Marconi sought exclusive contracts with licensees of his system, and there were other, different wireless telegraphy systems provided by competitors, especially in Germany. This led to disputes internationally.
The International Radiotelegraph Conference took place October 3 to November 3, 1906 in Berlin, Germany. Its proposals were endorsed by twenty-six countries and, if ratified, would take effect mid-1908. "The [proposed] treaty's most important provision governed wireless communication between the shore stations of contracting nations and vessels of any state, regardless of the wireless telegraphy system these ships employed. The United States insisted on ship-to-ship transmission. One clause that attracted far less attention provided for a bureau to oversee international wireless telegraphy [...]. This bureau [...] would be the first international regulatory body for broadcasting and telecommunication. This was the lasting legacy of the process that started because Marconi refused to allow his licensees to communicate with competing systems."
Marconi had used contracts and patents to establish a monopolistic position in Italy and Britain [...], but the rest of the world was wide open (Marconi 276-80).
I believe it is important to note that this was before the United Nations, or even the League of Nations, was formed.
Thursday, July 19, 2018
Tuesday, July 17, 2018
Marconi #4
By 1905 Marconi's sytem was pervasive. "On ships it was sometimes suggested that wireless had ruined 'the delights of complete repose which have hitherto ... been associated with the idea of being on a long ocean voyage,' but this notion was discounted by the benefits it brought for minimizing danger at sea. It was also good for business travelers who could for the first time remain in touch with their offices as they crossed the Atlantic. With cheap long-distance telegraphy within reach, emigration took on a less onerous meaning; it would be easier for members of disporic communities to keep in touch with their families back home. At the same time, ambitious corporations and military establishments everywhere vied for ways to use the new technology as an instrument for their grand designs. Indeed, the sentiments for and against Marconi's invention were not unlike those we hear today about the good and evil of the constant connectedness that comes with modern communication technology. There was full agreement, however, on the basic point: wireless communication had changed people's relationship with time, distance, and mobility" (Marconi 247-8).
Reginald Fessenden was "soon known in the United States as a sharp critic of Marconi's system. Fessenden realized that if Marconi's spark transmitter could be replaced by one that gave off a continuous wave, it would be possible to transmit voice by wireless. This was the technical breakthrough that enabled what would eventually be known as broadcasting, and for this reason, Fessenden is often claimed to be the inventor of radio. The spark-reliant intermittent wave transmission that Marconi pioneered could transmit dots and dashes but not speech and music (hence the distinction between "wireless telegraphy" and "broadcasting"). However, both methods relied on the medium of elecromagnetic waves, and Marconi was unquestionably the first to use the wave spectrum for communication" (250).
Dots and dashes, of course, refer to Morse code. By the way, Thomas Edison's first two children were nicknamed Dot and Dash (link). 😊
Reginald Fessenden was "soon known in the United States as a sharp critic of Marconi's system. Fessenden realized that if Marconi's spark transmitter could be replaced by one that gave off a continuous wave, it would be possible to transmit voice by wireless. This was the technical breakthrough that enabled what would eventually be known as broadcasting, and for this reason, Fessenden is often claimed to be the inventor of radio. The spark-reliant intermittent wave transmission that Marconi pioneered could transmit dots and dashes but not speech and music (hence the distinction between "wireless telegraphy" and "broadcasting"). However, both methods relied on the medium of elecromagnetic waves, and Marconi was unquestionably the first to use the wave spectrum for communication" (250).
Dots and dashes, of course, refer to Morse code. By the way, Thomas Edison's first two children were nicknamed Dot and Dash (link). 😊
Sunday, July 15, 2018
Marconi #3
G. Marconi secretly worked on a project he referred to as "the great thing" -- an attempt to signal across the Atlantic Ocean. Theoretical physicists said it couldn't be done because they claimed electromagnetic waves radiated in a straight line into space and would not follow the curvature of the earth. Holders of this view included the great French mathematician and physicist Henri Poincare, who understood the properties of Hertzian waves. But Marconi was convinced that the theoreticians were wrong; he believed electromagnetic waves would bend to follow the curvature of the earth (Marconi, 148).
In December, 1901 Marconi experimented with signals sent from a station in England across the Atlantic Ocean to a station in Newfoundland. At the receiving end he did indeed hear signals "serenely ignoring the curvature of the earth which so many doubters considered would be a fatal obstacle" (174).
Prompted to explain how Marconi had been able to receive a Hertzian wave signal nearly two thousand miles away, two theoretical physicists later hypothesized that there might exist an ionized layer in the upper atmosphere capable of reflecting or refracting radio waves of certain frequencies back to earth (176).
The biography doesn't address the varying range of radio wave lengths/frequencies. However, Wikipedia shows the whole range of radio waves (link1) and includes the following (link2).
"Lower frequency (between 30 and 3,000 kHz) vertically polarized radio waves can travel as surface waves following the contour of the Earth; this is called groundwave propagation."
"In this mode the radio wave propagates by interacting with the conductive surface of the Earth. The wave "clings" to the surface and thus follows the curvature of the Earth, so groundwaves can travel over mountains and beyond the horizon."
"Early long distance radio communication (wireless telegraphy) before the mid-1920s used low frequencies in the longwave bands and relied exclusively on ground-wave propagation. Frequencies above 3 MHz were regarded as useless and were given to hobbyists (radio amateurs). The discovery around 1920 of the ionospheric reflection or skywave mechanism made the medium wave and short wave frequencies useful for long distance communication and they were allocated to commercial and military users."
So it seems both Marconi and Poincare were partly correct and partly incorrect. Marconi's experiment used lower or medium frequency (longer or medium length) radio waves.
In December, 1901 Marconi experimented with signals sent from a station in England across the Atlantic Ocean to a station in Newfoundland. At the receiving end he did indeed hear signals "serenely ignoring the curvature of the earth which so many doubters considered would be a fatal obstacle" (174).
Prompted to explain how Marconi had been able to receive a Hertzian wave signal nearly two thousand miles away, two theoretical physicists later hypothesized that there might exist an ionized layer in the upper atmosphere capable of reflecting or refracting radio waves of certain frequencies back to earth (176).
The biography doesn't address the varying range of radio wave lengths/frequencies. However, Wikipedia shows the whole range of radio waves (link1) and includes the following (link2).
"Lower frequency (between 30 and 3,000 kHz) vertically polarized radio waves can travel as surface waves following the contour of the Earth; this is called groundwave propagation."
"In this mode the radio wave propagates by interacting with the conductive surface of the Earth. The wave "clings" to the surface and thus follows the curvature of the Earth, so groundwaves can travel over mountains and beyond the horizon."
"Early long distance radio communication (wireless telegraphy) before the mid-1920s used low frequencies in the longwave bands and relied exclusively on ground-wave propagation. Frequencies above 3 MHz were regarded as useless and were given to hobbyists (radio amateurs). The discovery around 1920 of the ionospheric reflection or skywave mechanism made the medium wave and short wave frequencies useful for long distance communication and they were allocated to commercial and military users."
So it seems both Marconi and Poincare were partly correct and partly incorrect. Marconi's experiment used lower or medium frequency (longer or medium length) radio waves.
Thursday, July 12, 2018
Marconi #2
Radio waves were first predicted by mathematical work done in 1867 by Scottish mathematical physicist James Clerk Maxwell. Maxwell noticed wavelike properties of light and similarities in electrical and magnetic observations. His mathematical theory, now called Maxwell's equations, described light waves, and waves of less or more length, as waves of electromagnetism that travel in space, radiated by a charged particle. In 1887, Heinrich Hertz demonstrated the reality of Maxwell's electromagnetic waves by experimentally generating radio waves in his laboratory, showing that they exhibited the same wave properties as light: standing waves, refraction, diffraction, and polarization. The waves were first called "Hertzian waves." The modern term "radio wave" replaced the original name around 1912. (Link).
"Hertz's breakthrough had attracted worldwide excitement when he published his results in 1888, but no one had yet found a practical application for the discovery" (Marconi 27). Hertz's interest in the waves was theoretical, and he died in 1894 (age 36). Marconi was strongly interested in their practicality and/or commercial use.
Besides developing the technology, much of his early career was devoted to obtaining patents in different countries and defending his patents from infringement. He sought exclusive contracts. A big part of advancing the technology was increasing the useful range of radio waves for communication. A big step was succeeding in transmitting radio waves over the Atlantic Ocean. That would allow wireless communication with ships very far from land and between continents. The greater part of practical interest in Marconi's wireless telegraphy was by governments for military use. A private sector exception was Lloyd's of London. "The first major firm to recognize the commercial potential of Marconi's invention was Lloyd's, the world's leading provider of marine insurance and, hence, dealer in shipping information" (88).
P.S. You might wonder how G. Marconi and wireless communication relate to a blog named Correspondence and Coherence. The relationships aren't strong, but there are some. 1. One definiens of correspondent is 'a journalist employed to provide news stories for newspapers or broadcast media.' Such correspondents nowadays often communicate using wireless technology with a cell phone or computer. 2. A coherer "was a primitive form of radio signal detector used in the first radio receivers during the wireless telegraphy era at the beginning of the 20th century" (Wikipedia). 😊
"Hertz's breakthrough had attracted worldwide excitement when he published his results in 1888, but no one had yet found a practical application for the discovery" (Marconi 27). Hertz's interest in the waves was theoretical, and he died in 1894 (age 36). Marconi was strongly interested in their practicality and/or commercial use.
Besides developing the technology, much of his early career was devoted to obtaining patents in different countries and defending his patents from infringement. He sought exclusive contracts. A big part of advancing the technology was increasing the useful range of radio waves for communication. A big step was succeeding in transmitting radio waves over the Atlantic Ocean. That would allow wireless communication with ships very far from land and between continents. The greater part of practical interest in Marconi's wireless telegraphy was by governments for military use. A private sector exception was Lloyd's of London. "The first major firm to recognize the commercial potential of Marconi's invention was Lloyd's, the world's leading provider of marine insurance and, hence, dealer in shipping information" (88).
P.S. You might wonder how G. Marconi and wireless communication relate to a blog named Correspondence and Coherence. The relationships aren't strong, but there are some. 1. One definiens of correspondent is 'a journalist employed to provide news stories for newspapers or broadcast media.' Such correspondents nowadays often communicate using wireless technology with a cell phone or computer. 2. A coherer "was a primitive form of radio signal detector used in the first radio receivers during the wireless telegraphy era at the beginning of the 20th century" (Wikipedia). 😊
Tuesday, July 10, 2018
Marconi #1
I'm reading Marconi by Mark Laboy (link). It's a biography of Guglielmo Marconi, who invented wireless communication. He is often credited with inventing the radio. His invention made the radio possible, but the claim is only partly true.
Pages 34-9 describe the technology of communication and its effects prior to Marconi's invention of wireless communication.
"Gutenburg's invention of movable type, in the mid-fifteenth century, was arguably the most important single development in communication technology of the past thousand years, in terms of its impact on the struggles for unhindered human expression and the corresponding attempts to exercise social and political control over it. Coupled with the spread of literacy, the printing press enabled the Protestant Revolution, among many other revolutions of modernity. But the thing about literacy, British cultural theorist Raymond Williams once wrote, is that you cannot teach someone to read the Bible without also, simultaneously and unintentionally, empowering them to read less holy tracts" (34).
"The "press" ... was by its very nature oppositional and mobilizational, encouraging and enfranchising individuals, and their publishers, to act more effectively as political citizens. Governments became more obsessed with a sense that they needed to control the press and, not surprisingly, the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, adopted in 1788, stated that Congress shall make no law interfering with freedom of the press. ... By the early nineteenth century, the press was a toll not only for democrats but for all sorts of propagandists as well" (35).
"[T]he introduction of the most important communication technology since the Gutenburg printing press [was] electrical wired telegraphy. By the 1830's, large commercial press interests as well as a new type of company, the national news agency, started to emerge. Press technology could operate as well on a very small scale as on a large one. Getting one's hands on a small printing press and using it to go into business or politics was not beyond the reach of entrepreneurs or activists. Telegraphy was another matter. Telegraphy was a complex technology, requiring huge capital investment; therefore access to it was regulated either by companies or governments, or, more typically, both. With the telegraph, for the first time, there was a separation of means and message, and the emergence of a belief that the tremendous power bestowed by ownership and control over the means of communication had to be offset by responsibilities.
Another new feature of telegraphy was that messages sent along telegraph lines did not recognize national borders. (Neither did carrier pigeons, which is one reason it took some time for telegraphy to catch on.) ...
The mail had to physically cross a border. Not so with the telegraph. ...
Wired telegraphy had some significant limitations, however. It did not reach everywhere, and often needed to be combined with another, usually more primitive, form of communication. To send someone a "telegram," or "wire," one needed, first, to get the message to a local office. Then, at the other end, someone had to deliver it by hand to the intended receiver. There were issues of security and confidentiality" (35-37).
Wired telegraphy's language was Morse code.
"After the first international underwater cable was laid between Dover, England, and Calais, France, in 1850, the idea of a transatlantic cable started to take shape. ...
The cable-based global communication infrastructure expanded ten-fold between 1870 and 1900, and double again in the next decade" (37-38).
Pages 34-9 describe the technology of communication and its effects prior to Marconi's invention of wireless communication.
"Gutenburg's invention of movable type, in the mid-fifteenth century, was arguably the most important single development in communication technology of the past thousand years, in terms of its impact on the struggles for unhindered human expression and the corresponding attempts to exercise social and political control over it. Coupled with the spread of literacy, the printing press enabled the Protestant Revolution, among many other revolutions of modernity. But the thing about literacy, British cultural theorist Raymond Williams once wrote, is that you cannot teach someone to read the Bible without also, simultaneously and unintentionally, empowering them to read less holy tracts" (34).
"The "press" ... was by its very nature oppositional and mobilizational, encouraging and enfranchising individuals, and their publishers, to act more effectively as political citizens. Governments became more obsessed with a sense that they needed to control the press and, not surprisingly, the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, adopted in 1788, stated that Congress shall make no law interfering with freedom of the press. ... By the early nineteenth century, the press was a toll not only for democrats but for all sorts of propagandists as well" (35).
"[T]he introduction of the most important communication technology since the Gutenburg printing press [was] electrical wired telegraphy. By the 1830's, large commercial press interests as well as a new type of company, the national news agency, started to emerge. Press technology could operate as well on a very small scale as on a large one. Getting one's hands on a small printing press and using it to go into business or politics was not beyond the reach of entrepreneurs or activists. Telegraphy was another matter. Telegraphy was a complex technology, requiring huge capital investment; therefore access to it was regulated either by companies or governments, or, more typically, both. With the telegraph, for the first time, there was a separation of means and message, and the emergence of a belief that the tremendous power bestowed by ownership and control over the means of communication had to be offset by responsibilities.
Another new feature of telegraphy was that messages sent along telegraph lines did not recognize national borders. (Neither did carrier pigeons, which is one reason it took some time for telegraphy to catch on.) ...
The mail had to physically cross a border. Not so with the telegraph. ...
Wired telegraphy had some significant limitations, however. It did not reach everywhere, and often needed to be combined with another, usually more primitive, form of communication. To send someone a "telegram," or "wire," one needed, first, to get the message to a local office. Then, at the other end, someone had to deliver it by hand to the intended receiver. There were issues of security and confidentiality" (35-37).
Wired telegraphy's language was Morse code.
"After the first international underwater cable was laid between Dover, England, and Calais, France, in 1850, the idea of a transatlantic cable started to take shape. ...
The cable-based global communication infrastructure expanded ten-fold between 1870 and 1900, and double again in the next decade" (37-38).
Saturday, July 7, 2018
Supreme Court rules against forced fees to unions
On June 27 the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that employees cannot be forced to pay "agency fees" (LA Times, CNN). "Agency fees" refers to money that employees who aren't union members pay to a union for things such as negotiating a contract, representing employees in grievances and arbitration, and lobbying activities to foster collective bargaining negotiations or secure advocates. The agency fee is also sometimes referred to as “fair share” and “agency shop fee.”
The agency fee differs from union dues. Employees who are not dues-paying members of the union pay this fee to the union for representing them (link). Agency fees are not supposed to be used for the union's political activities. Whether they actually are or not is very difficult to identify. Of course, these non-members do not get to vote in elections for union officers or vote on whether to strike or ratify a new contract. So the ruling gives more freedom and take-home pay to non-union employees.
Pro-union people didn't like the ruling, calling it things like "an attack on the working class." Of course, it wasn't an attack on the workers who will no longer be required to pay the fees. Union leaders and pro-union politicians didn't like it because it lessened their own power and money, but they refrained from saying that, probably not wanting to be accused of being selfish.
I confess that what I know about these fees, the government rules, and union activities is not a lot. For example, I don't know by how much "agency fees" are less than union dues, but part of the difference, maybe a lot more, goes to the union's political activities. This ruling may have been a little heavy-handed. Non-union members get some benefit -- hard to say how much -- from the union's collective bargaining efforts. Wages or benefits for unionized workers "spill over" to those for non-unionized workers. On the other hand, it doesn't bother me that the ruling will likely lessen the influence of union leaders. It won't bother me if it reduces their headcount and pay. Nearly all money donated for political campaigns by unions goes to Democrats (link). An article in Fortune magazine says 40% of union members vote Republican. So why does 99% of union advocacy money go to liberal groups? Some union leaders grant themselves huge pay and benefits. They have had too much power and influence for decades, much due to government rules favoring them. Like Justice Alito wrote in his majority opinion, union leaders have been very much responsible for huge budget problems in Illinois and other states and costly public employees pensions that are badly underfunded.
The agency fee differs from union dues. Employees who are not dues-paying members of the union pay this fee to the union for representing them (link). Agency fees are not supposed to be used for the union's political activities. Whether they actually are or not is very difficult to identify. Of course, these non-members do not get to vote in elections for union officers or vote on whether to strike or ratify a new contract. So the ruling gives more freedom and take-home pay to non-union employees.
Pro-union people didn't like the ruling, calling it things like "an attack on the working class." Of course, it wasn't an attack on the workers who will no longer be required to pay the fees. Union leaders and pro-union politicians didn't like it because it lessened their own power and money, but they refrained from saying that, probably not wanting to be accused of being selfish.
I confess that what I know about these fees, the government rules, and union activities is not a lot. For example, I don't know by how much "agency fees" are less than union dues, but part of the difference, maybe a lot more, goes to the union's political activities. This ruling may have been a little heavy-handed. Non-union members get some benefit -- hard to say how much -- from the union's collective bargaining efforts. Wages or benefits for unionized workers "spill over" to those for non-unionized workers. On the other hand, it doesn't bother me that the ruling will likely lessen the influence of union leaders. It won't bother me if it reduces their headcount and pay. Nearly all money donated for political campaigns by unions goes to Democrats (link). An article in Fortune magazine says 40% of union members vote Republican. So why does 99% of union advocacy money go to liberal groups? Some union leaders grant themselves huge pay and benefits. They have had too much power and influence for decades, much due to government rules favoring them. Like Justice Alito wrote in his majority opinion, union leaders have been very much responsible for huge budget problems in Illinois and other states and costly public employees pensions that are badly underfunded.
Monday, July 2, 2018
JARS 18.1
The Journal of Ayn Rand Studies, Volume 18, Number 1, July 2018 has been published. The Table of Contents is here. The article Egoism and Others is by yours truly.
Also of note is Robert Campbell's review of Harry Binswanger's book How We Know. I made several posts about How We Know on this blog during June-August, 2017. Campbell's review is more critical than mine, and our criticisms are about very different things.
Also of note is Robert Campbell's review of Harry Binswanger's book How We Know. I made several posts about How We Know on this blog during June-August, 2017. Campbell's review is more critical than mine, and our criticisms are about very different things.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)