What would you use?

I'd suggest that the root reason for choosing the name is irrelevant to
its continuing use. If what you say is correct it has obviously been
redefined by those that use it.. One might even call it evolution!

I have always thought it as "relative to". ie 0dBm=1mW for general RF
use. One can define and tune a radio's "levels" using one unit of
measure for all. eg;

+60dBm = 1kW
-117dBm = a pretty good FM receiver
-142dBm = about the limit for voice SSB/good preamp human ear use on 2M
-174dBm = thermal noise on earth at 1Hz bandwidth

These numbers then make path loss calculations predictions easier as
well. One just adds the gains (eg antenna) and subtracts the losses (eg
feedline and path) to get the RX level. The "margin" between that and
the RX level can then be used to make judgements about error rates over
the path.

Please come up with a viable alternative.

Cheers Bob VK2YQA


John Smith wrote:
The decibel is a rather ridiculous method to measure rf power. Indeed, the
decibel is designed on the human ear, of all things. While this can be
justified for audio work-its' justification in radio takes a "stretch of
sanity" (akin to "a leap of faith" in religion) to justify.