Although Robomow blades are small (and spin very fast) they are an awful lot bigger than that. Mine doesn’t really like taking off more than 25mm at a time, small cut and frequent is better but not always possible in English weather and so sometimes it just has to cope with the longer stuff.
However, it’s audible quite a way away, though not nearly as far as a conventional mower.
Other people don’t seem to be pointing this out to your trollosity, but lots of the EM spectrum are already not permitted to the general public. Perhaps you just aren’t aware of this. If you think that’s wrong, try transmitting on any of the cellular phone bands. Or the marine and emergency VHF bands. Or the military bands. Unless you are somewhere very isolated indeed it won’t be too long before large men come along and explain the error of your ways to you.
Your attitude is basically that of somebody who thinks everybody should be able to piss in the swimming pool, because anybody who doesn’t like it should just avoid the yellow water.
6 Likes
Is that worse than having a small group of people who are allowed to piss in the water and tell the rest of us that the yellow water is for our own good?
This is about 2 ground based telescopes. No orbital anything will be effected and there’s no equivalency. When talking about the cost of the home, the inference is the cost of the home on the real estate market. The cost of creating the 2 ground based telescopes would be closer to construction cost and not at all related to marked value.
The reason I suggested an orbital radio telescope, is that it would be beyond the reach of certain terrestrial transmissions. Radiiotelescopes tend to be quite large and I’d imagine the cost of placing one in orbit would be, well “astronomical”.
If you placed it on earth, you’d still have to deal with radio interference from people who weren’t inclined to respect the needs of radioastronomers.
Now, then, what is so goddamn important about robot lawnmowers that they need to close off a line of scientific investigation and not use a godddamn notch filter?
2 Likes
Posted here because this topic lacks the required XKCD cartoon:
I can’t help but suspect that if Mr. Munroe were to redo this particular comic giving consideration to the incipient Roomba™ lawnmower, he would have added a copious amount of red to his usual palette of colors.
2 Likes
It’s more similar to a small group having their own urinal, and telling you that you can’t swim in it.
3 Likes
That’s not at all what would happen. The astronomers are fine with robot lawnmowers using that frequency. They are only wanting a concession on using it within or near the ~13K sq mile radio quiet zone and feel the offered concession of a written warning is insufficient. No ones radio telescope is in any danger of not working. But, from reading the comments here it seems most people are jumping to hyperbolic conclusions.
Go to the NRQZ and turn on a cell phone. In short order you will be stopped and forced to turn off the phone. Why? Because we are told that the frequencies used can interfere with sensitive radio telescopes located within the NRQZ. Yet cell phone manufacturers are not asked to change bands. There are no warnings in the manual about the NRQZ. Sales of cell phone near the NRQZ are not limited. The same holds true for CB and HAM radios, baby monitors, etc etc. Equal application and protection under the law should be a given.
1 Like
If you were paid minimal wage, how many notch filters could be bought for the time spent arguing against them?
…also, why does a bloody lawnmower need its own part of the spectrum? Why is 5 GHz ISM not enough for them?
1 Like
the IEEE article links to the filings, and counterfilings. One of the observatory’s submissions suggests that, after reconsideration, the notch filter probably would not solve the problem completely. Has something to do with how such things are designed.
1 Like
“iRobot’s RLMs can certainly operate over most of this country without interfering with radio astronomy operations.” - NRAO spokesperson
“The radius of interference from an iRobot beacon is 610 meters with perfect line of sight.” The only residences that come close to fitting that criteria, iRobot says, are those at North Liberty, Iowa, “which is a heavily forested site.” (1)
So folks in North Liberty, Iowa shouldn’t use the iRobot RLM… sounds reasonable to me.
The radiated powers for what counts as “interference” will be vastly different for a NRAO and for a crappy robot peddler. (Notice also that iRobot machines tend to be dumb and their potential is vastly underutilized; no wonder they need spectrum they could apparently quite easily do without.)
You are the veritable pigeon playing chess. The interference range listed is for the NRAO. But you go ahead and knock over the pieces and shit on the board so you can strut around like you’ve won.
Nobody so far ever mentioned why does iRobot want to claim such big chunk of spectrum. Why they cannot just leverage the new MIMO chipsets instead, or be clever in another way.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
1 Like
