"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 8 Apr 2004 10:20:58 -0500, "Dave VanHorn"
wrote:
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Richard Clark wrote:
The recitation of any wavelength starting with a significant three is
enough to set off alarms when there is a concurrent claim of its
visibility. That is why I said it was impossible to be a decimal
error.
The point of the thing, which you seem intent on missing, is that EM
radiation is reflected by impedance discontinuities. Optical reflection
is
very similar to what happens at lower frequencies.
I normally use this analogy when discussing the use of shielding and
absorbent materials for EMI supression.
Hi Dave,
I certainly am missing something from this post. How do you get from
my comment about visible wavelengths to one about shielding EMI?
By the intervening sentence, about the similarity of optical reflection to
reflection at lower wavelengths.
|