i may not be an expert in the fields of radio communications, but how are we supposed to send a radio signal with these low frequencies to the moon? my findings suggest that we need a wavelength of 0.07-12 meters, which ranges from 25 MHz (25*10^6 Hz) to 4.3 GHz (4.3*10^9 Hz) other wavelengths would be obscured by our atmosphere. @codex-13 i asked about that in the IRC, but apparantly that wasnt it. i placed the response in the official (read: Dylans) document
"specific response in the AM Frequency Spectrum of KHz..." Can you elaborate on this? I'm still not sure exactly what it is you're after here.
We are using a satellite normally used for comms. So we are above the atmosphere, and the 'vanishing point' is a certain distance from the moon. The actual signal behaves erratically and is aberrant. Pieces of the wavelength appear on the surface across the northern hemisphere, but no orbital satellite has ever detected it. No record or hint of it exists in the spectrum except in bizarre spiraling patterns. To hear it on the ground you'd not only have to spin your dial perfectly with the change, and block out all other signals except the aberrant one. To make matters worse it is not locally consistent (All other radio waves continue indefinitely, this one ceases suddenly) so you have to keep moving with it to maintain signal.
The best analogy a more eccentric member of Q98A66 came up with is: Imagine you are taking a photo of a piece of paper, and sometimes a single pixel or very small piece of the film will have a letter or symbol on the page. If you take enough photos, you could combine all photos to show what all the letters and symbols mean on the page. The catch... there is no page, and the camera is moving/what it is picturing is moving. So even with all the imperfections in the photos that should all combine to form a message, it is impossible because without total knowledge of the original format we can't array them like a sentence on a page. To answer your question though, We need a value in Hertz to begin our broadcast at, so somewhere between 535 kHz and 1605 kHz. We then need a rate to adjust this initial value by. The vanishing point will then over time take our broadcast in perfect sequence. If we broadcast the wrong sequence then parts will be missing or out of sequence, and whomever is trying to receive the signal faces the picture taking dilemma. We are going to try and draw up some diagrams later to express what we are seeing, and what needs to happen with our signal. Don't worry, we were very confused for a very long time before we wrapped our heads around it, and we are probably wrong since our model doesn't account for the behavior. Short Answer: A value between 535 and 1605, and a value to incrementally raise the prior value.
In order to give you that, we need more data. Everything we've gotten from your team so far has been broadcast recordings, dates, times... No numbers as far as I am aware. I know you had a small amount of 'vanishing' in your tests but we have been given no data on when or at what point in the broadcast, or where in the frequency range you were using. Simply put we don't have enough information to do this right now.
If no other value is suggested, I say we go for 825 kHz and 20 as the other value. This is just a random guess but that's usually how I solve problems so, it might work!
i think this refers to a satelite orbiting the moon? it would explain why our signal would disappear at certain times. if we know the time it takes for the signal to disappear for the second time (t(0)=when the signal disappears, till t(end), signal is lost again), we know the rotationperiod for that satelite. i think that would give us insight for our calculations (if we dont forget to include the rotations from the observing object as well) the very simplified calculations for determining the average radius of this satellite orbiting the moon, would be: r(avarage radius satelite-centre of the moon)^1,5 = (T(period)*square root of {mass of the moon}) /2*pi
@Dawn Bloom it is suggested to start at a frequency of 600kHz, and increasing it with 10kHz rather than just bruteforcing it by randomly inserting any numbers, these numbers would give the highest probability of 'hitting the target' ascentes concluded this, when working on a music related thing, and noticed this method gave great results
In an hour we'll start trying different frequencies that are posted here, The sheer number of possibilities leaves an exact match unlikely, but you still play the lottery or you can't win at all.
@Dawn Bloom , am I correct in assuming the satellite we're looking for is not a satellite that would be listed in online directories?
We believe at this point that the object creating the phenomena we are observing is the Moon. If it was a satellite that had any kind of heat or other forms of radiation emitting from it, we would have observed it by now.
So, I'm getting confused now... I thought you meant that we were seeing signal losses because of the satellite passing between the moon and the target. Let me just list what I (think I) know. 1. The signal is bounced off the moon 2. If we 'scale the waveform across the AM in loops' (I have NO IDEA WHAT THIS MEANS) then signal loss is sometimes observed. 3. With this knowledge, we need to determine a frequency and integer value with which to scale. What is meant by 'scaling' the waveform or broadcast in 'loops'?
I agree with codex that we need some more data points in order to set the frequency and rate of change. I read about SSTV signals from the ISS. a receiver on earth needs to change frequency due to the relative motion of the ISS and the receiver. Think police sirens and doppler effect. I'm assuming that we are receiving the messages from a satellite orbiting the moon. There would be a loss of signal when the satellite is on the other side of the moon which would account for a periodic loss of signal. Also the signal frequency would change with the satellite's relative velocity. once the satellite comes into view it would be coming closer, then start moving farther away. There would also be some changes based on the moon's relative velocity to earth since the moon's orbit is elliptical. As mentioned above, if we know the time from signal start to signal loss we can make some assumptions about the orbital period. If we science the proverbial sh*t out of it, we could also make some assumptions about orbital shape. For example, a 47,000km orbital radius around the moon woudl have a 14 day period, which would account for the 7 days of uninterrupted signal that i believe was mentioned in a previous post by @Dawn Bloom . i used http://www.1728.org/kepler3a.htm with a lunar mass of 7.34E22kg in my calculations. Take my math with a grain of salt, I'm a doctor not a rocket scientist!
Zaelong brought up that the cipher for the original message seems pointless for this kind of broadcast, unless you were interested in transmitting the cipher as well. Otherwise they could just have sent the you are the most perfect world message in plaintext. The code alphabet forms a wheel, listing directions and colours along with the various moon phases, and it seems like moon phases might influence the broadcast, or at least coincide with something affecting its properties. If the changes in the waveform need to be looped, perhaps the code wheel is some way hints at how, as a form of return adress? The position of the beginning of the alphabet might be pointing to a starting requency, if that is the case? I don't know how you'd go about connecting colours or directions to specific frequencies, however. Dylan's wheel, for reference: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDJMMdgW_xlhEoIF7-7AQ3CkCjcq6Q6RWg7CjCSpI7w/edit#gid=0
switching from physics to erm metaphysics... here are 2 excerpts from the following page - http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/montauk/esp_filadelfia_7.htm "I began my research and found out that telepathic communication operated on principles that we strikingly similar to that of radio waves. I had discovered a wave that could be termed a “telepathic wave.” In some respects, it behaved like a radio wave. I sent out to get the characteristics of this “telepathic wave.” I studied their wave lengths and other pertinent facts. I determined that while a telepathic wave behaves like a radio wave, it isn’t exactly a radio wave. Although it propagates in a similar fashion to that of electromagnetic waves and possesses like properties, not all of these fit into normal wave functions." "Whenever a 410-420 MHz (Megahertz) cycle appeared on the air, they were jammed. When the 410-420 MHz cycle was off, the psychics would open back up after about twenty minutes. It was obvious that this signal was greatly impeding the ability of the psychics."
@LionOfComarre you make an interesting point. the colors in the code wheel are in order across the visible spectrum. it also links the colors to specific directions, and letters in the alphabet. The visible spectrum starts/ends in the west where violet crosses over to magenta. Of course the AM band and visible light are orders of magnitude apart, so I don't know how to use this information in our transmission. Unless it's just to show that frequency changes with direction.
That's outside the spectrum we are confined to in the observable effect. 535-1605 kHz or AM Band is what has the effect.
I think you mean paraphysics. As someone who studied philosophy for a year, seeing metaphysics used like that makes me wince.
@LionOfComarre Sorry, and thanks for the correction! @Dawn Bloom Oh yes, I guess I misread the frequencies in that quote. I do find it interesting that project montauk writing links telepathy, spacetime travel and oddly behaving radio waves. Could our signal be coming form earth in another timeline/dimension?
