Academic literature on the topic 'Band 5'

Recent concrete specifications often require the use of combined aggregate gradation that meets the “8-18” band gradation. But theoretically “8-18” band covers a wide range of aggregate variation which may result in variable properties of concrete. To avoid this drawback, two new band gradations were proposed, these are, “5-10-14-18” and “5-10-18-22” bands. This paper analyses different aspects of these proposed bands through a number of concrete mix results.

Since the future mobile networks will require significantly higher data throughput, and the Long-Term Evolution (LTE) licensed bands are already occupied, the frequency band extension and the data rate increase may be achieved by using some of the available unlicensed bands. The most appropriate unlicensed band for this purpose lies in 5 GHz frequency range. However, this unlicensed band is already occupied by WiFi networks and a special attention has to be paid to coordinate these two different networks in the shared spectrum usage. Therefore, this paper considers the shared access co-existence in 5 GHz unlicensed band between uncoordinated LTE and WiFi networks. More precisely, it considers the influence of the LTE downlink transmission on the performance of the WiFi networks. The experimental results show that the LTE significantly degrades the WiFi network performance, which means that some of the coordination algorithms have to be employed.

We describe the design, performance, and commissioning results for the new ALMA Band 5 receiver channel, 163–211 GHz, which is in the final stage of full deployment and expected to be available for observations in 2018. This manuscript provides the description of the new ALMA Band 5 receiver cartridge and serves as a reference for observers using the ALMA Band 5 receiver for observations. At the time of writing this paper, the ALMA Band 5 Production Consortium consisting of NOVA Instrumentation group, based in Groningen, NL, and GARD in Sweden have produced and delivered to ALMA Observatory over 60 receiver cartridges. All 60 cartridges fulfil the new more stringent specifications for Band 5 and demonstrate excellent noise temperatures, typically below 45 K single sideband (SSB) at 4 K detector physical temperature and below 35 K SSB at 3.5 K (typical for operation at the ALMA Frontend), providing the average sideband rejection better than 15 dB, and the integrated cross-polarization level better than –25 dB. The 70 warm cartridge assemblies, hosting Band 5 local oscillator and DC bias electronics, have been produced and delivered to ALMA by NRAO. The commissioning results confirm the excellent performance of the receivers.

A compact prototype of dual band monopole antenna has been fabricated on PCB with small overall size of 36.6 mm×47 mm. By the trial of simulation to tune the dimensions of PCB, an optimum design of antenna can be obtained. Dual resonances excited in 2.4 and 5 GHz bands. For return loss more than 9.6 dB, the achieved bandwidths are 2.41 to 2.77 GHz in 2.4 GHz band and 5.11 to 5.83 GHz in 5 GHz band. The return loss ( ) can keep larger than 9.6dB within the bands of 2.4 and 5 GHz.

Using in the Bohr Hamiltonian the approximations leading to the Bohr and Mot- telson description of wobbling motion in even nuclei, a W(5) model for wobbling bands, coexisting with a X(5) ground state band, is obtained. Separation of vari­ ables is achieved by assuming that the relevant potential has a sharp minimum at 70, which is the only parameter entering in the spectra and B(E2) transition rates (up to overall scale factors). B(E2) transition rates exhibit the features expected in the wobbling case.

Shoreline changes, that occur along the coast, gives negative effects to the environment and also social-economic activities on the fishermen’s livelihood. Study about shoreline changes, its trends, and its causes are important for the development of economic and sanitation vulnerability assessment on fishermen community caused by shoreline changes. Thus, environmental sustainability criteria within the local scale and specific to fishermen community takes into account and the implementation of the instrument become more appropriate to reduce the undesirable effects. This research aims to identifying and analysing shoreline changes trend and its factors over the fishermen settlement area along the coast of Sungaibuntu and Cemarajaya village, Karawang Regency, West Java. Data used in this study are Landsat-7 1999, 2002, 2007, and 2012 as well as Landsat-8 2017. To enhance Landsat-7 images, band 2-4-5 are used, meanwhile Landsat-8 employs band 3-5-6. Later, the shoreline was extracted by applying band rationing techniques, Band2/Band5 for Landsat-7 and Band3/Band6 for Landsat-8. The rate of shoreline changes along the coast of Sungaibuntu is -0.15 m/yr and -2.89 m/yr along Cemarajaya. The periodic phenomena that affect shoreline changes consist of tidal range with a mean value of 0.796 m, significant wave height (Hs) of 0 - 2.9 m with the dominant direction heading to the southeast, and also sea level rise (SLR). Besides, there is an anthropogenic factor of land use and land cover changes as the significant feature shown by the managed system of ponds, cropland, farmland, paddy field, along with the settlement. As for the instrument development of economic and sanitation vulnerability on fishermen community, it is important to take shoreline changes rate and its causes into account and consider it as vulnerability criteria.

A compact (8 × 62 × 5 mm3; 2.48 cc) frequency reconfigurable antenna that uses electrical switching with PIN diodes is proposed for the low frequency LTE band (699 MHz–862 MHz), high frequency LTE band (2496 MHz–2690 MHz), GSM850/900 bands (824 MHz–960 MHz), and DCS/PCS/WCDMA bands (1710 MHz–2170 MHz). The penta-band PIFA is first designed for GSM850/900/DCS/PCS/WCDMA bands by using two slits and ground pins within a limited antenna volume (8 × 54.6 × 5 mm3; 2.18 cc). The frequency reconfigurable antenna based on this penta-band PIFA is thus proposed to additionally cover all LTE bands. The proposed antenna has two PIN diodes with an optimal location. For State 1 (PIN diode 1: ON state, PIN diode 2: OFF state), the proposed antenna covers the low frequency LTE band, DCS/PCS/WCDMA bands, and high frequency LTE band. For State 2 (PIN diode 1: OFF state, PIN diode 2: ON state), the antenna covers the GSM850/900 bands. Simulated and measured results show that the total efficiency of the proposed antenna was greater than 40% for all operating frequency bands.

Abstract. Absorption spectra of peroxyacetyl nitrate (PAN, CH3C(O)OONO2) vapour at room temperature (295K) have been measured in the mid-infrared range, 550-2200cm-1 (18.2-4.55µm), using a Fourier Transform infrared spectrometer at instrument resolutions of 0.25 and 0.03cm-1 (unapodised). Between five and eight measurements were obtained for each spectral band of PAN in the pressure range 0.24-2.20mb showing good agreement with Beer's law. Both cross-section data and integrated absorption intensities for the five principal bands in the PAN spectra in this spectral range have been derived with peak cross-sections of the 794, 1163, 1302, 1741 and 1842cm-1 bands measured to be 0.95(±0.02), 1.21(±0.03), 0.92(±0.02), 2.39(±0.06) and 0.74(±0.03) (x10-18cm2molecule-1) respectively. Band intensities and band centre absorptivities are also reported for four weaker PAN absorption bands in the mid infrared for the first time. These observations are the highest spectral resolution measurements of PAN bands reported in the infrared to date. For three of the five strongest bands, the absolute integrated absorption intensities are in excellent agreement with previous studies. A 4.8% lower integrated intensity was found for the 1741cm-1νas(NO2) PAN absorption band, possibly as a result of the removal in this work of spectra affected by acetone contamination, while a 10.6% higher intensity was determined for the 1163cm-1ν(C-O) absorption band. No resolution of fine structure in the PAN absorption bands was observed at the resolutions studied. The confirmation of absorption cross-sections and estimated errors in this work will allow more accurate investigations of PAN using infrared spectroscopy, particularly for remote sensing of PAN in the atmosphere.

Nachdem im Jahr 1680 Spener durch seine Schrift „Das Allgemeine Priestertum“ den möglichen Verdacht der Heterodoxie erfolgreich abgewehrt hatte, erweitert sich sein Korrespondenzkreis. Auch solche, die bislang noch eine abwartende Einstellung gegenüber Spener und dem Frankfurter Pietismus eingenommen hatten, treten mit ihm in Briefkontakt. Prominentes Beispiel ist Veit Ludwig von Seckendorff, Kanzler am Hof von Sachsen-Zeitz, der nun - von sich aus - den Kontakt zu Spener sucht; dieser riß bis zum Tod Seckendorffs nicht mehr ab. Von hohem Informationswert sind die Briefe an die radikalen Kirchenkritiker Johann Georg Gichtel und Friedrich Breckling. Darin grenzt sich Spener deutlich von der spiritualistischen und kirchenkritischen Tradition ab, in relativer Unkenntnis davon, wie sehr in diesen Jahren gerade diese Haltung in der eigenen pietistischen Gruppe in Frankfurt wächst und nur ein Jahr später (1682) durch einen bekannt gewordenen Brief Christian Fendes an die Öffentlichkeit kommt. Auf der anderen Seite bemüht sich Spener, mögliche - und teilweise in Zukunft auch wirkliche - Gegner zu befrieden, die ihn aus der Sicht der lutherischen Orthodoxie kritisch beobachten. Die Expansionsunternehmungen Ludwig XIV., die dazu führten, dass Speners Heimatstadt unter französische Herrschaft geriet, veranlassen ihn, über künftige schwere Schicksale der evangelischen Kirche im Alten Reich nachzudenken. Heilsgeschichtlich deutet er diese Ereignisse als Beginn der schwierigen Zeit, die Spener nach der biblischen Verheißung vor dem Anbruch eines besseren Zustandes der evangelischen Kirche, erwartet. Die „Hoffnung künftig besserer Zeiten“ bzw. die Bestreitung der Nähe des Jüngsten Tages wird ausführlich erläutert und begründet in fünf Briefen an einen Schwager, wohl Johann Ulrich Wild, die Spener in den Jahren zwischen 1677 und 1681 schrieb. Sie sind als Anhang den Briefen des Jahres 1681 in diesem Band eingefügt. Für die Haltung Speners für die (moderne) Naturwissenschaft seiner Zeit ist ein Brief von größter Bedeutung. Durch die Erscheinung des Halley’schen Kometen im Jahr 1680 war eine öffentliche Diskussion darüber ausgebrochen, ob Kometen als ein besonderes Schreckzeichen Gottes zu deuten seien. Spener weist diesen Gedanken zurück und erkennt darin ein lediglich ein selten auftretendes Phänomen der Schöpfung, das zum Lob Gottes anregt. Er erweist sich damit deutlich offener für neue Erkenntnisse der Naturwissenschaft als viele seiner Zeitgenossen.:Inhalt Vorwort Abkürzungen und Siglen Abgekürzt zitierte Literatur und Quellen Briefe des Jahres 1681 Nr. 1 an [einen neu gewonnenen Freund] 7.1.1681 Nr. 2 an [einen Amtsbruder] 7.1.1681 Nr. 3 an Seger von den Berghe in Köln 8.1.1681 Nr. 4 an [Johannes Platz in Mülheim am Rhein] 13.1.1681 Nr. 5 an Conrad Samuel Schurzfleisch in Korbach 13.1.1681 Nr. 6 an Johann Christoph Linekogel in Lübeck 14.1.1681 Nr. 7 an [Johann Heinrich Lerche in Hasselfelde] 21.1.1681 Nr. 8 an [Johann Appel in Mannheim] [25].1.1681 Nr. 9 an [einen Unbekannten] 1.2.1681 Nr. 10 an [Johann Schmidt in Kopenhagen] 5.2.1681 Nr. 11 an [Philipp Ludwig Hanneken in Gießen] 5.2.1681 Nr. 12 an [einen Amtsbruder bei Berlin] 5.2.1681 Nr. 13 an Sigmund von Birken in Nürnberg 15.2.1681 Nr. 14 an Sophie Elisabeth von Sachsen-Zeitz in Zeitz 16.2.1681 Nr. 15 an Johann Winckler in Wertheim 23.2.1681 Nr. 16 an Johann Wilhelm Petersen in Eutin 26.2.1681 Nr. 17 an [Johann Melchior Stenger in Wittstock] [Ende Februar/ Anfang März 1681] Nr. 18 an Gottlieb Spizel in Augsburg 1.3.1681 Nr. 19 an Ahasver Fritsch in Rudolstadt 3.3.1681 Nr. 20 an [einen Anhänger Böhmes in oder bei Zwickau] 7.3.1681 Nr. 21 an [Philipp Albert Orth in Pfedelbach] 7.3.1681 Nr. 22 an [Johann Christoph Nungesser in Erbach] [Mitte März] 1681 Nr. 23 an Johann Christoph Holtzhausen [in Hamburg] 20.3.1681 Nr. 24 an [einen Amtsbruder] 21.3.1681 Nr. 25 an Seger von den Berghe in Köln 28.3.1681 Nr. 26 an die lutherische Gemeinde in Köln 30.3.1681 Nr. 27 an [einen jungen Amtsbruder] März 1681 Nr. 28 an [Caspar Heunisch in Schweinfurt] 1.4.1681 Nr. 29 an [Johann Christof Scheibler in Lütgendortmund] 1.4.1681 Nr. 30 an [Caspar Rebhan in Eisenach?] 1.4.1681 Nr. 31 an [einen befreundeten Amtsbruder] in [der Mark Brandenburg?] 5.4.1681 Nr. 32 an [einen Kandidaten der Theologie] 5.4.1681 Nr. 33 an Ahasver Fritsch in Rudolstadt 6.4.1681 Nr. 34 an [einen Amtsbruder] 7.4.1681 Nr. 35 an Abraham Calov in Wittenberg 7.4.1681 Nr. 36 an [Johann Friedrich Heckel] [ca. 7.4.] 1681 Nr. 37 an Johann Fabricius in Altdorf 8.4.1681 Nr. 38 an [einen Witwer in Marburg] 8.4.1681 Nr. 39 an Daniel Wilhelm Moller in Altdorf 9.4.[1681] Nr. 40 an [einen Freund] 9.4.1681 Nr. 41 an [einen Unbekannten] 15.4.1681 Nr. 42 an [einen Amtsbruder] 15.4.1681 Nr. 43 an [einen Amtsbruder in leitender Funktion] 16.4.1681 Nr. 44 an [einen Hofbediensteten] 19.4.1681 Nr. 45 an [Elias Veiel in Ulm] 19.4.1681 Nr. 46 an Johann Wilhelm Petersen in Eutin 22.4.1681 Nr. 47 an [Johann Fischer in Riga] 26.4.1681 Nr. 48 an [Johann Gezelius d.J. in Åbo] 27.4.1681 Nr. 49 an [einen Amtsbruder] [Frühjahr 1681?] Nr. 50 an [Johann Philipp Seip in Pyrmont] 5.5.1681 Nr. 51 an [einen Unbekannten] 11.5.1681 Nr. 52 an [Matthäus Esenwein in Hirsau] 11.5.1681 Nr. 53 an [Christian II. von Pfalz-Birkenfeld in Zweibrücken] 16.5.1681 Nr. 54 an [einen Theologen] 17.5.1681 Nr. 55 an [einen Unbekannten] 17.5.1681 Nr. 56 an Johann Philipp Wittstein in Korbach 21.5.1681 Nr. 57 an [Sebastian Kirchmeier in Rothenburg o.d.T.] [Mai] 1681 Nr. 58 an Johann Wilhelm Petersen in Eutin 3.6.1681 Nr. 59 an [Michael Christian Ludovici in Zeitz] 6.6.1681 Nr. 60 an Sophie Elisabeth von Sachsen-Zeitz in Zeitz 8.6.1681 Nr. 61 an Graf Heinrich III. von Reuß-Lobenstein in Lobenstein 8.6.1681 Nr. 62 an [Johann Caspar Francke in Eisleben] 10.6.1681 Nr. 63 an Johann Andreas Lucius in Dresden 15.6.1681 Nr. 64 an [Samuel Benedikt Carpzov in Dresden] 15.6.1681 Nr. 65 an Friedrich Benedikt Carpzov in Leipzig 16.6.1681 Nr. 66 an [einen Amtsbruder] 18.6.1681 Nr. 67 an Jacob Henning in Greifswald 22.6.1681 Nr. 68 an [Jacob Bernhard Multz in Öttingen] [vor 23.6.] 1681 Nr. 69 an Johann Wilhelm Petersen in Eutin 23.6.1681 Nr. 70 an Johanna Eleonora Petersen in Eutin [23.6.1681] Nr. 71 an [einen Amtsbruder] 24.6.1681 Nr. 72 an [einen Amtsbruder auf dem Land] 25.6.1681 Nr. 73 an [Georg Grabow in Cölln a.d. Spree] 28.6.1681 Nr. 74 an [Samuel Pomarius in Lübeck] 30.6.1681 Nr. 75 an [Balthasar Köpke in Fehrbellin] [1. Jahreshälfte?] 1681 Nr. 76 an Johann Wilhelm Petersen in Eutin 12.7.1681 Nr. 77 an Sophie Elisabeth von Sachsen-Zeitz in Zeitz 14.7.1681 Nr. 78 an [Johann Schilter in Jena] 14.7.1681 Nr. 79 an [einen befreundeten Theologen] 19.7.1681 Nr. 80 an Veit Ludwig von Seckendorff in Zeitz 22.7.1681 Nr. 81 an [Tobias Winckler in Nürnberg] 23.7.1681 Nr. 82 an [einen Unbekannten] 26.7.1681 Nr. 83 an [Georg Grabow in Cölln a.d. Spree] [Ende Juli/ Anfang August 1681] Nr. 84 an [Sebastian Kirchmeier in Rothenburg o.d.T.] 1.8.1681 Nr. 85 an Gottlieb Spizel in Augsburg 4.8.1681 Nr. 86 an [Katharina Platz in Mülheim am Rhein] 8.8.1681 Nr. 87 an Seger von den Berghe in Köln 10.8.1681 Nr. 88 an [Johann Matthäus Faber in Heilbronn?] 13.8.1681 Nr. 89 an [Christian Philipp Leutwein in Pfedelbach] [zwischen 7. und 13.8.1681] Nr. 90 an [Caspar Rebhan in Eisenach] 19.8.1681 Nr. 91 an Christian Kortholt in Kiel 19.8.1681 Nr. 92 an Seger von den Berghe in Köln 21.8.1681 Nr. 93 an Veit Ludwig von Seckendorff in Zeitz 26.8.1681 Nr. [93] Bemerkungen zu dem Vorschlag eines Predigerseminars Nr. 94 an [einen Kirchenältesten] 26.8.1681 Nr. 95 an [Maria Amalia von Geispitzheim in Zeitz] 30.8.1681 Nr. 96 an [einen Unbekannten] [August/Anfang September 1681] Nr. 97 an [einen Amtsbruder] 1.9.1681 Nr. 98 an [einen Bekannten in Straßburg] 2.9.1681 Nr. 99 an [Sophie Elisabeth von Sachsen-Zeitz in Zeitz] 2.9.1681 Nr. 100 an Johann Wilhelm Petersen in Eutin 5.9.1681 Nr. 101 an [Johann Christoph Holtzhausen] in [Hamburg] 7.9.1681 Nr. 102 an Gottlieb Spizel in Augsburg 7.9.1681 Nr. 103 an [einen neuen Anhänger] 9.9.1681 Nr. 104 an [Johann Christoph Holland in Erfurt] 9.9.1681 Nr. 105 an [einen Unbekannten] 23.9.1681 Nr. 106 an Ahasver Fritsch in Rudolstadt 26.9.1681 Nr. 107 an [Philipp Albert Orth in Pfedelbach] [September/Oktober] 1681 Nr. 108 an [Balthasar Friedrich Saltzmann] in Straßburg 3.10.1681 Nr. 109 an [einen Amtsbruder] 6.10.1681 Nr. 110 an [Jacob Bernhard Multz in Öttingen] [vor 10.10.] 1681 Nr. 111 an [einen Amtsbruder?] 12.10.1681 Nr. 112 an [einen Laien] 18.10.1681 Nr. 113 an [einen befreundeten Laien] 19.10.1681 Nr. 114 an [einen Amtsbruder] 20.10.1681 Nr. 115 an Johann Wilhelm Petersen in Eutin 22.10.1681 Nr. 116 an [Balthasar Friedrich Saltzmann in Straßburg] [Oktober] 1681 Nr. 117 an [den Vater eines Studenten] 1.11.[1681] Nr. 118 an [einen Unbekannten] 5.11.1681 Nr. 119 an [Eleonore Erdmuthe Luise von Brandenburg-Ansbach in Ansbach] 10.11.1681 Nr. 120 an Johann Wilhelm Petersen in Eutin 19.11.1681 Nr. 121 an [einen Unbekannten] 28.11.1681 Nr. 122 an [einen Unbekannten] [Herbst] 1681 Nr. 123 an [Friedrich Breckling in Amsterdam] [Ende November/Anfang Dezember] 1681 Nr. 124 an Sophie Elisabeth von Sachsen-Zeitz in Zeitz 1.12.1681 Nr. 125 an [Michael Christian Ludovici in Zeitz] [ca. 1.12.] 1681 Nr. 126 an die lutherische Gemeinde in Köln 8.12.1681 Nr. 127 an [Johann Tobias German in Trarbach?] [vor 15.12.] 1681 Nr. 128 an Sophie Elisabeth von Sachsen-Zeitz in Zeitz 15.12.1681 Nr. 129 an [Johann Georg Gichtel in Amsterdam] 15.12.[1681] Nr. 130 an [Balthasar Friedrich Saltzmann] in Straßburg [Mitte Dezember] 1681 Nr. 131 an Johann Schilter in Jena 21.12.1681 Nr. 132 an Ahasver Fritsch in Rudolstadt 22.12.1681 Nr. 133 an [Anton Reiser in Hamburg] 28.12.1681 Nr. 134 an [Michael Christian Ludovici] in [Zeitz] 30.12.1681 Nr. 135 an [Veit Ludwig von Seckendorff in Zeitz] 30.12.1681 Nr. 136 an Johann Wilhelm Petersen in Eutin 31.12.[1681] Nr. 137 an [einen Amtsbruder] im [Elsaß?] [November/Dezember] 1681 Nr. 138 an [Johann Caspar Francke in Eisleben] [2. Jahreshälfte] 1681 Nr. 139 an [einen Freund] [Ende?] 1681 Nr. 140 an [einen Amtsbruder] 1681 Nr. 141 an [einen Amtsbruder] 1681 Nr. 142 an [eine Unbekannte] 1681 Nr. 143 an [eine Gruppe von Amtsbrüdern] 1681 Nr. 144 an [einen Unbekannten] 1681 Nr. 145 an [David Nerreter in Öttingen] [1681] Nr. 146 an [Jacob Bernhard Multz in Öttingen] 1681 Nr. 147 an [einen Unbekannten] 1681 Nr. 148 an [ein Hoffräulein] 1681 Nr. 149 an [einen Theologiestudenten?] 1681 Nr. 150 an [einen älteren Theologen] 1681 Nr. 151 an [eine Anhängerin] 1681 Nr. 152 an [Heinrich Witsche in Plau?] 1681 Nr. 153 an [David Nerreter in Öttingen] [1681/82] Fünf Briefe aus den Jahren ca. 1677 bis 1681, in denen Spener die Nähe des Jüngsten Tages bestreitet Nr. 154 an [Johann Ulrich Wild in Esslingen] [um 1677?] Nr. 155 an [Johann Ulrich Wild in Esslingen] [1677] Nr. 156 an [Johann Ulrich Wild in Esslingen] [nach 1677] Nr. 157 an [Johann Ulrich Wild in Esslingen] [um 1680] Nr. 158 an [Johann Ulrich Wild in Esslingen] 1681 Verzeichnis der Fundorte Handschriften Drucke Register Personen Orte Bibelstellen Schlüssel zu den zeitgenössischen Sammlungen von Ph. J. Speners Bedenken und Briefen
Spener’s circle of correspondents expanded after he successfully warded off the possibility of being suspected of heresy by publishing his 1680 work „The Priesthood of all Believers.” Even those who had taken a “wait and see” attitude towards Spener and Frankfurt Pietism, now began corresponding with him. A prominent example is Veit Ludwig von Seckendorff, chancellor at the court of Saxony-Zeitz, who now took the initiative to contact Spener. The two remained correspondents until von Seckendorff’s death in 1692. Spener’s letters to the radical church critics Johann Georg Gichtel and Friedrich Breckling are very informative. In his letters, Spener disassociates himself from the spiritualist and church-critical traditions, in apparent ignorance of just how much precisely these attitudes have been growing in his own Pietist group in Frankfurt. Just one year later, a letter by Christian Fende in 1682 revealed to the public the radical state of the Pietist group in Frankfurt. On the other hand, Spener tries to pacify potential orthodox Lutheran opponents, some of whom actually become opponents in the future. Louis XIV. policy of expansion meant that Spener’s hometown came under French rule. This forces him to reflect upon an impending time of difficulty for the Lutheran Church in German territories. He interprets these events as the beginning of the hard times, which he expects to come before the Biblical promise of better times for the true church. He explains and justifies his “hope of better times” or its denial of the nearness of the final judgement, in five letters to Johann Ulrich Wild, Spener’s brother-in-law, to whom he writes between 1677 and 1681. They are included in this volume as an appendix to the letters from 1681. One letter is especially significant for insights into Spener’s attitude towards the (modern) natural science of his day. The appearance of Haley’s Comet in 1680 had unleashed a public debate about the question of whether comets were to be interpreted as a special warning sign of God. Spener rejects the notion and regards comets as simply a rarely occurring phenomenon of creation, which inspires us to praise God. Here he proves to be markedly more open to new findings of science than many of his contemporaries.:Inhalt Vorwort Abkürzungen und Siglen Abgekürzt zitierte Literatur und Quellen Briefe des Jahres 1681 Nr. 1 an [einen neu gewonnenen Freund] 7.1.1681 Nr. 2 an [einen Amtsbruder] 7.1.1681 Nr. 3 an Seger von den Berghe in Köln 8.1.1681 Nr. 4 an [Johannes Platz in Mülheim am Rhein] 13.1.1681 Nr. 5 an Conrad Samuel Schurzfleisch in Korbach 13.1.1681 Nr. 6 an Johann Christoph Linekogel in Lübeck 14.1.1681 Nr. 7 an [Johann Heinrich Lerche in Hasselfelde] 21.1.1681 Nr. 8 an [Johann Appel in Mannheim] [25].1.1681 Nr. 9 an [einen Unbekannten] 1.2.1681 Nr. 10 an [Johann Schmidt in Kopenhagen] 5.2.1681 Nr. 11 an [Philipp Ludwig Hanneken in Gießen] 5.2.1681 Nr. 12 an [einen Amtsbruder bei Berlin] 5.2.1681 Nr. 13 an Sigmund von Birken in Nürnberg 15.2.1681 Nr. 14 an Sophie Elisabeth von Sachsen-Zeitz in Zeitz 16.2.1681 Nr. 15 an Johann Winckler in Wertheim 23.2.1681 Nr. 16 an Johann Wilhelm Petersen in Eutin 26.2.1681 Nr. 17 an [Johann Melchior Stenger in Wittstock] [Ende Februar/ Anfang März 1681] Nr. 18 an Gottlieb Spizel in Augsburg 1.3.1681 Nr. 19 an Ahasver Fritsch in Rudolstadt 3.3.1681 Nr. 20 an [einen Anhänger Böhmes in oder bei Zwickau] 7.3.1681 Nr. 21 an [Philipp Albert Orth in Pfedelbach] 7.3.1681 Nr. 22 an [Johann Christoph Nungesser in Erbach] [Mitte März] 1681 Nr. 23 an Johann Christoph Holtzhausen [in Hamburg] 20.3.1681 Nr. 24 an [einen Amtsbruder] 21.3.1681 Nr. 25 an Seger von den Berghe in Köln 28.3.1681 Nr. 26 an die lutherische Gemeinde in Köln 30.3.1681 Nr. 27 an [einen jungen Amtsbruder] März 1681 Nr. 28 an [Caspar Heunisch in Schweinfurt] 1.4.1681 Nr. 29 an [Johann Christof Scheibler in Lütgendortmund] 1.4.1681 Nr. 30 an [Caspar Rebhan in Eisenach?] 1.4.1681 Nr. 31 an [einen befreundeten Amtsbruder] in [der Mark Brandenburg?] 5.4.1681 Nr. 32 an [einen Kandidaten der Theologie] 5.4.1681 Nr. 33 an Ahasver Fritsch in Rudolstadt 6.4.1681 Nr. 34 an [einen Amtsbruder] 7.4.1681 Nr. 35 an Abraham Calov in Wittenberg 7.4.1681 Nr. 36 an [Johann Friedrich Heckel] [ca. 7.4.] 1681 Nr. 37 an Johann Fabricius in Altdorf 8.4.1681 Nr. 38 an [einen Witwer in Marburg] 8.4.1681 Nr. 39 an Daniel Wilhelm Moller in Altdorf 9.4.[1681] Nr. 40 an [einen Freund] 9.4.1681 Nr. 41 an [einen Unbekannten] 15.4.1681 Nr. 42 an [einen Amtsbruder] 15.4.1681 Nr. 43 an [einen Amtsbruder in leitender Funktion] 16.4.1681 Nr. 44 an [einen Hofbediensteten] 19.4.1681 Nr. 45 an [Elias Veiel in Ulm] 19.4.1681 Nr. 46 an Johann Wilhelm Petersen in Eutin 22.4.1681 Nr. 47 an [Johann Fischer in Riga] 26.4.1681 Nr. 48 an [Johann Gezelius d.J. in Åbo] 27.4.1681 Nr. 49 an [einen Amtsbruder] [Frühjahr 1681?] Nr. 50 an [Johann Philipp Seip in Pyrmont] 5.5.1681 Nr. 51 an [einen Unbekannten] 11.5.1681 Nr. 52 an [Matthäus Esenwein in Hirsau] 11.5.1681 Nr. 53 an [Christian II. von Pfalz-Birkenfeld in Zweibrücken] 16.5.1681 Nr. 54 an [einen Theologen] 17.5.1681 Nr. 55 an [einen Unbekannten] 17.5.1681 Nr. 56 an Johann Philipp Wittstein in Korbach 21.5.1681 Nr. 57 an [Sebastian Kirchmeier in Rothenburg o.d.T.] [Mai] 1681 Nr. 58 an Johann Wilhelm Petersen in Eutin 3.6.1681 Nr. 59 an [Michael Christian Ludovici in Zeitz] 6.6.1681 Nr. 60 an Sophie Elisabeth von Sachsen-Zeitz in Zeitz 8.6.1681 Nr. 61 an Graf Heinrich III. von Reuß-Lobenstein in Lobenstein 8.6.1681 Nr. 62 an [Johann Caspar Francke in Eisleben] 10.6.1681 Nr. 63 an Johann Andreas Lucius in Dresden 15.6.1681 Nr. 64 an [Samuel Benedikt Carpzov in Dresden] 15.6.1681 Nr. 65 an Friedrich Benedikt Carpzov in Leipzig 16.6.1681 Nr. 66 an [einen Amtsbruder] 18.6.1681 Nr. 67 an Jacob Henning in Greifswald 22.6.1681 Nr. 68 an [Jacob Bernhard Multz in Öttingen] [vor 23.6.] 1681 Nr. 69 an Johann Wilhelm Petersen in Eutin 23.6.1681 Nr. 70 an Johanna Eleonora Petersen in Eutin [23.6.1681] Nr. 71 an [einen Amtsbruder] 24.6.1681 Nr. 72 an [einen Amtsbruder auf dem Land] 25.6.1681 Nr. 73 an [Georg Grabow in Cölln a.d. Spree] 28.6.1681 Nr. 74 an [Samuel Pomarius in Lübeck] 30.6.1681 Nr. 75 an [Balthasar Köpke in Fehrbellin] [1. Jahreshälfte?] 1681 Nr. 76 an Johann Wilhelm Petersen in Eutin 12.7.1681 Nr. 77 an Sophie Elisabeth von Sachsen-Zeitz in Zeitz 14.7.1681 Nr. 78 an [Johann Schilter in Jena] 14.7.1681 Nr. 79 an [einen befreundeten Theologen] 19.7.1681 Nr. 80 an Veit Ludwig von Seckendorff in Zeitz 22.7.1681 Nr. 81 an [Tobias Winckler in Nürnberg] 23.7.1681 Nr. 82 an [einen Unbekannten] 26.7.1681 Nr. 83 an [Georg Grabow in Cölln a.d. Spree] [Ende Juli/ Anfang August 1681] Nr. 84 an [Sebastian Kirchmeier in Rothenburg o.d.T.] 1.8.1681 Nr. 85 an Gottlieb Spizel in Augsburg 4.8.1681 Nr. 86 an [Katharina Platz in Mülheim am Rhein] 8.8.1681 Nr. 87 an Seger von den Berghe in Köln 10.8.1681 Nr. 88 an [Johann Matthäus Faber in Heilbronn?] 13.8.1681 Nr. 89 an [Christian Philipp Leutwein in Pfedelbach] [zwischen 7. und 13.8.1681] Nr. 90 an [Caspar Rebhan in Eisenach] 19.8.1681 Nr. 91 an Christian Kortholt in Kiel 19.8.1681 Nr. 92 an Seger von den Berghe in Köln 21.8.1681 Nr. 93 an Veit Ludwig von Seckendorff in Zeitz 26.8.1681 Nr. [93] Bemerkungen zu dem Vorschlag eines Predigerseminars Nr. 94 an [einen Kirchenältesten] 26.8.1681 Nr. 95 an [Maria Amalia von Geispitzheim in Zeitz] 30.8.1681 Nr. 96 an [einen Unbekannten] [August/Anfang September 1681] Nr. 97 an [einen Amtsbruder] 1.9.1681 Nr. 98 an [einen Bekannten in Straßburg] 2.9.1681 Nr. 99 an [Sophie Elisabeth von Sachsen-Zeitz in Zeitz] 2.9.1681 Nr. 100 an Johann Wilhelm Petersen in Eutin 5.9.1681 Nr. 101 an [Johann Christoph Holtzhausen] in [Hamburg] 7.9.1681 Nr. 102 an Gottlieb Spizel in Augsburg 7.9.1681 Nr. 103 an [einen neuen Anhänger] 9.9.1681 Nr. 104 an [Johann Christoph Holland in Erfurt] 9.9.1681 Nr. 105 an [einen Unbekannten] 23.9.1681 Nr. 106 an Ahasver Fritsch in Rudolstadt 26.9.1681 Nr. 107 an [Philipp Albert Orth in Pfedelbach] [September/Oktober] 1681 Nr. 108 an [Balthasar Friedrich Saltzmann] in Straßburg 3.10.1681 Nr. 109 an [einen Amtsbruder] 6.10.1681 Nr. 110 an [Jacob Bernhard Multz in Öttingen] [vor 10.10.] 1681 Nr. 111 an [einen Amtsbruder?] 12.10.1681 Nr. 112 an [einen Laien] 18.10.1681 Nr. 113 an [einen befreundeten Laien] 19.10.1681 Nr. 114 an [einen Amtsbruder] 20.10.1681 Nr. 115 an Johann Wilhelm Petersen in Eutin 22.10.1681 Nr. 116 an [Balthasar Friedrich Saltzmann in Straßburg] [Oktober] 1681 Nr. 117 an [den Vater eines Studenten] 1.11.[1681] Nr. 118 an [einen Unbekannten] 5.11.1681 Nr. 119 an [Eleonore Erdmuthe Luise von Brandenburg-Ansbach in Ansbach] 10.11.1681 Nr. 120 an Johann Wilhelm Petersen in Eutin 19.11.1681 Nr. 121 an [einen Unbekannten] 28.11.1681 Nr. 122 an [einen Unbekannten] [Herbst] 1681 Nr. 123 an [Friedrich Breckling in Amsterdam] [Ende November/Anfang Dezember] 1681 Nr. 124 an Sophie Elisabeth von Sachsen-Zeitz in Zeitz 1.12.1681 Nr. 125 an [Michael Christian Ludovici in Zeitz] [ca. 1.12.] 1681 Nr. 126 an die lutherische Gemeinde in Köln 8.12.1681 Nr. 127 an [Johann Tobias German in Trarbach?] [vor 15.12.] 1681 Nr. 128 an Sophie Elisabeth von Sachsen-Zeitz in Zeitz 15.12.1681 Nr. 129 an [Johann Georg Gichtel in Amsterdam] 15.12.[1681] Nr. 130 an [Balthasar Friedrich Saltzmann] in Straßburg [Mitte Dezember] 1681 Nr. 131 an Johann Schilter in Jena 21.12.1681 Nr. 132 an Ahasver Fritsch in Rudolstadt 22.12.1681 Nr. 133 an [Anton Reiser in Hamburg] 28.12.1681 Nr. 134 an [Michael Christian Ludovici] in [Zeitz] 30.12.1681 Nr. 135 an [Veit Ludwig von Seckendorff in Zeitz] 30.12.1681 Nr. 136 an Johann Wilhelm Petersen in Eutin 31.12.[1681] Nr. 137 an [einen Amtsbruder] im [Elsaß?] [November/Dezember] 1681 Nr. 138 an [Johann Caspar Francke in Eisleben] [2. Jahreshälfte] 1681 Nr. 139 an [einen Freund] [Ende?] 1681 Nr. 140 an [einen Amtsbruder] 1681 Nr. 141 an [einen Amtsbruder] 1681 Nr. 142 an [eine Unbekannte] 1681 Nr. 143 an [eine Gruppe von Amtsbrüdern] 1681 Nr. 144 an [einen Unbekannten] 1681 Nr. 145 an [David Nerreter in Öttingen] [1681] Nr. 146 an [Jacob Bernhard Multz in Öttingen] 1681 Nr. 147 an [einen Unbekannten] 1681 Nr. 148 an [ein Hoffräulein] 1681 Nr. 149 an [einen Theologiestudenten?] 1681 Nr. 150 an [einen älteren Theologen] 1681 Nr. 151 an [eine Anhängerin] 1681 Nr. 152 an [Heinrich Witsche in Plau?] 1681 Nr. 153 an [David Nerreter in Öttingen] [1681/82] Fünf Briefe aus den Jahren ca. 1677 bis 1681, in denen Spener die Nähe des Jüngsten Tages bestreitet Nr. 154 an [Johann Ulrich Wild in Esslingen] [um 1677?] Nr. 155 an [Johann Ulrich Wild in Esslingen] [1677] Nr. 156 an [Johann Ulrich Wild in Esslingen] [nach 1677] Nr. 157 an [Johann Ulrich Wild in Esslingen] [um 1680] Nr. 158 an [Johann Ulrich Wild in Esslingen] 1681 Verzeichnis der Fundorte Handschriften Drucke Register Personen Orte Bibelstellen Schlüssel zu den zeitgenössischen Sammlungen von Ph. J. Speners Bedenken und Briefen

Das Herbsttreffen Patholinguistik wird seit 2007 jährlich vom Verband für Patholinguistik e.V. (vpl) durchgeführt. Die Jubiläumsveranstaltung am 19.11.2011 in Potsdam war nicht nur die 5. Auflage der Veranstaltung, sondern auch ein Fest zum 10jährigen Bestehen des Verbandes. Das Thema lautete "Schluck für Schluck: Dysphagietherapie bei Kindern und Erwachsenen". Im vorliegenden Tagungsband finden sich die Artikel der Hauptvorträge sowie die Abstracts der Posterpräsentationen.
The 'Herbsttreffen Patholinguistik' is an annual conference organized by the Association for Patholinguistics (Verband für Patholinguistik e.V./vpl) since 2007. The anniversary event on November 19th, 2011 in Potsdam marked both the 5th edition of this conference series and the 10th birthday of the vpl. The main topic of the meeting was "Sip by sip: Dysphagia therapy in children and adults". These proceedings contain the papers from the invited talks and the abstracts of the poster presentations.

Thesis (M.S. in Combat Systems Technology)--Naval Postgraduate School, December 2004.
Thesis advisor(s): Alfred W.Cooper, Gamani Karunasiri. Includes bibliographical references (p. 91-92). Also available online.

International Telemetering Conference Proceedings / October 30-November 02, 1995 / Riviera Hotel, Las Vegas, Nevada
A 5-Watt S-Band telemetry transmitter is often the biggest power drain on an airborne telemetry system's power supply. Furthermore, operation is typically limited to supply voltages of 24 Volts or higher. This is because the traditional telemetry transmitter uses a series regulator power supply and silicon bipolar amplifiers. In this paper we describe the design philosophy of a high efficiency telemetry transmitter that uses Gallium Arsenide Field Effect Transistors (GaAs FETs) as the power output stages. The GaAs FETs provide efficiency levels not achievable with silicon bipolar technology. In addition, the power supply uses a switching regulator which provides for constant power drain as a function of input voltage and allows operation down to an input voltage of 18 Volts. Overall, the transmitter can reduce the system's power drain by 30%.

The demand for wireless devices is increasing, new standards are constantly evolving and the operating frequencies are spreading towards higher spectrums. The stress on lowering the voltage supply, the power consumption, the cost and increasing level of integration are the driving forces behind today's RF microelectronics research.
The goal of this thesis is to show the possibility of standard CMOS technology replacing the traditional technologies in RFIC applications, specifically in the design and implementation of frequency synthesizers for 5GHz WLAN applications. The frequency synthesizer is a key building block of WLAN transceivers. To generate multiple frequencies with the resolution required by 5GHz WLAN standards, a fractional-N frequency synthesizer architecture was successfully implemented in 1.8V 0.18mum CMOS technology. To be able to cover the lower and upper 5GHz bands of both HiperLan and 802.11a standards, a wide tuning range quadrature voltage controlled oscillator (VCO), providing a 4-phase output and operating from 5GHz to 6GHz, was used in the phase lock loop (PLL) design. The 5GHz WLAN standards are targeted since they are the most promising, they have few interferers and large data throughputs.
This thesis presents one of the few frequency synthesizers having a large bandwidth of operation and a small resolution reported to-date for this type of application. Also, the digital components used in this frequency synthesizer, namely the fractional-N divider and prescaler have the lowest power consumption reported to-date.

The purpose of this project was to design and manufacture a Low-Noise Amplifier (LNA) working at a 5 GHz frequency band, by using High Electron Mobility Transistor (HEMT) from Avago Technologies. To improve our design, it was necessary to build a two-stage amplifier; one stage to work in minimum noise sensitivity, and another stage to get the maximum gain achievable by the transistor. This thesis work was carried out as a part of the UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) system project developed by a research group at the Radio communication and Microwave Electronics department, UMH.The project was designed and simulated using Agilent ADS (Advanced Design System) software.

The Board of Directors of the Central Bank, as per the provisions of Article 5 of Law 31 of 1992, submits a report to the Congress of the Republic that describes the macroeconomic performance for the first half of 2019 and its prospects for the remainder of the year. The last two chapters report on the composition of the country’s international reserves and the projection of the financial situation of Banco de la República for 2019. The last chapter analyzes the payment systems in the cou

In response to the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the IDB Group Board of Governors endorsed the target of increasing climate-related financing in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) from 15% in 2015 to 30% of the IDB Groups combined total approvals by 2020. Currently, the IDB Group is on track to meet this commitment, as in 2018, it financed nearly US$5 billion in climate-change-related activities benefiting LAC, which accounted for 27% of total IDB Groups annual approvals. In 2019, the overall volume and proportion of climate finance in new IDBG approvals have increased to 29%. As the IDB continues to strive towards this goal by using its funds to ramp-up climate action, it also acknowledges that tackling climate change is an objective shared with the rest of the international community. For the past ten years, strategic partnerships have been forged with external sources of finance that are also looking to invest in low-carbon and climate-resilient development. Doing this has contributed to the Banks objective of mobilizing additional resources for climate action while also strengthening its position as a leading partner to accelerate climate innovation in many fields. From climate-smart technologies and resilient infrastructure to institutional reform and financial mechanisms, IDB's use of external sources of finance is helping countries in LAC advance toward meeting their international climate change commitments. This report collects a series of insights and lessons learned by the IDB in the preparation and implementation of projects with climate finance from four external sources: the Climate Investment Funds (CIF), the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF), the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and the Global Environment Facility (GEF). It includes a systematic revision of their design and their progress on delivery, an assessment of broader impacts (scale-up, replication, and contributions to transformational change/paradigm shift), and a set of recommendations to optimize the access and use of these funds in future rounds of climate investment. The insights and lessons learned collected in this publication can inform the design of short and medium-term actions that support “green recovery” through the mobilization of investments that promote decarbonization.

The power and promise of genome editing, CRISPR specifically, was first realized with the discovery of CRISPR loci in the 1980s.3 Since that time, CRISPR-Cas systems have been further developed enabling genome editing in virtually all organisms across the tree of life.3 In the last few years, we have seen the development of a diverse set of CRISPR-based technologies that has revolutionized genome manipulation.4 Enabling a more diverse set of actors than has been seen with other emerging technologies to redefine research and development for biotechnology products encompassing food, agriculture, and medicine.4 Currently, the CRISPR community encompasses over 40,000 authors at 20,000 institutions that have documented their research in over 20,000 published and peer-reviewed studies.5 These CRISPR-based genome editing tools have promised tremendous opportunities in agriculture for the breeding of crops and livestock across the food supply chain. Potentially addressing issues associated with a growing global population, sustainability concerns, and possibly help address the effects of climate change.4 These promises however, come along-side concerns of environmental and socio-economic risks associated with CRISPR-based genome editing, and concerns that governance systems are not keeping pace with the technological development and are ill-equipped, or not well suited, to evaluate these risks. The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) launched an initiative in 2020 to understand the complexities of these new tools, their potential impacts on the LAC region, and how IDB may best invest in its potential adoption and governance strategies. This first series of discussion documents: “Genome Editing in Latin America: Regulatory Overview,” and “CRISPR Patent and Licensing Policy” are part of this larger initiative to examine the regulatory and institutional frameworks surrounding gene editing via CRISPR-based technologies in the Latin America and Caribbean (LAC) regions. Focusing on Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Honduras, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay, they set the stage for a deeper analysis of the issues they present which will be studied over the course of the next year through expert solicitations in the region, the development of a series of crop-specific case studies, and a final comprehensive regional analysis of the issues discovered.