I still dont see differences
just saying it doesmn't make it so. Does it?

ok different coil size, but no one seems to be able to say what this
abour (sure delay, all coils have delay and none nows how much except
that it isnt much different from another coil).

coke = pepsi woohoo!

On May 15, 11:40 am, Richard Clark wrote:
On 15 May 2007 10:27:19 -0700, wrote:

Cecil doesnt seem to worry about this error, but just saying it
doesn't actually mean anything without differences. What is different
about his claim and Wests'?

Hi Herbert,

Yeah, I've noticed he's sloughed off your tough questions. The
differences are in the claim of having modeled Wes' helix, he did not,
it is a helix of Cecil's own invention. This is the problem of
leverage sources' credibility: use their name and discard their work
where it conflicts with your own. The differences (as I understand
your desire for actual data content) consist in the wrong pitch and
the wrong diameter. Aside from that, they are identical.

Now, how far can Cecil take a proof using this identity? All the way
within ±CSE (Cecil Standard Error, which as a numeric is 67%). The
world of theory is wide open when you cut yourself that much slack.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC