How silly to think you cannot formulate a scientific study with this data. Here's a simple one for this discussion. Hypothesis: Detected 80M FT8 signals from antenna X at 10pm are greater in number than 80M FT8 signals at noon in October. Null hypothesis: Detected 80M FT8 signals from antenna X at 10pm are not greater in number than 80M FT8 at noon in October. Experimental design: Count FT8 80M detected signals from Antenna X at 10pm and noon every day through October. Analysis: T-test demonstrates probability of less than 5% (p<0.05) that the number of FT8 80M signals detected at 10pm compared to noon is by random chance. Conclusion: If p<0.05, then the null hypothesis is disproved. Voila! Scientific experiment with FT8! Mindy
Yes. It is silly. A posteriori 'experiments' are not science. They are outcomes biased by selection effects. You cannot design an 'experiment' which favors a specific hypothesis based on knowing the data beforehand. Experiments must be blind. And they must have a control. 'Observations' are valid but then must succumb to Occam's Razor, and when possible require actual experiments as follow ups. Antennas and ionospheric conditions are testable EXPERIMENTS, and are far beyond any 'observation' stage. One cannot latch onto an explanation for an OBSERVATION when the most likely and simple --Occam's Razor-- explanation is couched in ambiguity from numerous variables. IOW the most likely explanation is no explanation. The 'experiment' is unbounded. I am not going to go into this further. Ham radio operators have the ability to tap into a wealth of scientific experience rather than assume science is made by what one believes. Science is not a matter of opinion or 'how one feels'. It is not a random puttering designed as video eye candy with a jaw dropping title. The fact that we have reduced the possibility of 'doing' science to the level of a hillbilly swimming pool is an insult to the many here who are more than willing to assist with helpful knowledge on how to proceed. The OP does not ASK about how to take an approach and rigorously test. Count me as one of those who now just ignore the nonsense rather than one who is willing to help. The equipment and data gathering are possible. The scientific method is absent. Don't blame the tools. Join Hamsci to learn what can be done, for example. Good luck.
They have plenty data, FT8 running 24h on several thousand stations worldwide, but taking out some to exemplify and/or corroborate couldn't be anything else than mere statistics. Obviously Radio Science is much more than that. Oliver
@W1YW I think you are the one presuppossing the answer to my very simple experiment. What exactly is the evidence you have that confirms FT8 signals detected at 10pm from antenna X (pick one) are greater in quantity than FT8 signals detected at noon for the month of October? You must believe or feel you know the answer! Mindy
Heaven forbid you extend the courtesy of using names....nice. Your response: Clear evidence that this issue, to you, is based on 'how you feel'. Sorry Mindy, science is not a question posed to Spock in movie 3...
Well, Chip is an awarded Antenna Scientist that has modern patents on new antenna designs that are advancing our Space Satellites. He also made himself invisible and got a patent for that. However "sometimes" he can come off "Rough" on the edges when discussing science like being at the Physics Cafeteria in MIT vs our Ham Radio Observation discussions.
Having fun experimenting is a great path in ham radio. But we have to be careful how we conduct ourselves. Why? Because Part 97 explicitly points out we exist, in part, to 'enhance the radio art'. That means we all have an obligation to either see how the 'radio art' works, or ask the vast pool of knowledgable fellow hams their feedback. And that is the context of my comments. 73 Chip W1YW
Sometimes! Especially on 160M. Or the occasional sporadic-e opening on 10M. If I hear a DX station that briefly comes in from South America or wherever on 10M I'm not going to have any qualms about increase power level until he can hear me(or he can hear my computer as you snarky types are going to say) as well. Sometimes that means 50W sometimes that means 850W.
KM9G does a great job overall with his videos (and you can see my prior comments on many of them). Obviously my opinions on this one have been negative. However--it would be improper to assume that I am discouraging KM9G from further, actual, experimenting: he, like all of us is licensed under the mission of Part 97. In fact, I am saying that when bounding into the 'enhance the radio art realm', we all have to be more aware of the standards that Part 97 holds us to. Those standards do not apply with things like interviews, rig reviews, and so on. Hence the comments. 73 Chip W1YW
850 watts on FT8? Copied from the Hinson user guide: Although FT8 is a weak signal mode, not a QRP mode per se, please keep your transmit power down. Be nice! Generally on HF, if a path is open, just a few watts will do. Put your amplifier on standby. Turn down the wick to QRP levels. Try it! If you don’t get any responses at all, try 10 watts, maybe 20 or 30. If you find that you routinely ‘need’ 100 watts or more, that is a strong hint that your feeder and antenna system are inefficient. 850 watts... you need a better antenna. Note to self...never buy any used equipment from N3RYB.
[QUOTE = "MW1CFN, post: 5985784, member: 506012"] La respuesta a tu pregunta también depende de esa variable absolutamente crítica que prácticamente nadie menciona: el entorno de la antena. Por ejemplo, para DX, y si trabaja en la playa, una antena vertical superará dramáticamente a cualquier antena de polarización horizontal / mixta, incluso cuando esa antena sea una Yagi 3-ele (o más). Sí, hice la investigación, al igual que muchos otros, y cualquier expedición DX informada a una isla / ubicación costera utilizará verticales. Para NVIS, bueno, sí, eso puede ser de interés en los EE. UU. Y para los operadores más antiguos de Europa en las bandas más bajas. Las verticales generalmente no son ideales para eso, por supuesto. [/ QUOTE] ysi esa antena vertical, la sumerges un poco en su base en agua salada de mar, aumente la calidad,
