Sorry...had to do that. Dell Winders is the only LRL proponent I've seen that really lashes out to other posters, such as that.
FYI....there are various other discussions about these devices, and FCC compliance has come up several times. Allow me to quote just a snippet from Carl Moreland:
"Even non-transmitter circuits often must be tested as unintentional radiators, and at least be self-verified. Calculators, ferinstance, fall in this category. So any electronic LRL probably needs to be at least self-verified, even if it doesn't intentionally transmit a signal."
No innuendos at all, my friend. Simple research. Your RT gimmick had no FCC ID on it...and you informed me of such. However, you did not reply to the second part of my question "or any FCC data contained within the owners manual that would indicate the device was approved for export into the Untied States, as per Part 15 and Federal Law?"
Although you doubted that the Examiner is subject to FCC ID....and it might not be....it still needs to be certified/verified as per Part 15.
I wanted to talk alleged electronic circuits, and you wanted to talk about resonant sound frequency's and hollow tubes. So...I threw in a sea shell. Neither has anything to do with the alleged circuits in the RT.
Ciao
|