On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 18:54:25 -0500, tom wrote:

Richard Clark wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 19:13:17 +0200, Szczepan Bia?ek
wrote:

All is exactly the same like in the fluids mechanics.

"Exactly" makes it very, very easy to show how an analogy fails:
Describe the laminar flow in terms of
the Reynolds number for

Hmm, I think I'd start with a very long K1FO yagi, say 50 elements.
Maybe even extend one to 100 elements to getting very fine details.
Then we look at the longitoodordinal current along the horizontal
element by element. I'll have to work on it a while though.

What are you thinking?

I am thinking that Stefan by lacking a demonstration of this
employment of his own chosen metaphor displays a vacuum in two subject
areas. As it stands, he stumbles through the nuances of RF. Instead,
he is trying to extrapolate them through a second subject, where, of
course, he tumbles over the nuances of fluidics.

The best we can expect is for him to haul a book to the nearest Xerox
and lean on the copy button to produce a snow job. The deepest
impression he will get of that intellectual experience is a paper cut.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC