Wireless reception [split from open discussion thread in Elections forum]

[JeffT]

I'm a fan of secure wireless networks.  I had a small LAN in Member Services so Brandon's computer and mine could both reach the paper printer and my NAS.  My switch was my router from home, and Pyro (who's been to my house A LOT) could see my network from the 20th floor from his room on the 4th or 5th.

Without disputing with certainty what may have been possible, this seems very unlikely, for the network to reach 15 floors, each a layer of concrete. More likely the device was simply reporting the fact that it had previously connected to that network, in a confusing manner. I know that Windows XP would sometimes show you previous networks you had connected to in a manner very convincingly/confusingly suggesting it was seeing it "live" at that time. Although newer versions of Windows may have improved, and without knowing what type of device Pyro was using, I'm going to suggest something like that was happening. I could be wrong, but I just wanted to point this possibility out.

[pyronine]

I'm a fan of secure wireless networks.  I had a small LAN in Member Services so Brandon's computer and mine could both reach the paper printer and my NAS.  My switch was my router from home, and Pyro (who's been to my house A LOT) could see my network from the 20th floor from his room on the 4th or 5th.

Without disputing with certainty what may have been possible, this seems very unlikely, for the network to reach 15 floors, each a layer of concrete. More likely the device was simply reporting the fact that it had previously connected to that network, in a confusing manner. I know that Windows XP would sometimes show you previous networks you had connected to in a manner very convincingly/confusingly suggesting it was seeing it "live" at that time. Although newer versions of Windows may have improved, and without knowing what type of device Pyro was using, I'm going to suggest something like that was happening. I could be wrong, but I just wanted to point this possibility out.

Her network showed up with 2 bars of strength, normally at her place, its 5 bars. I actually connected to it briefly before i connected to the hotel as my laptop is set to auto-connect to her network anytime it sees it. I just assumed she was using it for local service and not the internet so i did not connect through it.

[pyronine]

I'm a fan of secure wireless networks.  I had a small LAN in Member Services so Brandon's computer and mine could both reach the paper printer and my NAS.  My switch was my router from home, and Pyro (who's been to my house A LOT) could see my network from the 20th floor from his room on the 4th or 5th.

Without disputing with certainty what may have been possible, this seems very unlikely, for the network to reach 15 floors, each a layer of concrete. More likely the device was simply reporting the fact that it had previously connected to that network, in a confusing manner. I know that Windows XP would sometimes show you previous networks you had connected to in a manner very convincingly/confusingly suggesting it was seeing it "live" at that time. Although newer versions of Windows may have improved, and without knowing what type of device Pyro was using, I'm going to suggest something like that was happening. I could be wrong, but I just wanted to point this possibility out.

Her network showed up with 2 bars of strength, normally at her place, its 5 bars. I actually connected to it briefly before i connected to the hotel as my laptop is set to auto-connect to her network anytime it sees it. I just assumed she was using it for local service and not the internet so i did not connect through it.

p.s.

15 floors of concrete?, no, 2 windows and 16 floors of air. I was directly below MSO on the 4th floor. You cant think linear, electrical wave lengths are omni-directional, and therefore do not travel in a straight path. However the garage area is a different story as it is below ground and the signal has to pass through solid concrete and small vent shafts.

[MichaelEvans]

I'm a fan of secure wireless networks.  I had a small LAN in Member Services so Brandon's computer and mine could both reach the paper printer and my NAS.  My switch was my router from home, and Pyro (who's been to my house A LOT) could see my network from the 20th floor from his room on the 4th or 5th.

Without disputing with certainty what may have been possible, this seems very unlikely, for the network to reach 15 floors, each a layer of concrete. More likely the device was simply reporting the fact that it had previously connected to that network, in a confusing manner. I know that Windows XP would sometimes show you previous networks you had connected to in a manner very convincingly/confusingly suggesting it was seeing it "live" at that time. Although newer versions of Windows may have improved, and without knowing what type of device Pyro was using, I'm going to suggest something like that was happening. I could be wrong, but I just wanted to point this possibility out.

Her network showed up with 2 bars of strength, normally at her place, its 5 bars. I actually connected to it briefly before i connected to the hotel as my laptop is set to auto-connect to her network anytime it sees it. I just assumed she was using it for local service and not the internet so i did not connect through it.

p.s.

15 floors of concrete?, no, 2 windows and 16 floors of air. I was directly below MSO on the 4th floor. You cant think linear, electrical wave lengths are omni-directional, and therefore do not travel in a straight path. However the garage area is a different story as it is below ground and the signal has to pass through solid concrete and small vent shafts.

Same line of reasoning I was using; except more likely it bounced back and forth along the buildings a few times (with a little loss each time part of the signal leaked in to a building).  Mounting the router higher relative to the window, and the receiving laptop lower relative to the window; or both right against it, would improve the odds of finding a traversal path with minimal bounces and maximum strength.

[pyronine]

I'm a fan of secure wireless networks.  I had a small LAN in Member Services so Brandon's computer and mine could both reach the paper printer and my NAS.  My switch was my router from home, and Pyro (who's been to my house A LOT) could see my network from the 20th floor from his room on the 4th or 5th.

Without disputing with certainty what may have been possible, this seems very unlikely, for the network to reach 15 floors, each a layer of concrete. More likely the device was simply reporting the fact that it had previously connected to that network, in a confusing manner. I know that Windows XP would sometimes show you previous networks you had connected to in a manner very convincingly/confusingly suggesting it was seeing it "live" at that time. Although newer versions of Windows may have improved, and without knowing what type of device Pyro was using, I'm going to suggest something like that was happening. I could be wrong, but I just wanted to point this possibility out.

Her network showed up with 2 bars of strength, normally at her place, its 5 bars. I actually connected to it briefly before i connected to the hotel as my laptop is set to auto-connect to her network anytime it sees it. I just assumed she was using it for local service and not the internet so i did not connect through it.

p.s.

15 floors of concrete?, no, 2 windows and 16 floors of air. I was directly below MSO on the 4th floor. You cant think linear, electrical wave lengths are omni-directional, and therefore do not travel in a straight path. However the garage area is a different story as it is below ground and the signal has to pass through solid concrete and small vent shafts.

Same line of reasoning I was using; except more likely it bounced back and forth along the buildings a few times (with a little loss each time part of the signal leaked in to a building).  Mounting the router higher relative to the window, and the receiving laptop lower relative to the window; or both right against it, would improve the odds of finding a traversal path with minimal bounces and maximum strength.

Ok people, lets talk magnets> have you ever seen a picture of the earth's magnetic field. Whe you look at the north and south poles, there is a bubble connecting the two poles that travels around the earth. Think of the poles as your wifi antenna. The antenna is not creating a signal in a straight line that bounces off a wall and back and forth, or that goes in a straight line to your computer. In fact the antenna is sending out a bubble signal that goes through the glass, and walls. So no matter if the antenna is close to the window or not it will still pass through the glass and around the building in an oval shaped magnetic field. While some of the signal will bounce off objects the primary signal is not interrupted and passes around and through everything. For those of you who do not understand i attached a picture.

[JeffT]

Ok people, lets talk magnets> have you ever seen a picture of the earth's magnetic field. Whe you look at the north and south poles, there is a bubble connecting the two poles that travels around the earth. Think of the poles as your wifi antenna. The antenna is not creating a signal in a straight line that bounces off a wall and back and forth, or that goes in a straight line to your computer. In fact the antenna is sending out a bubble signal that goes through the glass, and walls. So no matter if the antenna is close to the window or not it will still pass through the glass and around the building in an oval shaped magnetic field. While some of the signal will bounce off objects the primary signal is not interrupted and passes around and through everything. For those of you who do not understand i attached a picture.

It doesn't work that way. The "oval" or "bubble" lines are field lines, not the path of electromagnetic waves. The bubble in the diagram doesn't represent the path of electromagnetic waves. Electromagnetic waves travel spherically outward from the source point, or an area of reflection or refraction, but the wave front moves in a straight line.

The sending and receiving signals also are separate and independent physical mechanisms--not part of a whole, like the two poles of a magnetic field. One device could be transmitting and the other only receiving, and not transmitting itself, for example.

Bouncing off buildings could possibly cause the signal to reach but it would have to be in just the right configuration, and because the strength of the signal decreases with the square of the distance, it becomes increasingly unlikely. Also, for communication to work with wi-fi, both directions would have to reach, which is even less likely because the antennas may not be oriented the same way.