Cecil Moore wrote:

Jim Kelley wrote:

I've already shown you where you made mistakes.


What you have shown me are a bunch of strawmen with which
I have no arguments. As a result, I have no idea upon what
we disagree. Most of your technical assertions are true and
I agree with them. When you derived the same total
destructive interference equation that I had been posting,
including the negative power term, virtually all of our
arguments went away.

How about technically explaining in detail just one
mistake you think I have made? I need to understand
a mistake before I can correct it.

Here's a typical objection of yours, an implication with
no technical content.

It is where you diverge from Hecht ... that I take issue.


I sincerely have no idea where you think I diverge from Hecht
and your refusal to enlighten me is interesting. In fact, I have
quoted Hecht extensively and borrowed some of his concepts from
optics to apply to RF. His treatments of superposition and
interference are the best I have ever read. I am not aware
of any divergence from Hecht on my part. Your assertion that I
diverge from Hecht or Richard presuming to roll Hecht's eyes
for him contains zero technical content from which I learn
nothing.

And that is a wonderful example of the rhetorical way to hold your hands
over your ears and hum. :-)

So when does the article appear in Phys. Rev?

73, ac6xg