1	Proposal for an HFGW Frequency Time Standard for Telecommunication Network Optimization Executive Summary Rev. B1, 10/18/06 G.V. Stephenson, C. Harper, & R.M.L. Baker Jr. PhD
2	HFGW FTS Proposal Executive Summary
3	What do we plan to do?
4	What are the benefits?
5	What is the value? Net Present Value Estimation Cash Flow Positive on Year 4 - four years from mature, lab proven technology Net Present Value estimate based on 10 years of operation: $ 51.5 Billion
6	What will make it happen? Phase 1: HFGW Detection Experiment
7	What will make it happen? Phase 1: Scale of HFGW Detection Equipment
8	What will make it happen? Phase 2: HFGW Generation Experiment
9	What will it cost? What is the payback? How much will it cost? To fund detection and generation experiments (Phase 1 & 2) for proof of concept: Plans and Specifications 4 Million Fabrication 6 Million Test 5 Million Cushion 5 Million Proof of Concept Phase 20 Million (for both experiments) HFGW FTS Infrastructure Development, Phase 3: Development of HFGW FTS receivers for cell phone use 25 Million Manufacture of cell phone HFGW FTS receivers 25 Million Four stations @ 25 Million each 100 Million Total Developmental Cost (Phases 1,2,& 3) 170 Million How much and how will it pay back? Licensing and Technical Support: 5% of 50 Billion in 10 years or 2.5 Billion
10	~ Backup Slides ~ HFGW Frequency Time Standard for Telecommunication Network Optimization Executive Summary Rev. B1, 10/18/06
11	What is the value? Improvement Value Estimation For search space improvements we choose 25%. For higher density phase encoding due to phase noise improvement, we choose 200%. For frequency-based improvements, we choose 25% for an overall raw capacity improvement floor of 250%. For better beam-forming due to precision positioning, we choose not to include this technology in the low side estimate since it is somewhat speculative. For the high side estimate 50% is used. For cell-handoff and precision Quality of Service (QoS) improvements due to precision timing, we choose an overall value improvement of 200%. Here, we apply the term QoS to network usage prioritization and predictability with respect to performance parameters including delay, error rate, and throughput. Even as a floor, we significantly reduce these expected low-side improvements prior to further use in our dollar valuation model to reinforce its conservative nature.
12	What is the value? Subscriber Value Estimation Applying these multipliers to a conventional High Bit Rate Wireless Market Offer (conservatively—for this model—priced at $100/month/2Mbps), we obtain a reference MRC/subscriber low-side value added due to the HFGW FTS of $275 (Table 2). Note that MRC = Monthly Recurring Charge. This includes a 25% $/mbps discount from conventional costs due to supply increase and demand elasticity. Further, in all significant cash flows (post year 2), we utilize a still more conservative estimate ranging from ~75-15% of this reference value.
13	What will make it happen? Suggested Next Steps First Step – Design, develop, fund, and perform HFGW detection experiments to detect background (relic) GW radiation to prove detection technology. One example approach: Li, Baker, & Chen, 2007 Second Step – Design, develop, fund, and perform HFGW generation experiments to generate GW radiation in a laboratory environment. One example approach: Woods & Baker, 2005 Use previously proven detection approach Near Term Development – Develop and miniaturize HFGW technology for use in the FTS application. Long Term Follow-on – Develop HFGW technology for use as a communication medium.