Hi Jean-Paul, I was thinking more about other ways of modulating a signal, rather than something that would be picked up by an FFT. Going back to Armstrong etc. the most efficient modulation methods are those closest to random noise. What if the narrow band signal was a pilot signal for wideband transmission elsewhere in the spectrum (similar to FM stereo systems). Something buried in the solar noise would be hard to find without additional clues. In the era of spark transmitters, who would have considered frequency skipping transmissions?? I agree about the decoding though, even once demodulated we may difficulty interpreting the result given what is likely to be completely different cutural noms and thought patterns. Although I believe it's more likely to be some sort of natural phenomina. RP On 13 October 2016 at 08:29, Jean-Paul Louis wrote: > Richard, > > I was not talking about decoding it, as that would need our understanding > of their way of thinking. But detecting fairly rapid variations of > Amplitude, Frequency, Phase or a combination of either. > That would be easy with the FFT spectrum, and does not need to decode, > Just find that there are variable patterns, which would imply messages. > > Just another $0.02, > > Jean-Paul > N1JPL > > > >> On Oct 12, 2016, at 3:22 PM, Richard Prosser wrote= : >> >> Or is part of a progression to check the state of technology? >> You need optical telescopes to see that far, you need FFT to see the >> the narrow pulses & bandwidths, you need ???? to see the modulation, >> you need ??? to decode it........ >> >> RP >> >> On 13 October 2016 at 07:53, Jean-Paul Louis wrote: >>> I agree with David, >>> >>> A narrow pulse cause is unknown today, but that does not prove ETI. >>> If those pulses had any kind of varying modulation, that would be a dif= ferent story. >>> >>> Waiting for better news, >>> Jean-Paul >>> N1JPL >>> >>> >>>> On Oct 12, 2016, at 10:29 AM, RussellMc wrote: >>>> >>>> On 13 October 2016 at 02:17, Van Horn, David < >>>> david.vanhorn@backcountryaccess.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> As the papers said, there is no known process in nature which sends s= uch >>>>> narrow pulses (time and wavelength) at the appropriate power levels >>>> >>>> >>>> I think that should read something like >>>> >>>> " ... until now there was no known process in nature which sends such >>>> narrow pulses (time and wavelength) at the appropriate power levels ..= .. ". >>>> >>>> Now we know there is one. Just not what it is. Yet. >>>> (Escape clause: LGM are "in nature" :-).) >>>> >>>> >>>> R >>>> >>>> -- >>>> http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive >>>> View/change your membership options at >>>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive >>> View/change your membership options at >>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist >> -- >> http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive >> View/change your membership options at >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > > > > > -- > http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist --=20 http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .