How to Beat a Speeding Ticket: A Guide for Motorists

[collinsmark]

pianola wooden fingers?

No, a finger in this context is not made of wood. 'Definitely more high tech than that.

Given your "pianola" guess, I can see you have done some research. But again, don't concentrate on her invention as she invented it. Recall the invention, as she co-designed it at the time, was comparatively basic and did not contain any fingers. Given decades of technological advancement, similar, related systems now might use fingers. Her original invention did not. Fingers are more technologically advanced than what could have been created in her day.

But because of the underlying communication principles of her idea, she is still associated with the things that use fingers. Let google be your friend. (Hint: start simple.)

 

[L4xord]

Going out on a limb here... Is it a person who constantly channel/frequency hops while using a citizens band radio...?

 

[Andre]

Or is it a "have quick" finger frequency hopping channel

 

[Jonathan Scott]

*[Quite easily as a matter of fact, with nothing more than the keywords already hinted at. (You might consider first trying to determine the name of that woman.)]

I already knew who the woman was and what her invention was about, so I thought that could put me ahead a bit, but I was a little surprised to spot that the image link contained her name!

Is this something to do with capacitors containing fingers that make them easily switchable?

 

[collinsmark]

Going out on a limb here... Is it a person who constantly channel/frequency hops while using a citizens band radio...?

Oh, my. Lol (I'm actually laughing out loud [I am]).

This woman's invention does involving "hopping" between different "frequencies." Yes! But not manually!

"Frequency hopping" is a type of "spread spectrum" communication. And yes, this woman's invention was the first frequency hopping device, and the spread spectrum system of any type. So she is associated with the invention of spread spectrum communication technology.

But frequency hopping is not the only type of spread spectrum system. There are others. And some of these others more readily implement fingers than do frequency hopping systems (that's where the "twist" comes in that I mentioned in post #66).

But all systems that use fingers are spread spectrum systems, and as such all systems which use fingers are associated with this woman even though they don't necessarily use frequency hopping. (Edit: and with this fact in mind, you don't really need to make the distinction when you google.)

You're not quite there yet though. I need a bit more regarding what a finger does, or at least what it is specifically part of.

 

[collinsmark]

Or is it a "have quick" finger frequency hopping channel

You're on the right track. Except in the link you provided, in the entire article there is a single use of the word finger, "...signal to interference signal power of each finger frequency hopping channel is the..." and I'm wondering if that use of finger was intentional or not. It might be a typo or editing mistake of some sort. Or more likely it could be a translation error.

Whatever the case, it doesn't explain what a finger actually is, or at least what it is part of. So, you're not quite there yet.

 

[collinsmark]

I already knew who the woman was and what her invention was about, so I thought that could put me ahead a bit, but I was a little surprised to spot that the image link contained her name!

Yes, finding her name shouldn't be too difficult, with that.

Is this something to do with capacitors containing fingers that make them easily switchable?

Sorry, there's nothing about it that involves capacitors in particular. (No more so than any electronic device anyway.)

 

[collinsmark]

And this is something to keep an eye out for, figuratively.

 

[Andre]

Got it but I'm overloaded a bit so I won't have time for a follow up.

 

[Danger]

I know the answer, Mark!
A "finger" is what I'm about to give you...

 

[flatmaster]

The Fourier transform of the signal will have a peak for each frequency. Each peak is a finger.

 

[collinsmark]

I know the answer, Mark!
A "finger" is what I'm about to give you...

The Fourier transform of the signal will have a peak for each frequency. Each peak is a finger.

Oooh, not quite, no. (But not a bad guess.) The operation of a fingers is even more complicated than even Fourier transforms, by themselves. Even systems that use fingers and use Fourier transforms as part of their operation, a finger is still more involved than simply a peak in the frequency response.

But here is general hint that I've been trying to subtly push (or maybe not so subtly): Even if you don't know about or understand the technology, google is really good at finding this sort of stuff for you. Look back at Post #66 and find that woman's name. Also, you know you are looking for something called a "finger." With those couple of pieces of information, do a google search. You might find your answer in the first few hits (maybe even the very first hit. ). Remember, this is the jargon game, so keep an eye out for a hit that contains technical jargon.

[Edit: well that method worked like a charm as of this morning, but now google hits seemed to have changed order. Try throwing in a "spread spectrum" or something, if nothing obvious comes up. You should be able to get to it that way.]

 

[flatmaster]

A receiver picks up not only the direct line-of-sight signal, but also reflections and echoes off of walls, furniture, and tea kettles. These reflections take a longer path and arrive after the line-of-sight signal. Each instance of the signal received is a finger. The fingers can be re-combined to make a stronger signal.

 

[collinsmark]

A receiver picks up not only the direct line-of-sight signal, but also reflections and echoes off of walls, furniture, and tea kettles. These reflections take a longer path and arrive after the line-of-sight signal. Each instance of the signal received is a finger. The fingers can be re-combined to make a stronger signal.

Oh, so close! So close indeed! 'Just a hair way!

As you mention, fingers *do* involve multipath components of a signal (multipath components being the echos, reflections, and the direct line of sight version of the signal), each finger is assigned to a different multipath component. But the "fingers" are not part of the signal itself (or multipath components themselves), rather fingers are part of the ... <== FILL IN BLANK HERE

 

[flatmaster]

Oh, so close! So close indeed! 'Just a hair way!

As you mention, fingers *do* involve multipath components of a signal (multipath components being the echos, reflections, and the direct line of sight version of the signal), each finger is assigned to a different multipath component. But the "fingers" are not part of the signal itself (or multipath components themselves), rather fingers are part of the ... <== FILL IN BLANK HERE

But the "fingers" are not part of the signal itself (or multipath components themselves), rather fingers are the parts of the receiver that take in each multi path component.

So in the following analogy, the ball is the multi-path component and the puppy catching the ball is the finger.

 

[collinsmark]

But the "fingers" are not part of the signal itself (or multipath components themselves), rather fingers are the parts of the receiver that take in each multi path component.

Bingo! flatmaster wins the round.

I would have also accepted any of these terms or a wide variation of them. A finger is:

• Part of a rake receiver (Notice in that link, down in the references section, Main Articles, History, there is a link to Hedy Lamarr. That's why as of this morning anyway, this link was the very first hit when googling "Hedy Lamarr finger".)
• A demodulating element.
• Part of something in a receiver that overcomes multipath fading.
• A despreader.
• A descrambler.
• A fancy doohickey thing that undoes the spreading.
• A correlator.
• Part of the receiver in a 3G cellphone.
• Something that demodulates a particular multipath component.
• A "sub-receiver" in a spread spectrum system.
• A really complicated doodad in a fancy spread spectrum receiver that uncomplicates the signal.

and maybe anything else that was close.

If you haven't guessed the woman in question is Hedy Lamarr.

Fingers, which are parts of a rake receiver were invented in 1956, but they are so complicated that it wasn't even practical to make them until the 1970s (and even then they weren't so practical).

But now if you have a 3G cellphone (such as CDMA, WCDMA phone [not GSM]), your phone contains fingers. If you are reading this thread online, while connected to the Internet by wireless LAN, it's possible that fingers are involved. And fingers or not, all of these things including Bluetooth and 4G cellular systems are loosely based in part on the invention by Hedy Lamar. (Again, some implementations of spread spectrum use fingers and some do not. But any system that does use fingers [per a rake receiver] is definitely spread spectrum.)

With that flatmaster, I hand it over to you.

 

[flatmaster]

Inspired by the original "green weenie", my word is...

"Dead Nuts"

Hint: Not at venereal disease

 

[flatmaster]

Hint: Has to do with measurement

 

[Danger]

Hint: Has to do with measurement

Where I come from, it means perfect as to measurement, proportions, aim, or any other subject requiring accuracy.

 

[flatmaster]

"Dead Nuts" can mean dead on, plumb, level, or exact, but it has a more specific meaning.

When making a precise series of measurements, it's important to "close the loop" to check for error. If you start at (0,0) on a cartesian grid, you should be able to take some path and return to (0,0)

If your real-world measurements of the path close the loop and return you to (0.00,0.00) then you're "dead nuts" and you know you measured well (or made two offsetting errors!).

The internet disagrees with me, but I was told that the extra zeros swinging around are the "dead nuts". Your turn Danger

 

[Danger]

Okay, here's a twist.
I'm going to recycle Andre's last one: "gate".
This time, though, it refers to something involved in my previous profession rather than his. I was a locksmith. Any of the things that he eliminated in his post are also not applicable to this one. It is very obscure, so I won't blame anyone for Googling rather than knowing it right off. (In fact, I don't even know whether or not Google can help.)

 

[flatmaster]

The gate is the array of pins in the tumbler. Every pin in the gate must line up to open the lock.

 

[flatmaster]

The suffix "-gate" is a generic term for a political scandal. The term originates with the Watergate scandal.

 

[Danger]

Nice tries, Flatmaster, but the first one doesn't exist and the second is not applicable.

I'm going to bed now, so don't expect any more replies in the immediate future.

edit: For the record, the array of pins is called the "code". For instance, if you tell me that you need a key for a 47946 code on a Schlage "C" keyway, I can make it for you without ever seeing the lock.

 

[Danger]

Really? Nobody?

 

[collinsmark]

Sigourney Weaver?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnJvsBbELvk

 

[Danger]

Sigourney Weaver?

No, but I love her so much that I'm tempted to give it to you.

Okay, I'll withdraw this question and give an easier one.
Let's get back to Andre's realm: the term is "George".

(A "gate" is the slot in the drive cam at the rear of the wheel pack in a dial-type combination lock, into which the fence falls in order to withdraw the bolt and open the door. I really didn't expect anyone to get it, since I seem to be the only locksmith in residence.)

 

[Danger]

Oh, come on now...
Anybody...?
Hint: Pilot says to co-pilot "Let George do it."

 

[flatmaster]

Otto pilot.

 

[Danger]

Otto pilot. View attachment 58434

Correct! (Although most require less inflation than the one in your photo. Oh, how I envied that little blue bastard...)

Take it away, son...

 

[flatmaster]

I learned this term just a month or two ago when it started to warm up here in Pennsylvania. The next word is...

"pole syrup"

Hint: Mind out of the gutter. It's not dirty.

 

[Danger]

It's not dirty.

Well, that pretty much rules out anything that I'd ever think of.

I have an idea, but I'll hold off. (Actually, stand by for a PM.)

edit: Since I was wrong, as ascertained by our PM's, I'll just lie back in the weeds and wait for a bit. This might turn out to be another instance of a regional term, since I've never heard of it in relation to what we discussed.

 

[Argentum Vulpes]

Would the people in Quebec be laughing at you for eating this on your breakfast? As far as I know it is a slang term for imitation maple syrup, as it most likely came from a telephone pole, as the joke goes.

 

[flatmaster]

Yep. It's fake maple syrup. I tapped my maple trees this year and came across this term in the process. Next word

 

[Argentum Vulpes]

I'm giving a series of words, if you know one you should know all, and be able to figure out context from each one.

Monitor World
Video Village
Dimmer Beach
The Pit