Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: The Shapiro's experiment HOAX. A 1968 TIME article.
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 01:29:49 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <01fa749e0adf99339c033aa2ddadbe79@www.novabbs.com>
References: <db18709b6ba689b9c07245000ff1b094@www.novabbs.com> <53a754e33f8216df2e7882aa63ee8391@www.novabbs.com> <511c68d28f959e6fc1f6e64452fd415d@www.novabbs.com> <3343e090c2dbceee4f4b044a1107ea21@www.novabbs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3109739"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="OjDMvaaXMeeN/7kNOPQl+dWI+zbnIp3mGAHMVhZ2e/A";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
X-Rslight-Posting-User: 26080b4f8b9f153eb24ebbc1b47c4c36ee247939
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$LPgaqFJ.WIqDGsQXUzE.dOjigWYANBfsvYGm/WDkJD8ZBuPiUYUIK
Bytes: 3352
Lines: 76

New calculations (average) about the average received signal in the
Shapiro experiment, by using his preliminary presentation in 1968.

Some data collected from his first paper:

https://paulba.no/paper/Shapiro_1968.pdf

QUOTE:
**************************************************************
The remainder of this Letter is devoted to a more detailed discussion of
the data analysis and the novel experimental techniques required by the
echo signal being sometimes as small as 10^-21 W, i.e., about 10^27
times weaker than the transmitted signal power of 300 kW.
.......
How is the template determined? Since the planetary radius p is about a
factor of 10^8 larger than the wavelength L of the radar signal, we can
consider the planet to be composed of a great number of independent
elements, each large compared with L and small compared with p.
*************************************************************

Radar equation for ranging:


Pᵣ = Pᵗ G² σ λ²/[(4π)³ R⁴]


Pᵣ = 10E-21 W

Pᵗ = 300,000 W

λ = 0.0375 mt

G = 67 dBi = 1.15E+06 (34 mt Cassegrain antenna at 8 Ghz)

R (Earth - Mercury) = 2E+11 m

σ (Mercury's cross-section at 8 Ghz - Shapiro calculations).

INCOGNITO: σ used in calculations (avg.)

σ = Pᵣ [(4π)³ R⁴]/(Pᵗ G² λ²) = 7.6E+12 m²



SIGNAL TO NOISE AT RECEIVER:


S/N = Pᵣ/(k Ts BW L)

k: Boltzmann constant = 1.380649E-23 J/K

Ts: System temperature = 150 "K

BW: Bandwidth = 20,000 Hz

L: Losses in receiving system = 20 dB = 100

N: Noise at receiver input = 4.141947E-15 W


S/N = 2.438467E-07 = -66 dB


So, faintest signal is about 5,000,000 times BELOW NOISE AND YET IS
RECOVERED AND POST-PROCESSED? IN 1968, WHEN DIGITAL ENCODING WAS IN ITS
INFANCE?

IT SURE WAS A JOKE ON YOU ALL.

EVEN IN 2024, THE DECODING OF A HIGHLY CODIFIED SIGNAL (CDMA/SPREAD
SPECTRUM) WITH S/N = -40 dB is extraordinary, but 60 years ago (and with
a 32 bits pseudo-random BPSK signal) his team could use signals with an
SNR 100 times lower?

But they fixed everything with 1 year of post-processing on an IBM 360
(first generation, 80 bits words). Yes, they could add decimals like
crazy with 80 bits words, BUT.....COOKING WAS AT ITS PEAK.