Hertz Hurts!

["Tom and Amanda Lang" <rustnrot@domain.elided>]

>Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 17:37:37 -0800
>From: "John Hofstetter" <hofs@domain.elided>
>Subject: Re: ihc-digest V6 #770
>
>So Eric,
>Why isn't 3600 Hz   3.6 kHz instead of 3.6 MHz ?
>If it is 3.6 Khz is that still in the RF range?
>All I know about radio, I learned from XERB after dark.
>John H.

3600 cps (cycles-per-second)=3600 Hz=3.6kHz
k=1000, m=1000000

Whether or not it an "RF" signal depends on whether it is an electromagnetic
wave or an electroacoustic wave.  It is possible to generate "RF" at 3.6kHz
but normally we consider this frequency in the electroacoustic "range"
There (at least there used to be) a VLF (Very Low Frequency) "RF" signal for
military communications at one time was at or below 18kHz.

Certainly, depending on the amplitude, 3.6 kHz RF could interact with a
radio circuit (probably the audio amplifier), and manifest itself as
electroacoustic "noise" in the speaker.  Also consider that there is
undoubtably harmonics of the 3.6kHz as well that can also interact (at 2x,
etc. of the 3.6 kHz) to create additional noise.


BTW, "cps" was abandoned 30+ years ago to honor Mr. Hertz (no, not the
rental car guy).  And, no I don't know exactly what he did, obviously
something in the area of electricity/electronics; in fact he may be
European.