pCell, A Bold Scheme For Super-Fast Wireless Data
readwrite.com
pCell, A Bold Scheme For Super-Fast Wireless Data
1–10 of 28 posts
Re: pCell, A Bold Scheme For Super-Fast Wireless Data
#2Here's the actual white paper, which is fairly readable:
http://www.rearden.com/DIDO/DIDO_White_Paper_110727.pdf
Re: pCell, A Bold Scheme For Super-Fast Wireless Data
#3Question: The article mentions that pCells use interference to their advantage. Would a network of these be able to operate in a public spectrum?
Re: pCell, A Bold Scheme For Super-Fast Wireless Data
#4Question: The article mentions that pCells use interference to their advantage. Would a network of these be able to operate in a public spectrum?
With the licensing environment that exists today the answer is a definite "uhhhh maybe?!"
If you wanted to do it with LTE gear no since it's fixed to non-public spectrum.
If you did some serious wifi hacking to use the same concepts you might be able to. But with the area that wifi covers and the generally terrible power efficiency of the amplifiers I'm not entirely sure you'd want to. I don't think you'd be able to call it pCell but you could probably use the DIDO ideas and make it happen if sufficiently motivated.
Re: pCell, A Bold Scheme For Super-Fast Wireless Data
#5Whenever I see something that claims to overcome a long tested theory like Shannon's law, it always makes me very suspicious. The explanations I have seen so far are long on claims and short on proof and remind me very much of "perpetual motion machines". So far nothing I have seen shows how they are "side stepping" Shannon. I smell a rat.
Re: pCell, A Bold Scheme For Super-Fast Wireless Data
#6Question: The article mentions that pCells use interference to their advantage. Would a network of these be able to operate in a public spectrum?
With the licensing environment that exists today the answer is a definite "uhhhh maybe?!" If you wanted to do it with LTE gear no since it's fixed to non-public spectrum. If you did some serious wifi hacking to use the same concepts you might be able to. But with the area that wifi covers and the generally terrible power efficiency of the amplifiers I'm not entirely sure you'd want to. I don't think you'd be able to…
I don't see any legal reason why you couldn't do something like this today. There are already WiFI routers that do beamforming and this just seems like an application of beam forming where your antennas are much further apart.
Re: pCell, A Bold Scheme For Super-Fast Wireless Data
#7This looks like it'd work for fixed broadband installations (say, for people in rural Montana or Ontario), but I'm less convinced it'd work well for cell phones because the tower would need to predict your movements in advance of you actually moving there in order for it to know where to build the constructive interference.
Re: pCell, A Bold Scheme For Super-Fast Wireless Data
#8Whenever I see something that claims to overcome a long tested theory like Shannon's law, it always makes me very suspicious. The explanations I have seen so far are long on claims and short on proof and remind me very much of "perpetual motion machines". So far nothing I have seen shows how they are "side stepping" Shannon. I smell a rat.
This doesn't violate the Shannon capacity theorem: Different channels, like MIMO channels, have different capacities.
pCell is basically a proprietary version of network MIMO. (Though maybe still valuable if it can get to market faster).
Re: pCell, A Bold Scheme For Super-Fast Wireless Data
#9This looks like it'd work for fixed broadband installations (say, for people in rural Montana or Ontario), but I'm less convinced it'd work well for cell phones because the tower would need to predict your movements in advance of you actually moving there in order for it to know where to build the constructive interference.
The receiver can determine the "Direction Of Arrival" of a received signal which it uses for beam forming (this is how it typically done, don't know anything about pCell).
Re: pCell, A Bold Scheme For Super-Fast Wireless Data
#10Whenever I see something that claims to overcome a long tested theory like Shannon's law, it always makes me very suspicious. The explanations I have seen so far are long on claims and short on proof and remind me very much of "perpetual motion machines". So far nothing I have seen shows how they are "side stepping" Shannon. I smell a rat.
They are sidestepping Shannon by taking advantage of spacial multiplexing.
If I'm user fiber-optic communications with 1064nm laser, there's a maximum bandwidth I can get out of a single fiber. But I can always just add more fibers.
You can do this with radio waves too. Just broadcast in such a way that a signal has maximum strength at the desired user's location, and less strength elsewhere.
You need multiple antennas, of course (like multiple fiber heads). I think if you wanted 100% bandwidth for each user, you'd need at least one antenna per user.