On 1 Dec, 07:02, Gene Fuller wrote:
AI4QJ wrote:
It is straightforward.
just fundamental common knowledge.
it is common to arrive at the same result using different means; they tend to
confirm that each is correct (like checking a proof as in QED).

Are you new around here???

Debates over common, straightforward, fundamental items are the
lifeblood for most of the endless threads on RRAA.

8-)

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Gene'
Who ever he is he is a breath of fresh air amoung the
pseudo experts that we have here. My hope is that he
stays around longer than Dr Davis did in the face of
incessant hand waving, stone throwing and without substance.
Those who perceive them selves as experts and are now
reduced to stammering nonsence when challenged to move
away from just stringing words together and to provide
something of substance with respect to the debate
As yet there has been nothing presented to refute the
mathematical explanation provided that supports Cecil's
position.Thus a lot of people will have to take new
positions at some distance from the salt on the table
to make room for Dan and Cecil to move closer .
Regards
Art Unwin KB9MZ.....XG (uk)