pie in the sky schemes. If your ideas are so great, prove it. Go line up
the investors. If your ideas are so great, you should have investors
beating down your doors. The fact that you apparently don't I think says
more about your ideas than anything I can say here.

Trust me Mr. Mook, I would LOVE to be proven wrong. 100 to 1 says that you
can't make a profit off this idea within the next 10 years. Hell 100:1 you
can't get serious money from an investor in the next 10 years, let alone
build any hardware.


--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

On Feb 24, 11:46*am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:
William Mook wrote:
On Feb 23, 8:34 pm, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:
William Mook wrote:
David Spain said, "Problem is that in the most affluent areas that
would actually subscribe, "

William Mook replies;

The world is rich enough to subscribe generally. Average global
income is $10,350 per person per year.

RANK INCOME PEOPLE SERVICE PACKAGE

Low income: $1,407 1.5 billion $1/year - 2 MHz - $20
handset
Middle income: $6,157 3.8 billion $1/month - 10 MHz - $200
netbook
High income: $37,141 1.5 billion $12/month - 60 MHz - $2000
laptop

You've got to be kidding. You expect someone to spend $2000/year for
your connectivity?

No - I expect someone to spend about $144 per yer for connectivity in
Europe, Japan, Australia, North America.

Remind me for what bandwidth?



With 33% market penetration $85 billion per year is earned.

And with 100% market penetration you earn $255 B per year.

Yes. *Put that's the entire population, so it is very unlikely that
figure will be reached quickly.

Umm, try at all. *Show me a single vendor that has achieved even 33% market
penetration of the ENTIRE population.

The world ALREADY has over 60% penetration by cell phones, the USA has
nearly 90% while places like Italy, Germany and Russia have over 100%.
(see table below - provided by ITU) This suggests that a very low
cost very capable system would provide universal coverage and the
wealthier folks would have multiple channel capabilities, while poorer
folks would have fewer channels.

REGION CELL PHONES PEOPLE %USE

- World 4,100,000,000 6,797,100,000 60.6%

1 China..... 747,380,000 1,335,330,000 55.97%
2 India....... 525,147,922 1,174,040,000 44.73%
3 USA....... 276,610,580 ....308,505,000 89.0%
4 Russia.... 207,900,000 ....141,915,979 143.2%
5 Brazil...... 173,960,000 ....191,480,630 90.84%

6 Indonesia 140,200,000 ....231,369,500 60.53%
7 Japan..... 107,490,000 ....127,530,000 84.11%
8 Germany........ 107,000,000 ......81,882,342 130.15%
9 Pakistan.... 97,579,940 ....168,500,500 59.60%
10 Italy.......... 88,580,000 ......60,090,400 147.41%




And with 0% you earn nothing.

That is unlikely with the system available at $12 per month for
unlimited bandwidth for the highest paying customer and $1 per month
for most customers and $1 per year for lowest paying customer.

Unlimited bandwidth? *

Yes, unlimited bandwidth. Many providers advertise unlimited
bandwidth. Since my system provides more bandwidth for everyone than
anyone else can provide, I can advertise unlimited bandwidth.

Now I know you're really smoking dope. *

You know nothing of the sort.

So if I want
100Gig of bandwidth for $12/month, you can provide it? *

You can have 10,000x that if you like for $12 per month. See below.

Excuse me while I
stop to laugh my ass off.


shrug I am not responsible for your illogical and emotional
conclusions. You should really read up on a thing before making
unfortunate statements about it.

Unlimited will have fine print - as another poster pointed out to
you. The bandwidth issue is worth going into to see just how capable
this my system is.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...te-white-light

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/lo...hDecision=-203

Supercontinuum lasers have been operated in the lab at 1.8 peta-bit
per second. An open optical data link through vacuum -satellite to
satellite- nearest neighbor - provides six connections per point and
864 points on orbit - using a variant of this approach provides a
throughput sufficient to provide 50 billion 55 Mbit/sec channels.

Since there are 2.6 million seconds per month, and the system provides
7.35 channels per person on the planet, then everyone everywhere is
provided 1 quadrillion bits per month. The mean is configured at 500
tera-bits per month. The poorer users would consume at 100 tera-bits
per month. The wealthier users would consume at 2.5 Q-bits per month
- to support the disparity of cash flows from the global system - and
maximize revenues. The logic behind this is the same as a movie
provider offering senior and student discounts to maximize revenues.

Having addressed the bandwidth of the backbone, the two remaining
issues are router design on orbit - which is the subject of patent
activity for me right now - so I will post on that later. Basically,
I use nonlinear optical systems with synthetic holograms to implement
logical and signal processing capabilties in support of petabit
signalling.

Another issue is uplink downlink in support of these rates.

I mentioned briefly in an earlier post that I use a large format
phased array antenna that is capable of painting virtual cells -
stationary and doppler correct - across the surface of the Earth.
Due to clouds direct signalling with open optical lasers at petabit
rates isn't practical. Microwaves will have to do.

http://www.radartutorial.eu/06.antennas/an14.en.html

A phased array antenna has a large number of individual radiating
elements. Each element controls the phase of the signal radiating
from it. In this way, beams may be formed and steered. Phased array
antenna are capable of far more than this. they are capable of
forming many beams simultaneously from the same antenna.

These antenna elements can also operate as receivers and create an
interferometer to pick up very weak signals from very tiny regions of
the field of view of the antenna.

Operating simultaneously as a reciever/transmitter a phased array
antenna can sense signals from very weak sources and form beams
directed to very precise locations from orbit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interferometry

The ITU designates GSM frequency bands for use with cellular
frequencies. There are 14 bands designated by 3rd Generation
Partnership Project (3GPP) TS 45.005, which succeeded 3GPP TS 05.05

These 14 bands are;

System Band Uplink (MHz) Downlink (MHz) Channel number

T-GSM-380 380 380.2–389.8 390.2–399.8 dynamic
T-GSM-410 410 410.2–419.8 420.2–429.8 dynamic
GSM-450 450 450.4–457.6 460.4–467.6 259–293
GSM-480 480 478.8–486.0 488.8–496.0 306–340
GSM-710 710 698.0–716.0 728.0–746.0 dynamic
GSM-750 750 747.0–762.0 777.0–792.0 438–511
T-GSM-810 810 806.0–821.0 851.0–866.0 dynamic
GSM-850 850 824.0–849.0 869.0–894.0 128–251
P-GSM-900 900 890.2–914.8 935.2–959.8 1–124
E-GSM-900 900 880.0–914.8 925.0–959.8 975–1023, 0-124
R-GSM-900 900 876.0–914.8 921.0–959.8 955–1023, 0-124
T-GSM-900 900 870.4–876.0 915.4–921.0 dynamic
DCS-1800 1800 1710.2–1784.8 1805.2–1879.8 512–885
PCS-1900 1900 1850.0–1910.0 1930.0–1990.0 512–810

In September 2008, IEEE 802.11y-2008 is an amendment to the IEEE
802.11-2007 standard that enables high powered Wi-Fi equipment to
operate in the 3700 MHz band in the United States.

My uplink system uses a variant of this 3,700 MHz system to provide
uplink downlink capabilities from my optical routers that tap into
multiple petabit per second optical links per router.

With a wavelength of 81 millimeters and a phased array antenna 100 m
in diameter in an orbit 1,000 km altitude, allows each phased array
antenna to paint a 'spot size' or 'cell size' of 1 km. This is
1/100th the area permitted to be covered by 802.11y (at 20 watts).

The phased array limits the 'range' of cell to 1/2 km so each cell is
1 km across.




*My costs are substantially lower, my product is substantially
superior.

Right, which is why so many people out there are building it. *

Why do you insist on making statements without first checking to see
if they're right?

Oh wait, NO
ONE is.

Cite?

*Hell, Sirius and XM can't make a profit on a cheaper idea.

What are the fundamentals driving the market? Again, you make
conclusions based on emotion without reference to fundamentals
involved. This is a recipe for disaster.



Anyone in a competitive market with a superior product offering and
lower costs would not be laughed at by any serious investor.

Right.

I'm glad you agree with something rational.

*Unfortunately you're offering neither.

Prove it.



After pointing out you have confused "market" with population.

No I have not you have with your remarks above.

Umm, yes, you did. *You assumed a market penetration of 33% into a
population of 6.8 billion. *

Right, with cell phones today providing 60% penetration and pentration
exceeding 100% in some locales, a substantially superior product at a
substantially reduced cost, with substantially improved capabilities
built around fundamental improvements in core technology, would easily
achiev 35% market share.

Unless you're somehow saying the population of
the planet is NOT 6.8 billion but is substantially higher.

I said the population was 6.8 billion. How can you conclude I said
something that I obviously did not say? It just goes to show how
illogic and emotion can warp your thinking.

Again, show me a single vendor that has achieved market penetration of 33%
of a 6.8 billion person market.

GSM has achieved 60% market pentration arond the planet today. A new
fundamentally improved system based on sound design fundamentals will
easily achieve 35% market acceptance and likely exceed it.

*You don't understand
what I'm saying and don't know enough to know you don't know. *haha -
and blame me. *That is the very quintessence of idiocy.

Umm. *When you keep repeating your mistakes, I'd be careful who is calling
who an idiot.

That would be you bozo.



You continue making observations founded upon illogical argument.
This one is listed under 'false choice'

No,

Yes, you haven't said one right thing -For example, in response to me
stating there are 6.8 billion people you replied I said there were
more than 6.8 billion people. You really are stark raving mad.

I continue to make observations based on facts. *

No you don't.

You keep dreaming up
pie in the sky schemes. *

No I don't.

If your ideas are so great, prove it. *

I have.

Go line up
the investors.

You keep making assumptions - for example, that I need investors at
this point. haha.

*If your ideas are so great, you should have investors
beating down your doors. *

So?

The fact that you apparently don't

The word here is apparently - you are making idiotic statements based
on what things apparently look like to you. You don't know **** about
me or about what I'm describing - yet that doesn't stop you from
making very hurtful harmful and bullheaded statements that are in the
end WRONG! haha - I suppose it derives from your need to feel better
about yourself by speaking evil of those who are clearly better than
you.

I think says
more about your ideas than anything I can say here.

What you think doesn't matter unless and until you actually trouble
yourself to put some thought into your thoughts - and stop operating
out of your gut instinct.

Trust me Mr. Mook,

Why?

I would LOVE to be proven wrong. *

? Why?

100 to 1 says that you
can't make a profit off this idea within the next 10 years.

Prove it.

*Hell 100:1 you
can't get serious money from an investor in the next 10 years, let alone
build any hardware.

Again, you really should be careful making statements about things
before you know anything at all about them.


--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

On Feb 26, 4:28*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:

:On Feb 26, 3:12 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: William Mook wrote:
:
: :On Feb 25, 10:26 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : William Mook wrote:
: :
: : :On Feb 25, 12:01 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : William Mook wrote:
: : :
: : : :
: : : :Yes, unlimited bandwidth. Many providers advertise unlimited
: : : :bandwidth. Since my system provides more bandwidth for everyone than
: : : :anyone else can provide, I can advertise unlimited bandwidth.
: : : :
: : :
: : : No, your system does not provide unlimited bandwidth.
: : :
: : : YOU DON'T HAVE A SYSTEM.
: : :
: : :Yes I do.
: : :
: : :
: : : Fiction.
: : :
: : :Not at all.
: : :
: : :An open optical backbone on orbit supports a network of 864
: : :satellites. Each satellite operates as an optical router. Each
: : :satellite communicates with six nearest neighbors at full duplex.
: : :Each channel supports 33.5 million channels each at 55 Mbit/sec. In
: : :this way, each router handles 200 million channels at 55 MBit/sec
: : :each. Theoretical capabilities are 173.8 billion channels of 55 MBit/
: : :sec each - system limitations reduce this to a little more than 50
: : :billion channels at 55 MBit/sec each over the entire globe.
: : :
: : :Each satellite is equipped with a 120 m diameter phased array antenna
: : :that beams stationary doppler corrected cells on the surface of the
: : :Earth, dynamically forming an array of 784,135,209 hexagons each
: : :nearly 1 km in diameter completely tiling the Earth.
: : :
: : :Each satellite covers 10 degrees of latitude and 15 degrees of
: : :longitude. At the equator this translates to a footprint on the
: : :ground that's 1,667 km tall by 1,111 km wide - containing 2,851,196
: : :hexagons.
: : :
: : :Each cell operates using a variant of IEEE 802.11y-2008 protocol
: : perating at 4400 Mhz to 5000 Mhz band as well as two other bands
: : 3400 Mhz to 4200 Mhz and 2700 Mhz to 2900 Mhz)
: : :
: : :Each cell supports 20 channels at 55 Mbit/sec rate simultaneously for
: : :each band a total of 60 simultaneous signals. Time domain multiplexing
: : :allows further allocation of the signal space in each band to provide
: : :a seamless telecom capability.
: : :
: : :This system not only provides a global wifi capability but also global
: : :voice over IP capability, a global navigation capability, and global
: : :machine control and sensing capability. That translates to virtual
: : :tourism as well as virtual work - via telerobotics. So, the virtual
: : :world merges seamlessly with real world actuators allowing people to
: : :live anywhere and work anywhere else. In this way the USA may bring
: : :back the factories and farms it has lost, while making use of low wage
: : :labor overseas - without the need of laborers going to the time
: : :trouble and cost of moving to the USA to provide their labors.
: : :
: :
: : You have no satellites. You have no network. You have no cells.
: :
: : Fictional.
: :
: :
: :A fictional device is a literary pretense created to advance a plot.
: :
:
: That's certainly one definition, although a deliberately narrow one.
: However, even THAT seems to fit your usual output. A pretense created
: to advance a plot...
:
: :
: :You have confused the adjective 'fictional' with the fact that I have
: lanned, a system that is designed in detail, intended to provide real
: :services, organized, for profit and scheduled for delivery. My
: :network is based upon actual, physical, factural, tangible, genuine,
: riginal, authentic, bona-fide, valid, true, and unquestionable
: :reality offered here ina true unfeigned, frank, heartfelt, unaffected,
: :truthful, honest and sincere way.
: :
: :In short the very opposite of fictional.
: :
:
: No satellites. No network. No cells.
:
:Not yet.
:

Get back to us when you do.

I am free to post and say whatever I like.

:
: Fictional.
:
:Not at all.
:

Most assuredly.

Not really. Your conclusion is based on fuzzy thinking.


--
"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the
*soul with evil."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Socrates

On Feb 26, 4:28*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:

:On Feb 26, 3:12 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: William Mook wrote:
:
: :On Feb 25, 10:26 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : William Mook wrote:
: :
: : :On Feb 25, 12:01 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : William Mook wrote:
: : :
: : : :
: : : :Yes, unlimited bandwidth. Many providers advertise unlimited
: : : :bandwidth. Since my system provides more bandwidth for everyone than
: : : :anyone else can provide, I can advertise unlimited bandwidth.
: : : :
: : :
: : : No, your system does not provide unlimited bandwidth.
: : :
: : : YOU DON'T HAVE A SYSTEM.
: : :
: : :Yes I do.
: : :
: : :
: : : Fiction.
: : :
: : :Not at all.
: : :
: : :An open optical backbone on orbit supports a network of 864
: : :satellites. Each satellite operates as an optical router. Each
: : :satellite communicates with six nearest neighbors at full duplex.
: : :Each channel supports 33.5 million channels each at 55 Mbit/sec. In
: : :this way, each router handles 200 million channels at 55 MBit/sec
: : :each. Theoretical capabilities are 173.8 billion channels of 55 MBit/
: : :sec each - system limitations reduce this to a little more than 50
: : :billion channels at 55 MBit/sec each over the entire globe.
: : :
: : :Each satellite is equipped with a 120 m diameter phased array antenna
: : :that beams stationary doppler corrected cells on the surface of the
: : :Earth, dynamically forming an array of 784,135,209 hexagons each
: : :nearly 1 km in diameter completely tiling the Earth.
: : :
: : :Each satellite covers 10 degrees of latitude and 15 degrees of
: : :longitude. At the equator this translates to a footprint on the
: : :ground that's 1,667 km tall by 1,111 km wide - containing 2,851,196
: : :hexagons.
: : :
: : :Each cell operates using a variant of IEEE 802.11y-2008 protocol
: : perating at 4400 Mhz to 5000 Mhz band as well as two other bands
: : 3400 Mhz to 4200 Mhz and 2700 Mhz to 2900 Mhz)
: : :
: : :Each cell supports 20 channels at 55 Mbit/sec rate simultaneously for
: : :each band a total of 60 simultaneous signals. Time domain multiplexing
: : :allows further allocation of the signal space in each band to provide
: : :a seamless telecom capability.
: : :
: : :This system not only provides a global wifi capability but also global
: : :voice over IP capability, a global navigation capability, and global
: : :machine control and sensing capability. That translates to virtual
: : :tourism as well as virtual work - via telerobotics. So, the virtual
: : :world merges seamlessly with real world actuators allowing people to
: : :live anywhere and work anywhere else. In this way the USA may bring
: : :back the factories and farms it has lost, while making use of low wage
: : :labor overseas - without the need of laborers going to the time
: : :trouble and cost of moving to the USA to provide their labors.
: : :
: :
: : You have no satellites. You have no network. You have no cells.
: :
: : Fictional.
: :
: :
: :A fictional device is a literary pretense created to advance a plot.
: :
:
: That's certainly one definition, although a deliberately narrow one.
: However, even THAT seems to fit your usual output. A pretense created
: to advance a plot...
:
: :
: :You have confused the adjective 'fictional' with the fact that I have
: lanned, a system that is designed in detail, intended to provide real
: :services, organized, for profit and scheduled for delivery. My
: :network is based upon actual, physical, factural, tangible, genuine,
: riginal, authentic, bona-fide, valid, true, and unquestionable
: :reality offered here ina true unfeigned, frank, heartfelt, unaffected,
: :truthful, honest and sincere way.
: :
: :In short the very opposite of fictional.
: :
:
: No satellites. No network. No cells.
:
:Not yet.
:

Get back to us when you do.

I will, and I will talk when I wish online about what I'm doing and
what I plan to do.

:
: Fictional.
:
:Not at all.
:

Most assuredly.

Most assuredly not fictional. Fictional means made-up pretense to
advance some sort of drama. Factual means based in reality. I have
described the operation of a system of satellites to create a global
communications network based on real results of research. You insist
in denigrating what I've said by wrongly calling it fictional merely
because the satellite are not yet operational.

You are engaging in spreading a false impression that such a network
is factually impossible - which as you point out below - is evil.

--
"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the
*soul with evil."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Socrates

On Feb 27, 1:32*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:

:On Feb 26, 4:28*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: William Mook wrote:
:
: :On Feb 26, 3:12 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : William Mook wrote:
: :
: : :On Feb 25, 10:26 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : William Mook wrote:
: : :
: : : :On Feb 25, 12:01 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : : William Mook wrote:
: : : :
: : : : :
: : : : :Yes, unlimited bandwidth. Many providers advertise unlimited
: : : : :bandwidth. Since my system provides more bandwidth for everyone than
: : : : :anyone else can provide, I can advertise unlimited bandwidth..
: : : : :
: : : :
: : : : No, your system does not provide unlimited bandwidth.
: : : :
: : : : YOU DON'T HAVE A SYSTEM.
: : : :
: : : :Yes I do.
: : : :
: : : :
: : : : Fiction.
: : : :
: : : :Not at all.
: : : :
: : : :An open optical backbone on orbit supports a network of 864
: : : :satellites. Each satellite operates as an optical router. Each
: : : :satellite communicates with six nearest neighbors at full duplex.

On Feb 27, 7:57*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:

:On Feb 26, 4:28 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: William Mook wrote:
:
: :On Feb 26, 3:12 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : William Mook wrote:
: :
: : :On Feb 25, 10:26 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : William Mook wrote:
: : :
: : : :On Feb 25, 12:01 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : : William Mook wrote:
: : : :
: : : : :
: : : : :Yes, unlimited bandwidth. Many providers advertise unlimited
: : : : :bandwidth. Since my system provides more bandwidth for everyone than
: : : : :anyone else can provide, I can advertise unlimited bandwidth..
: : : : :
: : : :
: : : : No, your system does not provide unlimited bandwidth.
: : : :
: : : : YOU DON'T HAVE A SYSTEM.
: : : :
: : : :Yes I do.
: : : :
: : : :
: : : : Fiction.
: : : :
: : : :Not at all.
: : : :
: : : :An open optical backbone on orbit supports a network of 864
: : : :satellites. Each satellite operates as an optical router. Each
: : : :satellite communicates with six nearest neighbors at full duplex.

On Feb 27, 8:02*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:

:On Feb 27, 1:32 am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: William Mook wrote:
:
: :On Feb 26, 4:28 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : William Mook wrote:
: :
: : :On Feb 26, 3:12 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : William Mook wrote:
: : :
: : : :On Feb 25, 10:26 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : : William Mook wrote:
: : : :
: : : : :On Feb 25, 12:01 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : : : William Mook wrote:
: : : : :
: : : : : :
: : : : : :Yes, unlimited bandwidth. Many providers advertise unlimited
: : : : : :bandwidth. Since my system provides more bandwidth for everyone than
: : : : : :anyone else can provide, I can advertise unlimited bandwidth.
: : : : : :
: : : : :
: : : : : No, your system does not provide unlimited bandwidth.
: : : : :
: : : : : YOU DON'T HAVE A SYSTEM.
: : : : :
: : : : :Yes I do.
: : : : :
: : : : :
: : : : : Fiction.
: : : : :
: : : : :Not at all.
: : : : :
: : : : :An open optical backbone on orbit supports a network of 864
: : : : :satellites. Each satellite operates as an optical router. Each
: : : : :satellite communicates with six nearest neighbors at full duplex.
: : : : :Each channel supports 33.5 million channels each at 55 Mbit/sec. In
: : : : :this way, each router handles 200 million channels at 55 MBit/sec
: : : : :each. Theoretical capabilities are 173.8 billion channels of 55 MBit/
: : : : :sec each - system limitations reduce this to a little more than 50
: : : : :billion channels at 55 MBit/sec each over the entire globe.
: : : : :
: : : : :Each satellite is equipped with a 120 m diameter phased array antenna
: : : : :that beams stationary doppler corrected cells on the surface of the
: : : : :Earth, dynamically forming an array of 784,135,209 hexagons each
: : : : :nearly 1 km in diameter completely tiling the Earth.
: : : : :
: : : : :Each satellite covers 10 degrees of latitude and 15 degrees of
: : : : :longitude. At the equator this translates to a footprint on the
: : : : :ground that's 1,667 km tall by 1,111 km wide - containing 2,851,196
: : : : :hexagons.
: : : : :
: : : : :Each cell operates using a variant of IEEE 802.11y-2008 protocol
: : : : perating at 4400 Mhz to 5000 Mhz band as well as two other bands
: : : : 3400 Mhz to 4200 Mhz and 2700 Mhz to 2900 Mhz)
: : : : :
: : : : :Each cell supports 20 channels at 55 Mbit/sec rate simultaneously for
: : : : :each band a total of 60 simultaneous signals. Time domain multiplexing
: : : : :allows further allocation of the signal space in each band to provide
: : : : :a seamless telecom capability.
: : : : :
: : : : :This system not only provides a global wifi capability but also global
: : : : :voice over IP capability, a global navigation capability, and global
: : : : :machine control and sensing capability. That translates to virtual
: : : : :tourism as well as virtual work - via telerobotics. So, the virtual
: : : : :world merges seamlessly with real world actuators allowing people to
: : : : :live anywhere and work anywhere else. In this way the USA may bring
: : : : :back the factories and farms it has lost, while making use of low wage
: : : : :labor overseas - without the need of laborers going to the time
: : : : :trouble and cost of moving to the USA to provide their labors.
: : : : :
: : : :
: : : : You have no satellites. You have no network. You have no cells.
: : : :
: : : : Fictional.
: : : :
: : : :
: : : :A fictional device is a literary pretense created to advance a plot.
: : : :
: : :
: : : That's certainly one definition, although a deliberately narrow one.
: : : However, even THAT seems to fit your usual output. A pretense created
: : : to advance a plot...
: : :
: : : :
: : : :You have confused the adjective 'fictional' with the fact that I have
: : : lanned, a system that is designed in detail, intended to provide real
: : : :services, organized, for profit and scheduled for delivery. My
: : : :network is based upon actual, physical, factural, tangible, genuine,
: : : riginal, authentic, bona-fide, valid, true, and unquestionable
: : : :reality offered here ina true unfeigned, frank, heartfelt, unaffected,
: : : :truthful, honest and sincere way.
: : : :
: : : :In short the very opposite of fictional.
: : : :
: : :
: : : No satellites. No network. No cells.
: : :
: : :Not yet.
: : :
: :
: : Get back to us when you do.
: :
: :I am free to post and say whatever I like.
: :
:
: Of course you are. And I am free to call it what it is. Fictional.
:
:And I am free to point out that you are misusing the term fictional.
:

Yes, you're free to emit any lie you care to.

I don't lie.


:
:Fictional means a made up story, a falsehood, used as a pretense to
:advance some sort of drama. *
:

Precisely.

I'm glad we agree. Please quit misusing the term in connection with
what I've written here about space communications systems I've
designed.

:
:
: :
: :
: : :
: : : Fictional.
: : :
: : :Not at all.
: : :
: :
: : Most assuredly.
: :
: :Not really. Your conclusion is based on fuzzy thinking.
: :
:
: Yet you're the one talking as if things that don't exist are a working
: system.
:
:You are the one that refuses to see that a system that is based on
:reality is a system even before its built and using the fact that a
:system must be designed before its built to wrongly conclude its a
:falsehood. *Its as if you're saying a thing must be built well before
:it is even designed - which is an impossibility. *Things must be
:designed and thought through, procedures and costs analyzed, before
:they get built. *This is what I have done and what you refuse to
:acknowledge with your stupid word games.
:

So the fact that novels include many things that are 'based on
reality' to a greater extent than anything you've put forward means
that there are no fictional novels?

Not at all. One can say something that's perfectly possible and based
in reality and which can still be a fiction - the train was late - is
a fiction when in fact it wasn't late at all. The fact that the
train was not late, but a character said so to advance the plot makes
it a fiction. This is only one of several usages of the term - and
one that seems best suited to address the confusion you've related
here.

I used the term to describe the superlaser used in Star Wars as the
basis of the Death Star that destroyed planets as fictional device.
Again, this device not only does not exist, it cannot exist and cannot
work as described. It is a fiction a fantasy designed solely to
advance the plot. I recall talking with Gene Roddenberry about his
decision to use warp drive in his Star Trek series. Originally he
wanted to make the show as realistic as possible. He wanted to make a
'Wagon Train for the Stars' - building on the rising popularity and
interest at the time of space travel. Wagon Train was the most
popular show on television at the time. Aliens would substitute for
Indians, and so forth.

He first pitched the idea to CBS - they didn't pick up the show, but
created their own version Lost in Space. Before he wrote his first
screenplay he researched the topic of star travel he realized that a
realistic treatment of star travel would involve large multi-
generation ships and long time periods. This wasn't suitable for the
type of show he was planning. So, he created a fictional device to
advance the plot along the lines he wanted - the warp drive. He did
the same thing with other devices. Since it cost a lot of money to
build models and shoot landing and take off sequences of landing ships
as planets were visited - and it seemed unrealistic to him to think a
large ship would routinely land and take off from different worlds -
so another fictional device was created to advance the plot without
all those difficulties - the transporter.

Now contrast this with my invention of the computer based cash
register.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/21646352/Mook-POS-Patent

An article appeared about me in the local press back in the day which
described what I did at the time - connecting instruments to computers
to reduce transcription errors and ease data processing costs. I was
approached by a number of retailers in my town asking me if I could
connect a cash register to a computer? Since they had many of the
same issues. Bob Evans, Les Wexner, Dave Thomas, all had issues with
handling data from a large number orf retail establishments. At Bob
Evans they wanted to get orders back to the kitchen efficiently, at
Wendy's they wanted to speed up and improve drive-through operation at
the Limited they wanted to maintain fresh inventory. Here these
problems didn't derive from a plot or a story - they derived from real
world operations. The sought a solution based in reality and one that
would be implemented. At Wendy's we equipped the workers with
headphones and microphones, and put a screen at drive-through. At Bob
Evans, we installed waitron terminals and connected them to displays
in the kitchens. At the Limited we combined rate of sales from
several stores through a network and from that set pricing and re-
ordering. (Store 1 sells a red dress and a green dress; Store 2 sells
a red dress and a blue dress; Store 3 sells a red dress and a yellow
dress. No one knows the brown dresses are dogs, and the red dresses
are hot. Combine the data, increase the price on the red dresses and
reorder them, lower the price on the brown dresses and cancel orders
for them - do that and triple your profits of your chain)

Now all of this takes careful analysis and planning, thought and
creativity - all soundly based in reality from beginning to end. It
may take years to gather the relevant data, and execute on it.
Throughout all of this it would be pernicious to call the efforts
fictional - and as bad as shouting fire in a crowded theater.

Interesting (if less than sane) viewpoint...

Not at all - you obviously have never invented a new product or
brought it successfully to market. I have.

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
*only stupid."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine

On Feb 28, 4:44*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:

:On Feb 27, 7:57 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: William Mook wrote:
:
: :On Feb 26, 4:28 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : William Mook wrote:
: :
: : :On Feb 26, 3:12 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : William Mook wrote:
: : :
: : : :On Feb 25, 10:26 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : : William Mook wrote:
: : : :
: : : : :On Feb 25, 12:01 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : : : William Mook wrote:
: : : : :
: : : : : :
: : : : : :Yes, unlimited bandwidth. Many providers advertise unlimited
: : : : : :bandwidth. Since my system provides more bandwidth for everyone than
: : : : : :anyone else can provide, I can advertise unlimited bandwidth.
: : : : : :
: : : : :
: : : : : No, your system does not provide unlimited bandwidth.
: : : : :
: : : : : YOU DON'T HAVE A SYSTEM.
: : : : :
: : : : :Yes I do.
: : : : :
: : : : :
: : : : : Fiction.
: : : : :
: : : : :Not at all.
: : : : :
: : : : :An open optical backbone on orbit supports a network of 864
: : : : :satellites. Each satellite operates as an optical router. Each
: : : : :satellite communicates with six nearest neighbors at full duplex.
: : : : :Each channel supports 33.5 million channels each at 55 Mbit/sec. In
: : : : :this way, each router handles 200 million channels at 55 MBit/sec
: : : : :each. Theoretical capabilities are 173.8 billion channels of 55 MBit/
: : : : :sec each - system limitations reduce this to a little more than 50
: : : : :billion channels at 55 MBit/sec each over the entire globe.
: : : : :
: : : : :Each satellite is equipped with a 120 m diameter phased array antenna
: : : : :that beams stationary doppler corrected cells on the surface of the
: : : : :Earth, dynamically forming an array of 784,135,209 hexagons each
: : : : :nearly 1 km in diameter completely tiling the Earth.
: : : : :
: : : : :Each satellite covers 10 degrees of latitude and 15 degrees of
: : : : :longitude. At the equator this translates to a footprint on the
: : : : :ground that's 1,667 km tall by 1,111 km wide - containing 2,851,196
: : : : :hexagons.
: : : : :
: : : : :Each cell operates using a variant of IEEE 802.11y-2008 protocol
: : : : perating at 4400 Mhz to 5000 Mhz band as well as two other bands
: : : : 3400 Mhz to 4200 Mhz and 2700 Mhz to 2900 Mhz)
: : : : :
: : : : :Each cell supports 20 channels at 55 Mbit/sec rate simultaneously for
: : : : :each band a total of 60 simultaneous signals. Time domain multiplexing
: : : : :allows further allocation of the signal space in each band to provide
: : : : :a seamless telecom capability.
: : : : :
: : : : :This system not only provides a global wifi capability but also global
: : : : :voice over IP capability, a global navigation capability, and global
: : : : :machine control and sensing capability. That translates to virtual
: : : : :tourism as well as virtual work - via telerobotics. So, the virtual
: : : : :world merges seamlessly with real world actuators allowing people to
: : : : :live anywhere and work anywhere else. In this way the USA may bring
: : : : :back the factories and farms it has lost, while making use of low wage
: : : : :labor overseas - without the need of laborers going to the time
: : : : :trouble and cost of moving to the USA to provide their labors.
: : : : :
: : : :
: : : : You have no satellites. You have no network. You have no cells.
: : : :
: : : : Fictional.
: : : :
: : : :
: : : :A fictional device is a literary pretense created to advance a plot.
: : : :
: : :
: : : That's certainly one definition, although a deliberately narrow one.
: : : However, even THAT seems to fit your usual output. A pretense created
: : : to advance a plot...
: : :
: : : :
: : : :You have confused the adjective 'fictional' with the fact that I have
: : : lanned, a system that is designed in detail, intended to provide real
: : : :services, organized, for profit and scheduled for delivery. My
: : : :network is based upon actual, physical, factural, tangible, genuine,
: : : riginal, authentic, bona-fide, valid, true, and unquestionable
: : : :reality offered here ina true unfeigned, frank, heartfelt, unaffected,
: : : :truthful, honest and sincere way.
: : : :
: : : :In short the very opposite of fictional.
: : : :
: : :
: : : No satellites. No network. No cells.
: : :
: : :Not yet.
: : :
: :
: : Get back to us when you do.
: :
: :I will, and I will talk when I wish online about what I'm doing and
: :what I plan to do.
: :
:
: Then you should grant others the same 'right' you insist on to talk
: when they wish to deride your fantasies.
:
: :
: : :
: : : Fictional.
: : :
: : :Not at all.
: : :
: :
: : Most assuredly.
: :
: :Most assuredly not fictional. Fictional means made-up pretense to
: :advance some sort of drama.
: :
:
: Exactly.
:
:Then you agree that you are misusing the term when applying it to what
:I've described here - since what I've described here, using petabit
pen optical laser beams, and millimeter phased array uplink downlink
:are based in reality - with details computed from the results of
:laboratory experiment, while fantasy and fiction cares not for such
:things.
:

I agree to no such thing. *

Then you are wrong.

In fact, quite the opposite.

Definitely wrong.

*YOU set the
definition

No I didn't. It came from Merrian Webster.

and I agree that even your limited definition of
'fictional' applies to your output.

Then you don't get it. You're wrong a fiction is a lie something not
real - decidedly so - told to advance a story or some fantasy. This
is distinctly different than a plan based soundly in reality. Your
intent here is to confuse fantasy with plan and thereby undermine the
plan I have proposed by calling it fantasy when it in fact is not
fantasy at all.

:
:
: :
: :Factual means based in reality. I have
: :described the operation of a system of satellites to create a global
: :communications network based on real results of research. You insist
: :in denigrating what I've said by wrongly calling it fictional merely
: :because the satellite are not yet operational.
: :
:
: And not yet built
:
:Are you saying that something can be built before it is designed?
:That is a ludicrous requirement.
:

I'm saying that all you've got so far is a bucket full of handwavium.

I have far more than that.

:
: and not yet designed
:
:I have created, fashioned, planned, devised, contrived, concieved, a
:satellite network that is fully capable of being constructed and
:executed as planned. *I have planned this for a purpose and intention
:and devised it to fulfill a specific function and made drawings and
:sketches of important details and concieved of a plan to carry out the
:construction of this plan.
:
:This is the very definition of design.
:

Hogwash. *

Your assertions are definitely hogwash.

You've not done what you claim

Cite?

and even if you had

hahaha - see? Who's waving their hands Freddie? YOU!


that is
NOT "the very definition of design" in the real world.

Yes it is.

:
: and not yet funded and
: supported only by handwaving.
:
:I have spent a considerable portion of my assets on this project. *So,
:it is funded as much as is needed right now. *More funding will be
:made available as appropriate.
:

Good luck with that...

Yeah, I feel the love Freddie.

: :
: :You are engaging in spreading a false impression that such a network
: :is factually impossible - which as you point out below - is evil.
: :
:
: You're lying again, Mookie...
:
:No I'm not, you are..
:

No I'm not, you are..

Riight - haha -

yawn

Avoidance reaction again?

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
*only stupid."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine

On Feb 28, 4:47*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:

:On Feb 27, 8:02 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: William Mook wrote:
:
: :On Feb 27, 1:32 am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : William Mook wrote:
: :
: : :On Feb 26, 4:28 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : William Mook wrote:
: : :
: : : :On Feb 26, 3:12 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : : William Mook wrote:
: : : :
: : : : :On Feb 25, 10:26 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : : : William Mook wrote:
: : : : :
: : : : : :On Feb 25, 12:01 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : : : : William Mook wrote:
: : : : : :
: : : : : : :
: : : : : : :Yes, unlimited bandwidth. Many providers advertise unlimited
: : : : : : :bandwidth. Since my system provides more bandwidth for everyone than
: : : : : : :anyone else can provide, I can advertise unlimited bandwidth.
: : : : : : :
: : : : : :
: : : : : : No, your system does not provide unlimited bandwidth.
: : : : : :
: : : : : : YOU DON'T HAVE A SYSTEM.
: : : : : :
: : : : : :Yes I do.
: : : : : :
: : : : : :
: : : : : : Fiction.
: : : : : :
: : : : : :Not at all.
: : : : : :
: : : : : :An open optical backbone on orbit supports a network of 864
: : : : : :satellites. Each satellite operates as an optical router. Each
: : : : : :satellite communicates with six nearest neighbors at full duplex.
: : : : : :Each channel supports 33.5 million channels each at 55 Mbit/sec. In
: : : : : :this way, each router handles 200 million channels at 55 MBit/sec
: : : : : :each. Theoretical capabilities are 173.8 billion channels of 55 MBit/
: : : : : :sec each - system limitations reduce this to a little more than 50
: : : : : :billion channels at 55 MBit/sec each over the entire globe.
: : : : : :
: : : : : :Each satellite is equipped with a 120 m diameter phased array antenna
: : : : : :that beams stationary doppler corrected cells on the surface of the
: : : : : :Earth, dynamically forming an array of 784,135,209 hexagons each
: : : : : :nearly 1 km in diameter completely tiling the Earth.
: : : : : :
: : : : : :Each satellite covers 10 degrees of latitude and 15 degrees of
: : : : : :longitude. At the equator this translates to a footprint on the
: : : : : :ground that's 1,667 km tall by 1,111 km wide - containing 2,851,196
: : : : : :hexagons.
: : : : : :
: : : : : :Each cell operates using a variant of IEEE 802.11y-2008 protocol
: : : : : perating at 4400 Mhz to 5000 Mhz band as well as two other bands
: : : : : 3400 Mhz to 4200 Mhz and 2700 Mhz to 2900 Mhz)
: : : : : :
: : : : : :Each cell supports 20 channels at 55 Mbit/sec rate simultaneously for
: : : : : :each band a total of 60 simultaneous signals. Time domain multiplexing
: : : : : :allows further allocation of the signal space in each band to provide
: : : : : :a seamless telecom capability.
: : : : : :
: : : : : :This system not only provides a global wifi capability but also global
: : : : : :voice over IP capability, a global navigation capability, and global
: : : : : :machine control and sensing capability. That translates to virtual
: : : : : :tourism as well as virtual work - via telerobotics. So, the virtual
: : : : : :world merges seamlessly with real world actuators allowing people to
: : : : : :live anywhere and work anywhere else. In this way the USA may bring
: : : : : :back the factories and farms it has lost, while making use of low wage
: : : : : :labor overseas - without the need of laborers going to the time
: : : : : :trouble and cost of moving to the USA to provide their labors.
: : : : : :
: : : : :
: : : : : You have no satellites. You have no network. You have no cells.
: : : : :
: : : : : Fictional.
: : : : :
: : : : :
: : : : :A fictional device is a literary pretense created to advance a plot.
: : : : :
: : : :
: : : : That's certainly one definition, although a deliberately narrow one.
: : : : However, even THAT seems to fit your usual output. A pretense created
: : : : to advance a plot...
: : : :
: : : : :
: : : : :You have confused the adjective 'fictional' with the fact that I have
: : : : lanned, a system that is designed in detail, intended to provide real
: : : : :services, organized, for profit and scheduled for delivery. My
: : : : :network is based upon actual, physical, factural, tangible, genuine,
: : : : riginal, authentic, bona-fide, valid, true, and unquestionable
: : : : :reality offered here ina true unfeigned, frank, heartfelt, unaffected,
: : : : :truthful, honest and sincere way.
: : : : :
: : : : :In short the very opposite of fictional.
: : : : :
: : : :
: : : : No satellites. No network. No cells.
: : : :
: : : :Not yet.
: : : :
: : :
: : : Get back to us when you do.
: : :
: : :I am free to post and say whatever I like.
: : :
: :
: : Of course you are. And I am free to call it what it is. Fictional.
: :
: :And I am free to point out that you are misusing the term fictional.
: :
:
: Yes, you're free to emit any lie you care to.
:
:I don't lie.
:

That's a lie, since you lie when you claim I'm misusing the definition
of fictional.

:
:
: :
: :Fictional means a made up story, a falsehood, used as a pretense to
: :advance some sort of drama.
: :
:
: Precisely.
:
:I'm glad we agree. *Please quit misusing the term in connection with
:what I've written here about space communications systems I've
:designed.
:

I'm not misusing it.

:
:
: :
: :
: : :
: : :
: : : :
: : : : Fictional.
: : : :
: : : :Not at all.
: : : :
: : :
: : : Most assuredly.
: : :
: : :Not really. Your conclusion is based on fuzzy thinking.
: : :
: :
: : Yet you're the one talking as if things that don't exist are a working
: : system.
: :
: :You are the one that refuses to see that a system that is based on
: :reality is a system even before its built and using the fact that a
: :system must be designed before its built to wrongly conclude its a
: :falsehood. Its as if you're saying a thing must be built well before
: :it is even designed - which is an impossibility. Things must be
: :designed and thought through, procedures and costs analyzed, before
: :they get built. This is what I have done and what you refuse to
: :acknowledge with your stupid word games.
: :
:
: So the fact that novels include many things that are 'based on
: reality' to a greater extent than anything you've put forward means
: that there are no fictional novels?
:
:
:Not at all. *One can say something that's perfectly possible and based
:in reality and which can still be a fiction - the train was late - is
:a fiction when in fact it wasn't late at all. * The fact that the
:train was not late, but a character said so to advance the plot makes
:it a fiction. * This is only one of several usages of the term - and
ne that seems best suited to address the confusion you've related
:here.
:

There's no confusion.

Not with me - you on the other hand are profoundly confused.

*Even you get it when it comes to anyone but
you. *What you're putting forward is FICTIONAL.

Nope - not in the least.

snip handwavium shucking and jiving

Since when is handwavium a word Freddie? You're making **** up and
calling me crazy. Idiot.

--
"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the
*soul with evil."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Socrates

By this definition you're the evil doer dude. get a freaking life and
leave me the **** alone.