Roger Conroy wrote:

"Dave Shrader" wrote:

Richard Clark wrote:
Quite Droll, I must admit. 3 MILLION Angstroms Hmmm? This is not a
unit of frequency by the way, so I suppose some elementary instruction
is in order.

Why isn't an Angstrom a measure of wavelength?? You yourself simply
translated it into a parameter of your choice as 0.3 mm.

I offer that ANY unit of length is acceptable in expressing wavelength.

he said frequency - not wavelength

He said frequency and then turned around and used wavelength. Wavelength
is also NOT a unit of frequency. His "elementary instruction" violated
his own objection and was thus inconsistent.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----