Rex wrote
Rod Speed wrote
xray wrote
Rod Speed wrote

Most of what you have been posting here
recently seems to be opinion rather than fact.

Best get your seems machinery seen to then.

Its a fact that even when a receiving antenna does radiate back
half of what it recieves, THAT IS NOT RELEVANT TO WHAT WAS
BEING DISCUSSED, THE LEGISLATED EIRP LEVEL ALLOWED.

Not a shred of opinion involved what so ever.

Look at this part of the thread...

[John said:]
If the receiver matching is for optimal noise figure, there may be
some reflection and reradiation, but there's nothing pinning it to
be half the received power.

[Roy said:]
John is correct.

[Rod said:]
Nope.

Not about that particular para of John's. I was saying that John was
not correct on the original point about whatever the receiving anntenna
radiates BEING RELEVANT TO THE LEGISLATED EIRP LEVEL.

No opinion there, just fact.

[Roy said:]
A receiving antenna, when matched, reradiates half the power it
receives.

[Rod said:]
Yes but that ISNT ANY REAL POWER in the EIRP restriction sense.

---
So John made a factual statment. Roy agreed.

It wasnt relevant to what was actually being discussed,
WHETHER WHATEVER THE RECEIVING ANTENNA
RADIATES HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE LEGISLATED
EIRP WAS ACTUALLY BEING DISCUSSED.

Your opinion was to disagree with the simple factual statment.

It wasnt an opinion, it was a statement of fact that that
comment John made WAS NOT RELEVANT TO THE
LEGISLATED EIRP LEVEL THAT WAS BEING DISCUSSED.

Roy added a clarifying statment. You started to go off the
hook and SHOUT because you were fixated on EIRP.

The legislated EIRP level WAS WHAT WAS BEING DISCUSSED
WHEN JOHN MADE SUCH A SPECTACULAR FOOL OF HIMSELF
RABBITING ON ABOUT WHAT THE RECIEVING ANTENNA RADIATES.

When I read it I never saw any direct implication about EIRP or legalities
in the explanation; it was a simple explanation about antennas.

Pity it was a comment made WHEN THE LEGISLATED EIRP LEVEL WAS
BEING DISCUSSED WITH REFERENCE TO THE RECEIVING ANTENNA.

Your *opinion* was involved in deciding you knew the exact intent of the posting

Wrong again. It is a FACT that John's comment had no
relevance what so ever to what was being discussed,
whether the receiving antenna has any relevance what
so ever to the legislated EIRP level. It doesnt.

and that it had implications in the EIRP thing, just because
that is the interpretation that passed through your mind.

Nothing to do with my mind, it was what was being discussed.

Ok, I'm done here. Not sure why I took the time for this one last post.

Yeah, you just made a VERY spectacular fool of yourself, yet again.