Does Wifi signal connect at eye of sight of the source, or wherever it meets?!

[digital10]

My question is simple, I want to know if the client and router signal meet at the shortest distance between the two or does the Wifi signal meets wherever its transmitted and strongest ? I have attached an illustration, is it model A or model B?

 

[OzarkEdge]

My question is simple, I want to know if the client and router signal meet at the shortest distance between the two or does the Wifi signal meets wherever its transmitted and strongest ? I have attached an illustration, is it model A or model B?

The router signal is received at the client antenna.
The client signal is received at the router antenna.
The signals usually travel through material like walls.

(The signals do not meet... they may cross/pass each other, but not meet.)

OE

 

[L&LD]

As usual, it depends. It may be both (some sliding scale in the middle), particularly if the router and the client can take advantage of more than a single stream/antennae.

I have seen this many times when a door is left open and the Wi-Fi is 'great', but otherwise it is just 'good', for certain clients (usually handhelds).

It is even more complex than that, but in general, 'everything' matters where Wi-Fi is concerned.

Known, visible, and other measurable effects are the easy part, but it also includes even the environment/environmental factors that affect Wi-Fi but are not measurable (at least not readily with consumer-available equipment). Including radiation in the Wi-Fi spectrum, Weather Radar/instruments, Airport equipment, and various undisclosed Military equipment/test(ing).

That is why for some we can say 'A' is the answer and for others, it can be demonstrated that 'B' is the answer.

And of course, my friend @OzarkEdge is perfectly correct too.

 

[thiggins]

@L&LD It does NOT depend. A signal must reach a receiver's antenna or it is not seen by the STA. Effective signal power can be affected by the things you cite. But a transmitted signal must be detected AT the receiver.

How Radio Works

Radio waves are the backbone of nearly all modern media technology, from TV to smartphones and wireless internet. Yet, they're actually a simple technology.

electronics.howstuffworks.com

 

[L&LD]

@thiggins, of course, you're correct.

I was answering based on my best guess at the question (i.e. which 'path' is chosen/used).

 

[digital10]

The router signal is received at the client antenna.
The client signal is received at the router antenna.
The signals usually travel through material like walls.

(The signals do not meet... they may cross/pass each other, but not meet.)

OE

@L&LD It does NOT depend. A signal must reach a receiver's antenna or it is not seen by the STA. Effective signal power can be affected by the things you cite. But a transmitted signal must be detected AT the receiver.

How Radio Works

Radio waves are the backbone of nearly all modern media technology, from TV to smartphones and wireless internet. Yet, they're actually a simple technology.

electronics.howstuffworks.com

I see...while I don't understand radio waves it seem like coverage would be much wider if the signals could talk where they meet the strongest. Of course, I don't assume I know more than radio scientist world wide and they have thought of this already but the technology for this method does not exist.

 

[L&LD]

Radio waves don't 'meet' (now I see that @thiggins was correct in his assumption and I was wrong in mine assuming you meant 'path taken').

They are dispatched from one point and acquired, where possible, by a second point. Depending on the signal strength and cleanliness of the signal of the transmitter, the distance involved, and the resolving power of the receiver.

There is never a 'middle' to meet. Only an originating point and an endpoint where that signal is at an amplitude that is still resolvable (and vice versa).

Think of a pebble thrown in a pond. The wave created needs to be strong enough (by virtue of how big the pebble is or with how much force it is thrown into the pond), to reach a point 'x' somewhere further into the pond and at an amplitude that is above the normal waves in the said pond to make it noticeable. There is nothing to 'meet' anywhere in between that will help it be seen at distance 'x'.

In the analogy above, the 'normal waves' are the background noise, the 'signal' is the direct waves the pebble/rock create, and the 'noticeable' aspect is the resolving power of the receiver and how acute their signal-to-noise ratio is.

Here's a quick google search that also uses the 'pond' analogy.

What are radio waves?

The basic building block of radio communications is a radio wave. Like waves on a pond, a radio wave is a series of repeating peaks and valleys.

www.nasa.gov

 

[thecheapseats]

<snip>...I don't assume I know more than radio scientist world wide and they have thought of this already but the technology for this method does not exist.

of course it exists - known as radio (rf) repeaters and are used for many slices of the DC to daylight (slang) frequency spectrum... simplex, half-duplex and full duplex modals apply as well as gov (in the u.s., fcc) licensing of course... your wireless router 'toy' is licensed... rf is point to point until a repeater is applied with the earliest natural repeater being our ionosphere... there's no conditional meeting in the middle...

 

[L&LD]

@thecheapseats a 'repeater' doesn't change how radio waves work.

 

[thecheapseats]

are you 'guessing' again?...

 

[L&LD]

No, not guessing this time.

 

[thecheapseats]

yesterday, you didn't understand radio wave propagation - today you're lecturing on it... your lack of knowledge is stunning... keep guessing...

 

[L&LD]

Yes, I learn daily. There is no lecture here, just sharing what I learn. Do you not follow the simple posts above to see my progress?

 

[thiggins]

ok. Folks nothing further to see here. Move along.