Len:

At the end of this post is your text taken from the moderates hangout
(rec.radio.amateur.moderated) ...

One major invention you didn't mention, which is just about poised to
shake the world, is the invention of "cultured diamonds." Cultured
diamonds are absolutely real, indeed, they are more perfect and flawless
than any diamond which has ever been found in nature. Their purity is
the same as the absolutely pure silicon quartz crystal, silicon
semiconductor material, germanium, etc. which is used by the
electronics/semiconductor industry. This URL explains them rather well:

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.09/diamond.html

Why is this new development so important to the electronics world?

Well, present silicon technology is about at its limit. What now limits
major increases in computing speed is the temperature limitations of
silicon. Diamond far exceeds the capabilities of silicon and will allow
much faster computer speeds. Until very recently diamond pure enough
for use in semiconductors was not available, and even if it was, its'
use would be cost prohibitive.

It is interesting the russians actually developed the technology to
manufacture these cheap diamonds (present cost to make a one carat
diamond? Approx. $5.00 USD.) Just one more example of how the US is
lagging behind russia, china, australia, etc.

Yes, real diamonds are almost cheap enough to pave your driveway with;
and not only that, they are more perfect than anything found in nature.
No jeweler can tell the difference between a "cultured diamond" and
one found in nature. Only expensive testing can find the differences
(and only then because the "cultured diamond" is perfectly flawless.)
De Beers is poised to mount an ad campaign expounding the desirability
of nature (natural?) diamonds over these cultured diamonds. Their
motivations are only too transparent. At present, each "cultured
diamond" must be marked by laser to denote it is synthetic. However,
get a ten carat diamond and cut it into smaller gems and who's the
wiser? (without a high-tech lab.)

You might think this is a great boon to women and wedding rings (not to
mention the poor jerk who must put up the bucks for the purchase of
one.) But no, the news media seems to have clamped a pretty tight lid
on news about these diamonds. De Beers avoids any mention or comment on
these diamonds, if at all possible. Call any major diamond
wholesaler/retailer and they will most likely claim ignorance to their
existence. I found only one outlet on the east coast where one could
obtain them, they were priced, retail, about 1/3 the cost of diamonds
found in nature.

We live in a much more controlled world than anyone would care to
imagine or admit. I suspect the dollar controls our education and
knowledge ... (and information in general.)

At present, I only wonder if this is hampering/slowing their use in
electronics ... and what else is like this which I am unaware of ...

I am appalled we have let ourselves become enslaved by very wealthy
interests which now appears to affect even news media, mans developing
technologies and semiconductor manufacturing ...

JS


"Once upon a time" is approximately the time period prior to
World War II...the first 44 years of "radio" as a communications
medium. Trying to judge progress in a technology area involving
hobbyists solely by the information contained in hobbyist
publications is inaccurate, if not outright braggadocio by
hobbyists. "Radio" as a communications medium is now 111 years
old. The innovation, invention, and quantum-jumps in increases
of the communications (and radio) arts of the last 67 years have
totally eclipsed those early pioneering days done by everyone
involved with any RF emission activity. Some of the highlights:

1. "Discovery of 'shortwaves' enabling worldwide communications:
Already known by non-hobbyist technologists. Radio amateurs
were forced upwards in frequency use by politics, not
pioneering. It was fortuitous for amateurs, yes, but not
necessarily of their own and objected-to at the time by
amateurs.

2. SSB: Already used in wireline communications by long-distance
telephony providers in the 1920s; use on HF as "carrier" (multi-
channel) service by commercial and government groups in the
1930s.
Single-channel SSB given boost by USAF contracts for such in the
immediate-post-WWII time.

3. Quartz crystal control of frequency: Already known by
academics
and other physical standards workers; WWII needs resulted in
mass-
production of crystal units reaching a million units per month;
synthetic (man-made) quartz crystal growth perfected by industry
in the 1950s. Growth techniques helped the semiconductor
industry with similar growth of germanium and silicon ingots.

4. VHF FM voice: Pioneering already begun about 1938 by industry
to improve Public Safety mobile communications and adopted by
military for universal manpack and vehicular radio in WWII;
broadcasting use pioneered by Edwin Armstrong in 1930s for
broadcasting industry applications, including music.

5. Superheterodyne receivers: Invention of Edwin Armstrong in
1918, led to almost universal use of superheterodyne
architecture
in receivers to the present day in all radio services.

6. Quartz and mechanical-torsion-resonator narrow bandpass
filters:
Originally developed by telephony industry for "carrier" long-
distance wireline and multi-channel RF communications providers;
development of "modern filter theory" spurred by this same
application plus long-distance frequency-multiplexed microwave
radio relay (transcontinental service). Adoption to most radio
architectures possible by man-grown quartz crystal blanks (3).

7. "Channelized" (step-increment) frequency control of Rx, Tx:
First wide use in DoD/USAF contracts for post-WWII single-
channel SSB, followed shortly thereafter by air carrier and
general aviation radionavigation and radio communications.

8. Use of internal ("embedded") microprocessors for general
purpose control of function and frequency: Almost simultaneous
in both test equipment and various radio communications services
beginning about the mid-1970s. Such enabled reduced interior
space, number of total components by eliminating mechanical
couplings of controls. Adjunct advantage of providing displays
of controls settings and mathematical results of some functions
heretofore unavailable with older methods.

9. Digital Signal Processing (DSP): Probable first widespread use
for submarine and anti-submarine military use, typically SONAR
variations. Followed closely by applications to "music
synthesizers" and similar (PC sound cards) and consumer
electronics and instrumentation displays. This and item (8)
made possible by Large Scale Integration of solid-state
devices beginning their explosive growth in the mid-1970s.

The preceding items are just a short list of major innovations as
they apply to common amateur radio use of today. It does not begin
to cover major innovations in all electronics, including
applications
to medicine and architectural engineering nor the physical
standards
organizations worldwide.

Ham radio ceased to be forward
looking and innovative and has devolved into something more akin to
stamp collecting - interesting to practitioners, useless to the world at
large.

"Xxx," to paraphrase Hans Brakob, I would "throw that out with
great force."

The activity of amateur radio is basically a hobby, an activity
done primarily for personal enjoyment...worldwide, I might add.
It is a fascinating one, a technically-challenging one, one of
use in communicating with like-minded enthusiasts, local to
worldwide. Hobbies are FUN for their participants. There is
nothing at all "wrong" with having FUN doing anything, whether
stamp collecting, rebuilding classic cars, flying model aircraft
by radio control, or being advisors for Scouts.

Radio amateurs, by and large, are not into amateur radio for the
sake of being inventors, scientific researchers, manufacturers
of radio-electronics devices, or being emergency and disaster
volunteers. They CAN, of course, as can any citizen without an
amateur radio license.

I could cite an equally-long list of "post-Sputnik" innovations
that have appeared in amateur radio use and technology, done by
radio amateurs themselves. Some, if not most, are citizens of
other countries. However, the more widely-used innovations and
inventions has, from the beginning, come from academicians,
engineers and producers in the electronics industry, and
communications providers. The history of all that explosive
growth has been continually documented in hundreds of trade
journals, professional associations, and scientific journals.
It isn't exclusive to appearing in amateur radio interest
publications.

Ham radio will not grow until and unless it is seen to provide value
to the larger community. Once, it was considered to be a source of
competitive advantage to the economy by contributing to the
technological base (a post-Sputnik point of view).

Please feel free to document all those "advantages to the
economy." I see very few such cases of the last 111 years of
"radio." What I have seen are a number of claims for same
that very conveniently "sin by omission" [of incorrect
attribution to the overall world of radio and electronics]...
something that marketeers know by the simple acronym of "PR."

My guess is that the
FCC was willing to ignore the complaints of the ARRL and the old Morse
code cultists because they (the FCC) see it that way, as well.

I must disagree with that as well. Since the FCC must regulate
ALL United States civil radio RF emissions, they are chartered
to be aware and informed of almost everything in regards to
"radio." They DO that on a technical level, including having an
Office of Engineering and Technology for their own advisement.
The FCC is aware of nearly ALL radio use, not only in the USA
but worldwide (we are globally interconnected in many
communications ways). The FCC also asks for advice on use and
technology and, as chartered by law, input from ALL citizens.
Such "input" is made available to the public at large, freely.

Anyone can fault the FCC for some alleged political bias. That
is frequent and also many-sided. Such is normal in politics,
but it is not per se some "truth." The ARRL ("my" club) is
no more a paragon of truth than any membership organization
and the FCC is not bound to 'obey' the ARRL 'advice' than any
other special-interest group.

The FCC made a decision on a contentious subject in amateur
radio license examinations. The FCC has the final say on who
is licensed and who is not. The public comment period was long
and over 3,700 citizens commented. The FCC took about a year
to reach a decision on the matter, then made it law by legal
means. Let us accept that and go forward.

Len AF6AY