OK, I'll take the bait. Since you are apparently the patentee, explain what is new about your scheme. Do you really think you can sell your idea based on what you have posted, which just looks like old technology?

__________________
Ron

 

Ok, for one, take into consideration how much information is being sampled, a single time base is being divided to its max, not only that a single cycle is being divided into two,each holding a seperate value of information, UN- QUANTIZED, (where is that old technology) and that the value of the information stays relative from input to output, in both value and time frame, and information capacity with regards to an 8, 16, 32, 64 128 bit byte, is increased by 1500, 3100, 6300, 12700, 25500%, respectively.................

JD

 

I have no idea what you're talking about.
The patent number you posted yielded zero hits.
Right now, you sound like a crank. I could be wrong.

__________________
Ron

 

So i take your not into Time Division Multiplexing......................

JD

As for the patent number, showing no results, it will untill its granted, but still, it showing no results, means no has a patent on it, YET, and as for being a crank, well thats your opinion, but if you don understand Time Division, where have you got room to comment, Lol, ................


JD

 

It's not that I don't understand TDM. The stuff you are spouting makes no sense.
You posted two GB patent numbers on your web site, neither of which I could find. What is the reason for referencing those?

__________________
Ron