Talk:Optical fiber

message: In the section "Comparison with electrical transmission", the article mentiones High electrical resistance for fiber optic cables. I'm wondering whether this means higher electrical resistance than electric cables, or complete electrical resistance instead. Would be nice if someone cleared that up.
*Well, electical resistance is never "complete" - it's always some finite value, even if it's really high. In general, the electical resistance of glass fibre is as high as any other piece of glass, i.e. pretty damn high. --Bob Mellish 15:27, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  electrical resistance 

message: I was surprised to see Corning refered to as a British company. Unless there is something very subtle (like their distant origins), Corning is surely american - based in Corning, NY. Keck and co-workers, I am certain, did their pioneering work in the USA.
There are at least three different histories of the development of optical fibre - British, Japanese and American. The British credits Kao and Hockham and the Post Office Research Centre, The Japanese credits Nakahara and Sumitomo, the American credits Keck and Corning. That's a very simplistic summary, but the essence is correct - it depends mostly on the nationality of the author / teller of the history. My view? It was an idea whose time had come and all parties were innovating at the same time and contributed to the progress. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 138.130.64.75 (talk • contribs) .
:Actually, they each made complimentary contributions to the art. The BPO, known then, establihed the requirements through the Kao Hockman papers. Corning invented a viable process and material for making fiber. Other companies in Japan and elsewhere created many needed components for fiber systems. Numerous patent trials through the 1980's established the primacy of Corning's (a NY company) inventions, on a world wide basis. This is not to discredit the contributions of others in many very important areas.  The case is clearly laid out in "The Silent War" Magaziner 1990. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.24.214.136 (talk • contribs) .
::Corning's roots are very American -- it was founded in the 19th century in Corning, New York where it is still headquartered; the company was named after the town. Today, the company is very global and I would not be surprised if they have as many, if not, more employees overseas as in the U.S. --A. B. 17:31, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Who published the first research? Which journal was it published in? When was it published? Who holds the patent?Ghostofnemo (talk) 15:35, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corning 

message: Which is correct?  The article states "Typical single mode fibre optic cables can sustain transmission distances of 80 to 140 km" but then "Recent advances in fiber technology have reduced losses so far that no amplification of the optical signal is needed over distances of hundreds of kilometers".  One or the other is the state of the art... which is it!!!! I need to know!
>> "Recent Advances" vs. "Typical Fiber". ;)
јјјјјј  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.162.216.230 (talk) 17:27, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistency in range 

message: While editing another wikipedia article (translated from German/Deutsch, if that makes any difference), I see the term "optical waveguide cables". Is that exactly the same thing as "optical fiber", or something different ? Is this phrase common enough to mention in the article ? --DavidCary 21:44, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  optical waveguide cables 

message: Is there a reason why fibre is used instead of fiber 4 times in the article?  The only mention I see is at the beginning, where it states that fibre is the British term.  I can't see any contextual differences between the use of fiber and fibre, and unless someone has a reason, will change all instances to fiber.
>1. It helps with search engines
>2. Brits and Aussies editing the page will use fibre, while USA uses fiber.
While I certainly want people to come read this page, whether they type "fibre" or "fiber" into their search engines, it just seems inconsistent for the article title to say "fiber" while the article text uses "fibre". --DavidCary 21:44, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see Wikipedia:Manual of Style#National varieties of english. The guideline is for each article to be internally consistent. I have made all the uses of fibre consistent with the article title (fiber). The main gotcha would be if the Fibre Channel standard should be mentioned, the title of that standard uses the British spelling. To aid the search engines, there should be a "redirect page" from "Optical Fibre" to this page. If it's not there, I will figure out how to create it.--The Photon 16:18, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fiber vs Fibre 

message: “Optical fiber in waveguides” piece probably refers to some advanced integrated optics application, or some optical backplane application. However in present form is uninformative and misleading. Could somebody please correct this paragraph. Or, may be, we should remove it. --Sergiusz 23:27, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I support removing the sectionThe Photon 05:01, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Unless its meant to be a reference to something like , in which case, somebody please write it up so it makes sense.--The Photon 04:49, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Optical fiber in waveguides 

message: RELEASE FRIDAY MARCH 22, 2002. Bell Labs scientists transmit 64 channels of data at 40 gigabits per second per channel (2.56 Tbps) over 4000 kilometers (2500 miles) 
In OFC 2005  paper by a group from Agere Systems -- a record-setting fiber optic transmission rate of 3.2 Tbps. --Sergiusz 20:49, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  To be included, FO Transmission Records 

message: Hello,
I added manufacturing by MCVD, but was unsure how to reference the article. Can someone please have a look at this? Thanks.
:You did fine! One thing you might want to do now is to find those terms in your new text that reference other Wikipedia articles, and make them Wikilinks by enclosing the term in square brackets like so: Chemical vapor deposition. You can also reference an article using a different term than the actual article name, like so: Modified Chemical Vapor Deposition; the first part is the actual article title and the second part is what will show up here in the article, for example: Modified Chemical Vapor Deposition.
:Remember, though, Wiki standard practice is to only make a term a Wikilink the first time that it appears in the article. Subsequent reuses of the term aren't Wikilinked.
:Also, you may want to "sign" your talk postings (here) by putting four tildes (~~~~) after your post. When you press "Save page", these will be replaced by your username or IP address in a handy Wikilinked format. A timestamp will also be included.
:Atlant 13:54, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added Manufacturing 

message: I removed this text:
Svetlana plant in Saint Petersburg, Russia was first who decided to use fiberoptics in house aronments and decorations. Namely in Fiberoptic UFO lamp, which look like this. [url]http://www.thingsthatglow.com/html/images/8612.jpg[/url]
The lamp from light travels through painted glass, then through fiberoptics.	
Reason: Hecht mentions decorative lamps of this type around 1958, but gives no solid citation. 
If there's any citation for these lamps at an earlier date in St Petersburg, please re-add the text with citation. If the St Petersburg lamp doesn't predate 1958, but if the image is available under a free license, consider using it to illustrate the "Other uses of Fiber Optics" section.
--The Photon 00:07, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed text on Svetlana Plant, Saint Petersburg 

message: Is this Peter Schultz the same one referenced in the "History" section of this article?
:Based on the biography at shultz.scripps.edu, I'd say say "No." -- The Photon 05:17, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this the same Peter Schultz? 

message: Hi..
i would like to see the history section be after the principle..... it doesn't make sense putting it at the end.....
Jayant, 17 Years, India|(Talk) 05:30, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For articles on technical and scientific topics, the history is often not all that important compared to the technical details and applications.--Srleffler 06:58, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, this is a very important technical innovation, and I think the history section should be expanded. Can you imagine an article about the telephone that doesn't go into some detail as to who developed the device, how it was conceived, and where was it developed? In whose lab was this developed? Who made the breakthrough to make a glass rod into flexible fibers and clad the fibers in a plastic coating? Who holds the patent? Who gets credit for this amazing breakthrough? We know about the light bulb, the automobile, the telephone, the airplane, but all of this amazing modern technology, like integrated circuits, digital electronics, and fiber optics just....appears. Edison, Ford, Bell, the Wright brothers were all famous men.Ghostofnemo (talk) 15:31, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

text: Found this: "In 1954, Dutch scientist Abraham Van Heel and British scientist Harold. H. Hopkins separately wrote papers on imaging bundles. Hopkins reported on imaging bundles of unclad fibers while Van Heel reported on simple bundles of clad fibers. He covered a bare fiber with a transparent cladding of a lower refractive index. This protected the fiber reflection surface from outside distortion and greatly reduced interference between fibers. At the time, the greatest obstacle to a viable use of fiber optics was in achieving the lowest signal (light) loss." at http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa980407.htm Ghostofnemo (talk) 15:54, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Put the history first..... 

message: I think the whole area of fiber optic cable should either be expanded or else moved to a separate article with a summary and link here. Your thoughts?--A. B. 01:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No need to ask -- be bold and expand the section. If it gets too out of balance with the rest of this article, that's the time to split it out to its own article. -- The Photon 01:36, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fiber optic cable

message: This is a very useful article, but I am missing some additional input from experts out there (there is bound to be somebody) on the use of optical fibre instead of copper fibre. Any takers?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.169.127.6 (talk • contribs) .
:See article on FTTP for practical application of PON technology to replace existing copper wire with fiber optic plant, and Verizon's FiOS roll out using BPON technology. This is a very broad subject, if there is anything you are specifically curious about, I'll be happy to discuss. --Toddyboy711 19:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Uses of Optical fibre as a replacement of traditional "copper" lines for the transfer of data

message: I re-reorganized the Principle of operation section. The article needs to start with a section that focuses on how an optical fiber works, rather than focusing on cataloguing types of fiber. We can do both, but not the way the previous reorganization structured it. In particular, that edit implied that one can divide fiber into four distinct types: step index, graded index, multimode, and singlemode. That's misleading. Multimode and singlemode fiber can each be either step index or graded index (although graded index singlemode fiber is not used commercially as far as I know). I think it flows better to divide into single- and multimode, and deal with step vs. graded within the sections. That allows us to focus on how fiber works, without totally rewriting the section.--Srleffler 04:08, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Principle of operation 

message: It sounds like a lot of you have specialized experience that would be useful for improving the Fiber-optic communication article, especially the optical fiber section of that article johnpseudo 19:18, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fiber-optic communication

message: Should we perhaps mention that optical fibres are being used in Raman Spectroscopy probes or should that go in the Raman page? GreatMizuti 06:40, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Raman Probes?

message: ok, that may sound silly and irrelevant but it seems like useful information for an encyclopedia. are there other ways that can provide faster telecommunication? --87.194.72.129 01:33, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: hah, very interesting, thanks. (hm, i didn't know irda was part of that technology..) --87.194.72.129 01:19, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there anything "faster"? 

message: I was about to add this image that I created to the article:
However I didn't add the image, because it seems like the article already has quite a few images. I was worried that the article would become too cluttered. I would like a second (or third) opinion on this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kebes (talk • contribs) 20:07, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally really like this image - it explains a lot.  I would support it being added to the article. fonetikli 01:56, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Looks good to me.  Put it near the top where there's plenty of room. Dicklyon 03:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Add image?

message: I often read about fiber-pigtails in connectors or isolators. Why are they not mentioned here?
How can the modes be matched, if going from a fibre to a crystal (modulator, isolator, diode)?
How can one make optical waveguides out of crystals? Are they all etched into the surface of large crysals with some doping to change the index of refraction? What if I do not want to dope? Arnero 19:52, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If your crystal has a waveguide, like in a laser diode, you mode match with a tiny lens or other optics. If the crystal doesn't have a waveguide, you just use a lens to collimate the beam from the fiber. Waveguides are usually made in crystals by doping.--Srleffler 04:52, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pigtails 

message: Under the heading "Singlemode fiber" it is said:
"Fiber with a core diameter less than about ten times the wavelength of the propagating light...". The adjacent image (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Singlemode_fibre_structure.png) describes a singlemode fiber with a core diameter of 8 μm (and this is consistent with the fact that generally singlemode fibers have a core with a diameter around 10 μm). However, it means that this will act as a singlemode fiber for wavelengths more than 10 times longer, i.e. more than 80 μm (80,000 nm!). So visible (or near IR) light (say, 1,000 nm) will NOT regard this core as a singlemode core ?!
In other words, according to the sentence cited above, a singlemode fiber with cutoff wavelength of 488 nm (I am using these daily) should have a core diameter of ~ 50 nm...
Can anybody sort out this discrepancy?
--Microspot 06:10, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The diameter of the fibre is 10 times the wavelength, so the 10 μm fibre can handle 1 μm wavelength, which is longer than visible light.  I think you got the ten times round the wrong way. GB 09:15, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Singlemode fiber 

message: what is the known lifespan of the optic fibre in different environments? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.35.5.145 (talk • contribs).
:With the exception of optical runaway PDF, I'm not sure there are any practical limits to the life of a passive piece of fiber optic cable. Cable with electrical repeaters would be a different story, of course.
:Atlant 23:31, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: At least some cable is known to spontaneously break if you bend it, depending on bend radius, after some time (months-decades). The shorter the radius, the quicker it goes. In an ocean environment I think hydrogen contamination can occur (IRC), and that limits life.WolfKeeper 03:41, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

text: That's a really complicated question, it depends on modulation technique, whether there is dispersion compensation on or for the cable, and whether you are using optical repeaters.WolfKeeper 03:41, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Optical fiber lifespan 

message: Um... source?
You can't just multiply the channels by 40G.... it turns out that the channels aren't actually independent, the fiber is not completely linear in several different ways, so there's intermodulation between different channels that tend to mess each other up. Even going from 10G to 40G you have to double the channel spacing. There's many, many complications.
AFAIK the current practical limit is more like 14TB/s or a factor higher, but not 1PB, that's currently out of reach, barring some breakthrough. And even ~14TB/s needs a large number of racks of lasers to get all the different channels lit, and there lots of couplers needed... all kinds of mess.
If it's not referenced it needs to come out.WolfKeeper 06:45, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like some theoretical number for the upper limit of a fiber's information-carrying capacity. Still, it's been marked "citation needed" for a while and it seems better to yank it out until a citable source can be found. 123davidn found a reference to that limit in a discussion forum posting, but that's not a citable source. I presume the discussion forum is not the original source, but that they may have seen the number quoted somewhere.--Srleffler 03:43, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  14 PB/s? 

message: Is brand rex a notable fibre producer? I found an abstract of Elliot's fibre optic cabling that mentions them,  Previously I have read the book and recall is small, but full of good information for connecting, layout and routing of fibre, as well as other good things. I don't have the book on me at the moment, can anyone confirm if it is mentioned in Elliot's book? Abstract Fiber Optic Cabling, Second Edition (Newnes) ? A quick search seems to show lots of cabling connectors, more than fibres. User A1 (talk) 02:51, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brand-rex 

message: I oppose merging in Colour coding of optical fibers here. I'm not sure that material needs its own article, but it's too specialized for the article on optical fibers. Perhaps we need a article on optical fiber cables, which could incorporate that material and some material from this article.--Srleffler (talk) 02:24, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That would work. We do need an article on optical fibre cabling. 132.205.99.122 (talk) 21:28, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I support Srleffler's position and proposal. In fact, since it's more than a week since his comments, I'll make the new article at Optical fiber cable. The Photon 16:53, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with Colour coding of optical fibers 

message: I find it dismal that I can't find Synchronous optical networking (SONET), Fiber distributed data interface (FDDI), or TOSLINK anywhere on this page.  This article is very heavy on theory and lacking any real examples of application except the caption on the picture of the TOSLINK cable.  For shame!  Someone please come back to Earth and throw us a few practical examples of your lofty conceptions. Stephen Charles Thompson (talk) 07:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is an overview of optical fiber and fiber optics. It contains brief summaries of how optical fiber is used, but if you want to get into technical details you should be reading a more specific article, such as Fiber-optic communication, which has links to all of the articles you mentioned. The short section on fiber optic communications here begins with a link to the more detailed article on the topic.--Srleffler (talk) 14:09, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the link to the main article Fiber-optic communication does not list Synchronous optical networking (SONET), Fiber distributed data interface (FDDI), or TOSLINK as examples either.  It doesn't even mention or link Verizon FIOS as it discusses "..telecommunications companies to transmit telephone signals, Internet communication, and cable television signals...".  Again, as I said, this is dismal.  It lacks involvement with the general community by failing to provide examples or references to common objects they may be familiar with.  It lacks participation with the reader at large. (e.g. Circus mentions Clowns and P.T. Barnum.) Stephen Charles Thompson (talk) 17:05, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure I understand your complaint. The article Fiber-optic communication certainly does contain links to the articles on SONET, FDDI, and TOSLINK. They are in the section on "Governing Standards". Perhaps you feel they should be discussed in some other way in the article? I'm not sure what you have in mind, though. You refer to them as "examples", but I'm not sure that is a good description. These are technical standards, two of which are probably of little importance to most readers. Similarly, you seem surprised we have no link to an article on a specific phone company's fiber optic service. Why would we? There are thousands of phone companies in the world. Should we have links to all of them in the main article on optical fiber? It's not even clear to me that the article on fiber optic communication should link to individual vendors, nor is it clear that Wikipedia should have an article on Verizon FiOS. --Srleffler (talk) 19:24, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Application examples

message: Not that there's much to merge as the topic is fully covered in this article. Anyone mind a plain redirect? ˉˉanetode╦╩ 12:00, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I mind. I reversed your edits. The fiber cable article had been vandalized a month ago, deleting most of its content. I restored the pre-vandal version. The articles are separate due to Summary style. That article treats the construction of fiber cables in more detail than this article. I also undid your change in categories. This is an odd case—we have a category on fiber optics as a discipline, and a category on optical fibers. The latter is for articles on specific types of optical fiber. There is no article on the field of fiber optics, however. This article is the "main article" for :Category:Fiber optics, and also for :Category:Optical fiber. Yes, it means the article is in a category and the parent category. Exception to the rule...--Srleffler (talk) 18:55, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I didn't realize there was more to the cable article. I don't see the necessity in duplicating categories since the categorization scheme itself is not linearly hierarchical, but that's a minor issue. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 03:36, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merger of [[optical fiber cable]] 

message: Hullo,
:This is a request for information on 
::1. Fibre optic cable testing using an optical power source and an optical power meter 
::2. Wavelength  (why only specific values like 630, 780, 850 .....   and  not any other number)
::3. Wavelenght dependency,  polarization dependency and power range of the meter.
::4. The spectral halfwidth of the source 
::5. The relevance  of power measured in dBm.
: 
: and any other point relevant to  testing of fiber optical fibers
NManju (talk) 10:35, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fiber  Optic Cable Testing 

message: 1800 Kelvins isn't 2200 Celsius, but around 1530. And that's very close to the point at which glass forms. Could someone double-check this?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.252.237.202 (talk) 14:38, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, 1800 K is 1526.85 °C exactly; I believe the 1800 K is intended to be a figure rounded to the nearest hundred, so the conversion without false precision would be 1500 °C. I'm going to fix that. --A. di M. (talk) 16:33, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Temperature figures are incorrect 

message: :I copied this from my discussion page.--Afluegel (talk - WP Glass) 07:02, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Very good! I think you could easily include in the planned article also the strength of glass in general. I will copy this to the discussion pages of the articles Optical fiber and Fiberglass.--Afluegel (talk - WP Glass) 07:00, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:Logger9/Strength of glass fiber]] 

message: I have added a much-needed section on the mechanisms of attenuation (light scattering and bond stretching/absorption) in the UV-Vis-IR portions of the EM spectrum. -- logger9 (talk) 07:26, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mechanisms of attenuation 

message: Strangely absent in the article - polymeric coatings are critical to the fiber manufacturing process and even more so to the long term performance of the fiber.  Someone commented on why optical fiber doesn't break. Due in a big way to FO coatings.  Visit this Web site for more information  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pfoarde (talk • contribs) 22:19, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch. Not sure how we managed to miss that. I moved the new material up to another section in the article, and will copyedit it.--Srleffler (talk) 04:46, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

text: Thanks. It does seem ot fit better under the process section. I would also like to add some information about microbending and its relationship to signal attenuation. I'm not sure where that might best be placed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.244.15.101 (talk) 10:55, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added Section on Optical Fiber Coatings 

message: I reverted some edits today. I think that trying to cram the definition of "dielectric" into the first sentence of that section breaks the flow of the sentence too much, and it just isn't that important. The key distinction is not whether the guide conducts electricity, but rather how the guide confines light. A metallic waveguide confines electromagnetic waves by simple reflection from the metal. A dielectric guide confines them by total internal reflection from a dielectric interface. This is the most important thing to say about a dielectric waveguide. The definition of "dielectric" follows in the second sentence of the section, both via a link to dielectric and the definition that a dielectric is an electrically nonconducting material.--Srleffler (talk) 21:09, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dielectric waveguide 

message: Is there a maximum number of splice fusions for a (SM and MM) optical fiber cable?--Jdvillalobos (talk) 16:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That would depend on how bad the splices are. If you can get a near-zero dB loss, you can repeat it as many times as you want.Toddyboy711 (talk) 02:30, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maximum number of fusions 

message: In 1965 Manfred Börner from the german Telefunken AG fabricated the first Optical-Fiber-Data-Conduction-System, constructed out of a laser diode, fiberglass and photodiode. 1966 he patented this System (Manfred Börner, Mehrstufiges Übertragungssystem für Pulscodemodulation dargestellte Nachrichten, DBP Nr. 1254513, 1966 / French Pat.Nt. 1548972 / Brit. Pat. Nr. 1202418 / US Pat. Nr. 3845-293). Matzei (talk) 00:53, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If this person is who you say he is, then he should be very notable.  Try making a stub of a wikipedia page for him.  I don't think I'm being "anglosphere-centric" when a google search of his name gives no indication of his notability. johnpseudo 12:29, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Some links for you: - Joachim Hagenauers speech at the ITG Festveranstaltung 26. April 2004 Citation Prof. Dr. Joachim Hagenauer: "So der leider verstorbene Professor Börner, der aus den Forschungslabors von AEG/Telefunken hervorging und bis 1994 an der TU München lehrte. Er gilt als der visionäre Erfinder der Glasfaserübertragung (English: He is the visionary inventor of the Optical-Fiber-Conduction), einer Technik, die heute das Rückgrad der weltweiten Kommunikation darstellt. - Südwestrundfunk SWR2, Datenströme durch die Tiefsee, 16. Januar 2006, 08.30 Uhr Text MP3 Download Citation Prof. Reinhold Noé: „In den 60er Jahren wurden Glasfasern mit niedrigem Verlust entwickelt. Im Jahre 1966 hat der spätere Professor Manfred Börner erstmalig Licht moduliert und damit Daten übertragen (English: In 1966 Manfred Börner was the first, who modulated light [laser diode -> fiberglass -> photodiode] to transfer datas “- http://www.heise.de/ct/artikel/Synergien-zerbroeselt-289306.html Citation: "Im Forschungsinstitut Ulm sicherte Manfred Börner 1966 dem Unternehmen weltweit das erste Patent für ein Glasfaser-Übertragungssystem." (English: At the researche institute in Ulm Manfred Börner registered for the company [Telefunken] the first patent for the Optical-Fiber-Data-Conduction- http://klausdietz.de/KLausElektronikGeschichte.html- http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manfred_B%C3%B6rnerMatzei (talk) 04:49, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems like you have a handful of personal accounts from German physicists and a link to a German wikipedia article that you wrote.  Can you show me a link to a reliable source?  Something official, written on behalf of an establishment (like a research journal, magazine, newspaper, etc.)? johnpseudo 12:35, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Johnpseudo, i'll name you some official sources:- M. J. Howes and D. V. Morgan, eds., Optical Fiber Communications,.  p. 4 (Chapter 1, P.Russer, Introduction to optical communications), Wiley, New York. (1980): Citation: "The first suggestions to use fibers as a transmission medium for optical communication were made in 1966 by Kao and Hockham, Werts, and Boerner."- Hans-Georg Unger, Vater der Glasfaserkommunikation, Physik Journal (2009) Nr. 12, Wiley-VCH Verlag, Weinheim- http://www.heise.de/ct/artikel/Synergien-zerbroeselt-289306.html  Citation: "Im Forschungsinstitut Ulm sicherte Manfred Börner 1966 dem Unternehmen weltweit das erste Patent für ein Glasfaser-Übertragungssystem." (English: At the researche institute in Ulm Manfred Börner registered for the company [Telefunken] the first patent for the Optical-Fiber-Data-Conduction" -> C't Magazin is a prestigious german Magazin- Wolfgang Kaiser, Eduard-Rhein-Preis für Prof Dr. Manfred Börner, TUM Mitteilungen 1 - 90/91, Seite 30f, Citation: "Der Systemvorschlag von Prof. Börner beruht auf dem sinnvollen Zusammenwirken von Laserdiode als Lichtsender, Glasfaser  als Übertragungsmedium und Photodiode." Matzei (talk) 13:49, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That seems to be pretty good sourcing to me.  But I still think your original wording overstates his significance. "Until today all optoelectronic Data-Conduction-Systems are based on his suggestion." doesn't really seem supported by your sources.  He was one of several scientists who came to the same conclusion.  It also doesn't seem like he really "fabricated the first Optical-Fiber-Data-Conduction-System".  He just patented the first system. johnpseudo 13:19, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Good morning Johnpseudo, my original wording comes from Wolfgang Kaisers Laudatio on Manfred Börner, as he got the very distinguished Eduard-Rhein-Preis in 1990 (Award Winners). Source: TUM Mitteilungen 1 - 90/91, Seite 30f, Citation: "[...] sein vor bereits 25 Jahren gemachter, richtungsweisender Vorschlag, digitale optische Übertragungssysteme auf der Basis von Streckenabschnitten aufzubauen, die aus Halbleiter-Laserdioden, Glasfaserleitungen und Photodioden bestehen. Alle optischen Weitverkehrs-Übertragungssysteme arbeiten heute nach diesem, von Prof. Börner angegebenen Systemprinzip. (English: His 25 years old, trend-setting suggestion, to build optical conduction-systems based on segments out of laser diodes, fiberglasses and photodiodes. Today all optical long-distance-conduction-systems are working with this form Prof. Börner proposed principle system)." Matzei (talk) 04:10, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm just trying to reconcile the fact that Börner seems to be relatively obscure for a person who invented fiber-optic communication.  Perhaps Wolfgang Kaiser was a little generous with the facts in his "Laudatio".  Perhaps Börner was only one of several people who made the same suggestion, as your other more-reliable sources state.  It would be only natural for someone to exaggerate a little when presenting such a prize. johnpseudo 15:41, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you also think the same about the Nobel Prize and the Nobel Prize Encomiums? Don't answer, because i don't want to continue this conversation. I don't wast my time to discuss with a totaly ignorant interlocutor. The historians will finde out the truth, i know and i'am sure. Matzei (talk) 22:09, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ...And when they do that, it will become appropriate for us to put it here on wikipedia.  I'm sorry you came away feeling upset.  Schönen Tag noch! johnpseudo 15:25, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ...No hard feelings. Until honesty! Auch Dir, Johnpseudo, eine gute Zeit! Matzei (talk) 01:39, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

text: Well this link from the German article on Börner to the original patent application constitutes enough proof of his significance. In contrast to this, using - in the case of Nishizawa - one of this researcher's own, later works as a reference for his claim to have devised optical data transmission over an optical fibre already in 1963 doesn't live up to the standard's you wish to apply in Börner's case, Johnpseudo, does it? Inclusion of Börner in this article is fully warranted, hence I have added a respective sentence. -- HenryH 85.180.181.194 (talk) 10:10, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Manfred Börner 

message: As it stands, the article starts talking about optical fibers without explaining what they are. I originally added a lead sentence saying that it was a medium designed for carrying light messages. However, DKquerty reverted "per WP:NPOV: there are many uses for fiber optics beyond "messages"". As a compromise, how about saying that it is just a medium designed to carry light? (X! · talk)  · @632  ·  14:10, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps "a medium designed to carry light, often as discrete information." DKqwerty (talk) 22:04, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I find the lead to be a generally good introduction. I'm inclined to remove the rewrite tag from the top of the article. --Kvng (talk) 03:42, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  New lead sentence 

message: The illustrations of light beams literally bouncing off the cylindrical boundry of the fiber are misleading. Actual light in actual fibers does not act like that. 
Reasoning is: If a beam of light is to be propagated by a certain distance, its diameter cannot be arbitrarily small. After a distance called Rayleigh length the beam diverges to the double crossection. After several Rayleigh lengths the beam diameter is larger than the fiber diameter which obviously yields a different picture.
The image with the green beam seems to contradict the above reasoning with nice reflections. However, the acrylic rod is not a fiber. Its diameter is more than tenfold the diameter of the largest glass fibers available. It is more than hundredfold the dimension of the most popular multimode fibers. Now, try to scale the experiment down. The diameter of the laser beam is about a thenth of the diameter of the rod. The diameter of a typical multimode fiber is about 100 micron. This implies a laser beam diameter of about 10 microns to yield smilar relations as with the acrylic rod. But the rayleigh length of a green beam with 10 micron width is 0.6 mm, only. It quickly diverges and fills the whole fiber after about a centimeter. For the largest available fibers the core is about 1 mm. In this case the rayleigh length of the laser beam is not that small. But after a few meters the fiber is still completely filled by the beam.
Note, that reflections from the strongly curved wall will make the beam diverge even faster. So the image of a narrow beams bouncing off the walls is inappropriate to illustrate the way a multimode fiber actually works and should be removed.-----<(kaimartin)>--- (talk) 00:09, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  misleading illustrations 

message: Why is not the radiation effects on optical fiber systems mentioned?
I know that optical fiber have improved their resistant to radiation.
But should it not be mention from an historic point of view at least.
Some research has been don on the subject.
Radiation Effects on Optical Fiber Systems  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.12.210.241 (talk) 08:37, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Radiation Effects on Optical Fiber Systems 

message: I'm not sure how to, but I think the quantity of data between Bell and NTT is enough for a chart. It is difficult to know how the technology has progressed when the specs are all over the place. Any takers?
Twillisjr (talk) 01:48, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Optical Fiber Communication Chart 

message: Over a month ago, a patent application was published by the US Patent and Trademark Office, for a new kind of silica optical fiber:  One in which the core and inner cladding are constructed from an isotope-modified kind of silica.  Specifically, a silica where the isotopic content of Si-28 is about 99.8%-99.9%, rather than nature's 92.2% Si-28, 4.67% Si-29, and 2.3% Si-30.  See    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/WO2013101261A1.html   The main claimed advantages are a 'velocity factor' of above 90% of 'c' (compared to existing silica fibers' 68%), an optical loss 10-20x lower than existing fibers' 0.19db/km (so, a loss of about 0.019-0.0095 db/km), an optical dispersion 10x-20x lower than existing single-mode silica fibers, and an optical bandwidth from about 1000 to 1800nm wavelength (all at well under 0.05 db/km attenuation.  Obviously, these values may seem hard to believe.  I have just tried to begin a paragraph concerning this invention in a WP article titled "Jim Bell", who is the inventor of this new fiber.  You will see that Jim Bell has a very controversial background, but has a bachelor's degree in Chemistry and a scientific history in the fields of Physics, Electronics, Optics, Radio, and others. Problem is, I'm being 'trolled' by another editor, who has reverted my edit (twice) for the ostensible reason that I haven't (yet) included enough material to establish that invention's 'notability'. (Seemingly, my reference to the patent application itself is insufficient.)  I have no reason to believe that the 'troll' has even the slightest expertise in fiber optics, and almost certainly he has no knowledge sufficient to understand the meaning of the above technical advantages, let alone their significance.  Indeed, he has never edited in that article before, implying (so far) that his involvement was triggered by a 'watchlist' alone.  (He hasn't yet said why he set up such a watchlist trigger on that specific article.)   What I'm looking for is an unbiased opinion, and hopefully some assistance, from a person in the fiber-optics field.  This assistance would include reading that patent application, and expressing an opinion as to if (and why) that invention is 'notable', and adding text in that article explaining more detail as to why that invention is 'notable'.  24.21.41.211 (talk) 21:46, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: No trolling is occurring so I'd watch the name calling. Ravensfire and I are asking for secondary sources to establish notability. While Wikipedians with expertise in the field might have an easier time finding these sources, adding their opinions about notability to the article would contravene our no original research policy. --NeilN talk to me 22:08, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: As I mentioned on the talk page, I found a potential secondary source for this after a quick google search.  Other potential secondary sources would be helpful.  Ravensfire (talk) 22:16, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe I'm just 'gun-shy', but somehow I get the impression that whatever I put in could be reverted, yet again, for being somehow 'inadequate'.  Maybe if you'd agree to work WITH me, and not against me, a suitable paragraph or two could be formed within a week or so.  Presumably, somebody here will also respond to my request for help, too. 24.21.41.211 (talk) 23:36, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Your expertise and time are needed 

message: I have developed some tutorials on fibers optics which I believe will be very useful for many, presenting much detail on the physics with nice illustrations from numerically simulated example cases. One is on passive fiber optics, a second one on fiber amplifiers, and one on fiber lasers will follow.
If you agree that this is useful, please set a corresponding link under "External links" to the page http://www.rp-photonics.com/tutorials.html, or perhaps better links to the single tutorials:
passive fiber optics: http://www.rp-photonics.com/passive_fiber_optics.html
fiber amplifiers: http://www.rp-photonics.com/tutorial_fiber_amplifiers.html
RPaschotta (talk) 15:34, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tutorials on Fiber Optics 

message: On numerous occasions it might be desirable to cite repeatedly from a single source (a book for example) but from multiple pages. 
Would it not be nice if we were to adopt the system of Footnotes, notes and references as has been done in the  Franz Kafka article (a featured article too). But obviously, if this system were to be used for this article it would need to be used consistently throughout the article and redoing all the references will undoubtedly be quite a big task. And I see all the more reason to adopt such a system since this article is quite large. 
 
At present, in the way that I have added the references to the lead section (that I just edited and added references to(link)) I have just used the simple method of using a "ref name" and mentioned the page numbers only in the wiki text; now these page numbers don't really show anywhere in the page (and this is obviously bad). 
What are your thoughts on adopting a method such as the "Footnotes, notes and references" method? What are some alternative methods by which multiple pages from a single source could be cited?
MSheshera (talk) 07:09, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Referencing style.  

message: "Modern cables come in a wide variety of sheathings and armor, designed for applications such as direct burial in trenches, high voltage isolation, dual use as power lines,[64][not in citation given] installation in conduit, lashing to aerial telephone poles, submarine installation, and insertion in paved streets."
this seems vaguely relevant
hintss (talk) 13:43, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  practical issues > cable construction > dual use as power lines 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Optical fiber. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.city.sendai.jp/soumu/kouhou/s-new-e6/page01.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:39, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Optical fiber. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110711082842/http://www.generalphotonics.com/pdf/PSReprint.pdf to http://www.generalphotonics.com/pdf/PSReprint.pdf
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20091009052534/http://www.physorg.com/news173455192.html to http://www.physorg.com/news173455192.html/
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110718095104/http://www2.electronicproducts.com/Photovoltaic_feat_advances_power_over_optical_fiber-article-olap01-jun2006-html.aspx to http://www2.electronicproducts.com/Photovoltaic_feat_advances_power_over_optical_fiber-article-olap01-jun2006-html.aspx
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070125051848/http://zone.ni.com:80/devzone/cda/ph/p/id/129 to http://zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/ph/p/id/129#toc2
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110613040314/http://www.corning.com/news_center/news_releases/2007/2007072301.aspx to http://www.corning.com/news_center/news_releases/2007/2007072301.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:10, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Editors of this article may be interested in the discussion at Talk:Silicon photonics#Fiber Optics & Silicon photonics. User:Ne0Freedom is trying to remove :Category:Fiber optics from :Category:Optics and instead put it in his newly created category, :Category:Silicon photonics. I strongly oppose this. His view seems to be based on the misconception that anything optical with silicon in it (even silicon dioxide—glass) is automatically "silicon photonics".--Srleffler (talk) 01:52, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categorization of Fiber optics 

message: Early in the morning, I simply inserted the other title for optical fibres (Starting in Line 1) which is commonly called as Fiber Optics also, but I got reverted by one of the users named Wtshymanski ? Could somebody please let me know, why is it so? It is really unfair or was the user right on his place. Please someone Expert need to lookup into the matter and so improving the article.
Thanks n Regards(~~SB~~ 08:37, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: "Fiber optics" is a common term to refer to the optical endpoints (ie. transceiver) in the sense of "the optics for the fiber" and not commonly used for the fiber itself. --Zac67 (talk) 17:43, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

text: Wtshymanski was right. "Fiber optics" is not a synonym for "optical fiber". Rather, "fiber optics" is the study of optical fiber or, as Zac67 notes, a description of devices made from or used with optical fiber. --Srleffler (talk) 08:58, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fiber Optics 

message: I have added a few mentions of infrared, including the photo caption, to avoid readers thinking visible light is used. I think that is seldom mentioned, which can cause some misunderstanding (I only recently learned about it) Vpab15 (talk) 16:51, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I had to revert the caption – not all fiber is used for communication, and without mentioning that the caption was misleading. Also note that with 850 nm light, most often part of the cone is actually visible to the naked eye. --Zac67 (talk) 18:07, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the revert on the caption. As you said, not all fiber is used for communication, and adding mention of it to the caption was unnecessary and confusing, particularly since the fibers shown don't look like telecomm fibers, and probably are carrying visible light.--Srleffler (talk) 01:19, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infrared light 

message: I reverted this edit today. As the main article for :Category:Optical fiber, this article can also be in :Category:Fiber optics per WP:CATMAIN. Not having it there would be confusing.--Srleffler (talk) 06:41, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categorization