I don’t understand why, tho I do not have any kind of expertise here.
I suggest (Haven’t read it), this paper proposes to send much denser and broadened signals around one carrier frequency (they use single mode). Due to dispersion they
Start to overlap with one each other. If you put more frequencies, you would have more overlaps and I fail to see how it won’t lead to errors.
They all arrive at the broader time window, which again could be mitigated either by error correction, or by extending the time window.
Okay, let’s read and find out whether we can find something that we don’t know.
There’s no paper, there is no letter, it’s a simple statement at the institute page. The way science is being communicated nowadays is frustrating.
From the statement
However, alongside the commercially available C and L-bands, we used two additional spectral bands called E-band and S-band. Such bands traditionally haven’t been required because the C- and L-bands could deliver the required capacity to meet consumer needs.
So they indeed broadened the frequency range.
They also did not say anything about limitations. They just pushed this bizarre number everywhere 🤷🏼♂️
We already have transceivers that perform forward error correction. That technology is a decade+ old.
It is, but it compromises the speed exponentially with length/broadening
Dispersion compensation and FEC are separate layers of the cake, and work hand in hand.
I don’t understand why, tho I do not have any kind of expertise here.
I suggest (Haven’t read it), this paper proposes to send much denser and broadened signals around one carrier frequency (they use single mode). Due to dispersion they
Start to overlap with one each other. If you put more frequencies, you would have more overlaps and I fail to see how it won’t lead to errors.
They all arrive at the broader time window, which again could be mitigated either by error correction, or by extending the time window.
“I haven’t read it, but I assume these are things they didn’t take into account.”
Okay then.
Okay, let’s read and find out whether we can find something that we don’t know.
There’s no paper, there is no letter, it’s a simple statement at the institute page. The way science is being communicated nowadays is frustrating.
From the statement
So they indeed broadened the frequency range.
if there is a paper you probably can’t read it because it’s published behind a pay wall, because fuck normies i guess.
https://opg.optica.org/ol/fulltext.cfm?uri=ol-49-6-1429&id=547584
You can read their previous papers