zoki85
- 1,198
- 231
There's no inverse square law problem with directed or focused EM waves energy beams. Problems are of other kinds.
Would you include the size and aiming of the antennas as a problem?zoki85 said:Problems are of other kinds.
Yes. Preceise beam pointing to the rectantenna site on the ground is of crucial importance in such transmission. Needless to say, it requires special technology and methods.Baluncore said:Would you include the size and aiming of the antennas as a problem?
You cannot beat the inverse square law, once the distance is great enough. Spreading loss is always with us and using directive antennae only increases the gain in a particular direction.zoki85 said:There's no inverse square law problem with directed or focused EM waves energy beams. Problems are of other kinds.
zoki85 said:Yes. Preceise beam pointing to the rectantenna site on the ground is of crucial importance in such transmission. Needless to say, it requires special technology and methods.
Point is that distance is close enough so that spreading loss can be made small enough.sophiecentaur said:Spreading loss is always with us and using directive antennae only increases the gain in a particular direction.
I am not familar with proposed use of metamaterials included anywhere in space between satellites and ground receiver.The fancy stuff with metamaterials presupposed you can stick the (equivalent of a) lens between transmitter and receiver and that presupposes that you have somewhere to mount it.
There are lot of papers published in per review journals about these technologies and their state of art. It's not magic, it can be done. Much bigger problems are very high price for installation, and question if the expense can be justifyed or not (personally, I don't so). OTOH, there are other very costly power energetic programs like ITER , which are much more important."Special technology and methods" smacks a bit too much of Magic, rather than Engineering.