I have an internal client (a civil engineer) who is asking me to assist him in a data collection task.
He is suggesting that I use a low frequency carrier (and I mean sub KHz) to convey high frequency info (and I mean signals with lots of MHz level signal components).
I am trying to explain to him that it's usually done the other way around. Citing Shannon-Hartley on the signaling limitations of a channel is not as convincing an argument, since is seems to deal with binary transmission and error-free bit rates.
Anyone have any bright ideas as to how to convincingly communicate the problem here to my non-EE friend? Again, what he is suggesting is to carry MHz-range analog data over a 60-100 Hz carrier. I tried telling him the carrier is superfluous in his approach. In one brain and out the other, unfortunately. (He used to teach CE at a MIT, too. And believes the earth is 5000 years old.)
Any thoughts greatly appreciated.
He is suggesting that I use a low frequency carrier (and I mean sub KHz) to convey high frequency info (and I mean signals with lots of MHz level signal components).
I am trying to explain to him that it's usually done the other way around. Citing Shannon-Hartley on the signaling limitations of a channel is not as convincing an argument, since is seems to deal with binary transmission and error-free bit rates.
Anyone have any bright ideas as to how to convincingly communicate the problem here to my non-EE friend? Again, what he is suggesting is to carry MHz-range analog data over a 60-100 Hz carrier. I tried telling him the carrier is superfluous in his approach. In one brain and out the other, unfortunately. (He used to teach CE at a MIT, too. And believes the earth is 5000 years old.)
Any thoughts greatly appreciated.
