Thanks Roy, I'm resting easy now.

Walt


On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 10:51:42 -0700, Roy Lewallen
wrote:

Rest easy, Walt. To my knowledge, no one has ever shown BL&E's
*measurements* to be invalid, or the conclusions reached from those
measurements. It's their mathematical treatment of what they expected to
happen, in the first part of their paper (Part II: Theoretical
Considerations), that wasn't correct. I don't believe I have a paper
that details the errors they made, but it was regarded my later authors
as being in error, prompting a great deal of more rigorous work. Later
authors don't generally even reference that BL&E theoretical
mathematical work. Nearly all reference their measurements, however, as
they should.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL