eric@scace.org said:
Frequencies around 15 Hz were common on early 20th century cables,
depending on the degree of success in compensating for the inherent
capacitance on a cable thousands of miles long surrounded by conductive
sea water.
Is the sea water relevant?
Does enough energy leak through the shield so that it matters? How well does
coax work at low frequencies?
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
Don't forget, seawater is the return path...
On Mar 17, 2017, at 18:04, Hal Murray hmurray@megapathdsl.net wrote:
eric@scace.org said:
Frequencies around 15 Hz were common on early 20th century cables,
depending on the degree of success in compensating for the inherent
capacitance on a cable thousands of miles long surrounded by conductive
sea water.
Is the sea water relevant?
Does enough energy leak through the shield so that it matters? How well does
coax work at low frequencies?
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
In message 20170317220437.4A4FF40605C@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net, Hal Murray writes:
eric@scace.org said:
Frequencies around 15 Hz were common on early 20th century cables,
depending on the degree of success in compensating for the inherent
capacitance on a cable thousands of miles long surrounded by conductive
sea water.
Is the sea water relevant?
Not in a coaxial cable, unless it gets into the cable.
Most telegraph cables where not coaxial and used the sea-water as return path.
Does enough energy leak through the shield so that it matters? How well does
coax work at low frequencies?
Coax is near perfect at low frequencies, but the lengths of these
cables introduced geophysics as a number of sources of noise.
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.