![]() |
what happens to reflected energy ?
On Fri, 2 Jul 2010 12:04:57 -0700 (PDT), lu6etj
wrote: Hello Richard: (I am not quoting with "" because I get unpredictable results with google :) ) You said: "Please observe the distinction as appeals to 100W or "one second" have no bearing on where you seem to be fixated with quanta and energy." I could not translate this sentence, (sometimes your writings are complicated for me Richard, try Tarzan style or better yet... try as you were writing to Cheeta! :) Hi Miguel, Fair enough - and sorry for the density of style. (I handed the sentence to a friend who lives in England and today said to me that have so many interpretations and did not solve my problem...) Well, that sentence was more about context than it was about style. I am glad you did not ask your friend to read the thread. "Why do you compare 80M to green light?" Well... I like it! photons born from light, green light it is a central zone of visible light spectrum, and 80 m is my favourite ex- novice band... Yes, green (actually green-yellow) light corresponds to photopic (day) vision. Scotopic (moonless night) vision is blue-shifted. Sitting inside would tend towards a combination called mesopic vision. The analogue of the eye as "receiver" gives us the peculiar action of resonance shifting due to strength of the QSO. Propagation fading would find the contact drifting from the 80M Band up through the 60M band. Look, light has a very rough "texture", Is Cheeta trying to say photons? light quanta is a very energetic thing, its "granularity" it is high and we easily perceive its quantic nature, The eye can sense one photon out of two under the best of conditions, but what that means as far as "granularity" is lost on me. A RADAR (even if not an 80M one) can respond to a pulse it sends and senses in an echo. The packet contains at least 100 to 10000 cycles. Pulse shape signatures would suggest that individual cycles are resolved - granularity? 80 m energy instead has a very, very "soft" texture, 10^8 time softer than green light, and we can not measure its "granularity" with our instruments. The granularity can be expressed in microKelvins of temperature which can be (and has been) resolved. What you describe as "we can not measure" is more a function of background noise, not ability, nor instrumentation incapacity. Think of a 1000 kg car smashing against your car at 100 km/h, now think of a mosquito (10 mg) smashing against your windshield at the same speed.. well if the one green light quantum had the cinetc energy of a 1000 kg thrown against your car, 80 m quantum would have the mosquito energy! It is a really good example... you should congratulate me for that formidable approach!! no?, hi hi Analogies, as we have mulled them over in the past, often lead to their own failure and that, in turn, brings down the central point trying to be argued. Case in point with your mosquito: The two collision events can also be expressed as energy translation into temperature change. This is called phononic energy - or sound. The crash of cars or bugs resolves into a sound. Do we hear, or do we have the capacity to hear either? Both? There are 8 orders of magnitude difference between the two masses at the same velocities. Our hearing dynamic range easily encompasses that. I can hear bugs bump against my living room window at far slower velocity. I would not hear them with the background noise of an operating automobile and the various road, wind, conversational or radio noises raising the noise floor. This points out that measurement failures are often a matter of method, hence the human component of psychological impairment. Science is more fascinating in its stories of overcoming shortfalls of perception. Einstein wasn't known for his math, or his benchwork, he gave us perspective. Physicists said that we can better perceive energy glanularity at lower temperatures and they say we have classic behaviour when hv kT, well... at 1 K, kT it is 6000 times bigger than 80 m hv, a very classic oscilator indeed!, at 293 K ambient temperature I think we can not appreciate quantized nature of RF waves!, (at least with my Bird 43) :) All the matter of background noise. I have a question too, please tell me (I am very curious): why you take every opportunity to bite (sting?) my friend Cecil, ah? ;). Probably because you enjoy reading it, otherwise why are you offering another opportunity? ;-) 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
what happens to reflected energy ?
On 2 jul, 16:57, Richard Clark wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jul 2010 12:04:57 -0700 (PDT), lu6etj wrote: Hello Richard: (I am not quoting with "" because I get unpredictable results with google :) *) You said: "Please observe the distinction as appeals to 100W or "one second" have no bearing on where you seem to be fixated with quanta and energy." I could not translate this sentence, (sometimes your writings are complicated for me Richard, try Tarzan style or better yet... try as you were writing to Cheeta! :) Hi Miguel, Fair enough - and sorry for the density of style. (I handed the sentence to a friend who lives in England and today said to me that have so many interpretations and did not solve my problem...) Well, that sentence was more about context than it was about style. *I am glad you did not ask your friend to read the thread. "Why do you compare 80M to green light?" Well... I like it! *photons born from light, green light it is a central zone of visible light spectrum, and 80 m is my favourite ex- novice band... Yes, green (actually green-yellow) light corresponds to photopic (day) vision. *Scotopic (moonless night) vision is blue-shifted. *Sitting inside would tend towards a combination called mesopic vision. The analogue of the eye as "receiver" gives us the peculiar action of resonance shifting due to strength of the QSO. *Propagation fading would find the contact drifting from the 80M Band up through the 60M band. Look, light has a very rough "texture", Is Cheeta trying to say photons? light quanta is a very energetic thing, its "granularity" it is high and we easily perceive its quantic nature, The eye can sense one photon out of two under the best of conditions, but what that means as far as "granularity" is lost on me. *A RADAR (even if not an 80M one) can respond to a pulse it sends and senses in an echo. *The packet contains at least 100 to 10000 cycles. *Pulse shape signatures would suggest that individual cycles are resolved - granularity? 80 m energy instead has a very, very "soft" texture, 10^8 time softer than green light, and we can not measure its "granularity" with our instruments. The granularity can be expressed in microKelvins of temperature which can be (and has been) resolved. *What you describe as "we can not measure" is more a function of background noise, not ability, nor instrumentation incapacity. Think of a 1000 kg car smashing against your car at 100 km/h, now think of a mosquito (10 mg) smashing against your windshield at the same speed.. *well if the one green light quantum had the cinetc energy of a 1000 kg thrown against your car, 80 m quantum would have the mosquito energy! It is a really good example... you should congratulate me for that formidable approach!! no?, hi hi Analogies, as we have mulled them over in the past, often lead to their own failure and that, in turn, brings down the central point trying to be argued. Case in point with your mosquito: *The two collision events can also be expressed as energy translation into temperature change. *This is called phononic energy - or sound. *The crash of cars or bugs resolves into a sound. *Do we hear, or do we have the capacity to hear either? Both? *There are 8 orders of magnitude difference between the two masses at the same velocities. *Our hearing dynamic range easily encompasses that. *I can hear bugs bump against my living room window at far slower velocity. *I would not hear them with the background noise of an operating automobile and the various road, wind, conversational or radio noises raising the noise floor. This points out that measurement failures are often a matter of method, hence the human component of psychological impairment. Science is more fascinating in its stories of overcoming shortfalls of perception. *Einstein wasn't known for his math, or his benchwork, he gave us perspective. Physicists said that we can better perceive energy glanularity at lower temperatures and they say we have classic behaviour when hv kT, well... at 1 K, kT it is 6000 times bigger than 80 m hv, a very classic oscilator indeed!, at 293 K ambient temperature I think we can not appreciate quantized nature of RF waves!, (at least with my Bird 43) :) All the matter of background noise. I have a question too, please tell me (I am very curious): why you take every opportunity to bite (sting?) my friend Cecil, ah? ;). Probably because you enjoy reading it, otherwise why are you offering another opportunity? *;-) 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Hi hi, no, not Cheeta... Resnick & Halliday & Krane use "granularity" metaphor, "granularity" and "texture" are words that denote same idea: ligth photons are really very big Jerry Lee's "Great balls of fire", 80 m photons are very very tiny balls :) For that reason your eyes catch light photon, they (photons) are fat guys, you know?. Glanularity is not about "cycles" but quantum energy = hv, v=frequency, high frequency = high energy quantum = high granularity, not cycles Not "analogies", no, no, I am only comparing energy magnitud differences! (I am not resigning my rights to analogies, with this), 10^8 more bigger cinetic E represents so much energy difference at any scale; obviously a light photon has very, very much lower energy as a 1 t (Tm) car at 100 km/h (it has 3.6*10^-19 J) but 80 m photon it is 100000000 lower!, Can you hear 80 dB sounds below mosquito buzzing? are you the six million dollar man? :) You talk about "fluctuations" OK, can you assure to me those fluctuations are due quantized nature of RF signals? have you references about that? Naturally I have my doubts, what you say do not match my sacred Wiley & sons bible physics verses: remember at only 1 K, kt hv, and for R, H & K elders, granularity can not be perceived. Well, but stop here, please: I did not say we can not measure 100 W oscillator granularity, eh?, I am not any authority to say such thing!, look what the fathers of my church say in page 483: "Quantized energy simply not reveales in large scale oscillators, the smallness of the h Plank component make the granulosity very fine (thin?) so that we can not detect it" I bet you live a little more near them than I, Ask to them why they said that. I am innocent, I am only the postman who brings the news (where is Petrocelli?) :D :D 73 - Miguel - LU6ETJ PS: Cecil, friend, this man this is already yours. Just confessed his inconditional love for RF quanta... |
what happens to reflected energy ?
On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 15:16:05 -0400, Michael Coslo
wrote: Cecil Moore wrote: On Jul 2, 2:04 pm, lu6etj wrote: I have a question too, please tell me (I am very curious): why you take every opportunity to bite (sting?) my friend Cecil, ah? ;). I once caught Richard red-handed, blatently superposing powers and he has never forgiven me for that. :-) Is a MASER actually a LASER? It reads TASER (Cecil didn't know which end to hold). 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
what happens to reflected energy ?
On Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:33:35 -0700 (PDT), lu6etj
wrote: Hi hi, no, not Cheeta... Resnick & Halliday & Krane use "granularity" metaphor, "granularity" and "texture" are words that denote same idea: ligth photons are really very big Jerry Lee's "Great balls of fire", 80 m photons are very very tiny balls :) For that reason your eyes catch light photon, they (photons) are fat guys, you know?. Glanularity is not about "cycles" but quantum energy = hv, v=frequency, high frequency = high energy quantum = high granularity, not cycles **** warning: Stylistic alert, skip to next comment ******** Mmmm, that is at least the second time with glanularity that I cannot allow to pass: Ovarian waves? Cyclic period? Menstraphotons? well, enough English.... Not "analogies", no, no, I am only comparing energy magnitud differences! (I am not resigning my rights to analogies, with this), 10^8 more bigger cinetic E represents so much energy difference at any scale; obviously a light photon has very, very much lower energy as a 1 t (Tm) car at 100 km/h (it has 3.6*10^-19 J) but 80 m photon it is 100000000 lower!, Can you hear 80 dB sounds below mosquito buzzing? are you the six million dollar man? :) Is a car crash 80dB down from mosquitos? You have your magnitudes inverted or you are crossing between metaphors (another failure mechanism). You talk about "fluctuations" OK, can you assure to me those fluctuations are due quantized nature of RF signals? have you references about that? Naturally I have my doubts, what you say do not match my sacred Wiley & sons bible physics verses: remember at only 1 K, kt hv, and for R, H & K elders, granularity can not be perceived. It isn't their field, but that doesn't mean science is invalid. Google the terms (you already have one in quotes). This has been around for a decade or more. "Quantized energy simply not reveales in large scale oscillators, the smallness of the h Plank component make the granulosity very fine (thin?) so that we can not detect it" The problem with selective quoting is that the reader doesn't know the boundaries - aside from it being a paraphrase and not a literal quote - unless they write like Cheeta. Sorry for the allusion to a monkey, but the grammar reveals this is not a true source. I can read between the lines, but then I get to expand upon that to introduce my own spin. That doesn't get things very far, does it? Don't pick up on Cecil's bad habit of leaning on the Xerox copy button. I bet you live a little more near them than I, Ask to them why they said that. I am innocent, I am only the postman who brings the news (where is Petrocelli?) :D :D Why don't I? The price of email is the same from any location on earth (or through a satellite link freely accessible from outerspace). 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
what happens to reflected energy ?
On 2 jul, 20:32, Richard Clark wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:33:35 -0700 (PDT), lu6etj wrote: Hi hi, no, not Cheeta... Resnick & Halliday & Krane use "granularity" metaphor, "granularity" and "texture" are words that denote same idea: ligth photons are really very big Jerry Lee's "Great balls of fire", 80 m photons are very very tiny balls :) *For that reason your eyes catch light photon, they (photons) are fat guys, you know?. Glanularity is not about "cycles" but quantum energy = hv, v=frequency, high frequency = high energy quantum = high granularity, not cycles **** warning: *Stylistic alert, skip to next comment ******** Mmmm, *that is at least the second time with glanularity that I cannot allow to pass: * * * * Ovarian waves? *Cyclic period? *Menstraphotons? well, enough English.... Not "analogies", no, no, I am only comparing energy magnitud differences! (I am not resigning my rights to analogies, with this), 10^8 more bigger cinetic E represents so much energy difference at any scale; obviously a light photon has very, very much lower energy as a 1 t (Tm) car at 100 km/h (it has 3.6*10^-19 J) but 80 m photon it is 100000000 lower!, Can you hear 80 dB sounds below mosquito buzzing? are you the six million dollar man? :) Is a car crash 80dB down from mosquitos? *You have your magnitudes inverted or you are crossing between metaphors (another failure mechanism). You talk about "fluctuations" OK, can you assure to me those fluctuations are due quantized nature of RF signals? have you references about that? Naturally I have my doubts, what you say do not match my sacred Wiley & sons bible physics verses: remember at only 1 K, kt hv, *and for R, H & K elders, granularity can not be perceived. It isn't their field, but that doesn't mean science is invalid. Google the terms (you already have one in quotes). *This has been around for a decade or more. "Quantized energy simply not reveales in large scale oscillators, the smallness of the h Plank component make the granulosity very fine (thin?) so that we can not detect it" The problem with selective quoting is that the reader doesn't know the boundaries - aside from it being a paraphrase and not a literal quote - unless they write like Cheeta. *Sorry for the allusion to a monkey, but the grammar reveals this is not a true source. *I can read between the lines, but then I get to expand upon that to introduce my own spin. *That doesn't get things very far, does it? *Don't pick up on Cecil's bad habit of leaning on the Xerox copy button. I bet you live a little more near them than I, Ask to them why they said that. I am innocent, I am only the postman who brings the news (where is Petrocelli?) :D :D Why don't I? *The price of email is the same from any location on earth (or through a satellite link freely accessible from outerspace). 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Hi, hi, I do not quite understand/translate your jokes: do you dislike Resnick's "granularity"? I think it is a sort of energy acne :) You said you could hear an insect shooting your window then I asked you if you can hear sound 80 dB below insect shooting your window. 80 dB example it is only a about difference (quotient) of magnitudes. Or you do not read well or I not write well my sentences -the last has a probability of 0,99- :) Certainly, my book is in spanish, the original is "Physics" Vol II, Extended version, 4th ed. ISBN 0-471-54804-9 (I do not have it), read from here. Yes, it is dated 1992 a little old, doesn't it?. so... can we today measure quantum acne from large scale 3,5 MHz oscillator at room temperature? (Use caution to answer me because your words can turn against us and someone may be tempted to postulate "The uncerntainty VSWR principle" and rots all here :D ) Yes, yes, I by far prefer Xerox button to my own non senses :=D :=D. (another sting to my friend Cecil?). Well, I stop here because I think our friends are going to reprimand me for not posting serious matters. Thank you very much for your friendly and patient with me posts . Miguel LU6ETJ. |
what happens to reflected energy ?
On Sat, 3 Jul 2010 16:13:27 -0700 (PDT), lu6etj
wrote: Hi, hi, I do not quite understand/translate your jokes: do you dislike Resnick's "granularity"? I think it is a sort of energy acne :) Hi Miguel, Good joke. Others may not be aware that Buenos Aires is one among cities that have the highest psychiatrist to population ratio in the world. To set the record straight, Seattle has a very high suicide rate. This in no way intimates that you are crazy and I am about to off myself (this may disappoint some that drawl). You said you could hear an insect shooting your window then I asked you if you can hear sound 80 dB below insect shooting your window. You presented the analogue of car vs mosquito. You expressed the magnitude of difference. I disputed neither, accepted them, showed that the difference(s) could be perceived. Why add a new variable? If you are not, are you challenging your own analogue? 80 dB example it is only a about difference (quotient) of magnitudes. Or you do not read well or I not write well my sentences -the last has a probability of 0,99- :) You are now extending it to 160dB of difference. As I said, you either have your magnitudes inverted, or are now mixing metaphors. The argument is in failure mode. This is invariably the fate of metaphor/analog/allegory when it is forced to replace simple math for observable and demonstrable science. To touch on allegory, the snake in Eden (read Texas) introduced analogues (read Hallelujah - let there be Photons!) and seduced (read perverted) logic to obtain mastery over creation (read RRAA). Don't blame the guy with the horn. :-) Certainly, my book is in spanish, the original is "Physics" Vol II, Extended version, 4th ed. ISBN 0-471-54804-9 (I do not have it), read from here. Yes, it is dated 1992 a little old, doesn't it?. Not too many of us get new copies from the future, so I am not particularly upset about its copyright date. so... can we today measure quantum acne from large scale 3,5 MHz oscillator at room temperature? Did you miss my comments about noise floor? Can you breath, unassisted, under water? Does a tree make a noise when it topples on the Moon? Can you feel the tingle of 110VAC when you are being struck by lightning? Do these questions sound like Cecileo? (As I have long ago blocked his postings, I assume our newsgroup victim has at least once made an allusion to his torment by the inquisition.) There are 10,000 ways to fail and you found at least one that was documented. I showed you an equal number of success (1) and that is unsatisfactory. Could it be answered that between the two examples that one exhibits a huge S+N/N? In other words, why at: room temperature? Do you have a New York flight to catch to solve the Financial crisis? Plan on the next flight out tomorrow and cool the room down. (Use caution to answer me because your words can turn against us and someone may be tempted to postulate "The uncerntainty VSWR principle" and rots all here :D ) "However your VSWR may vary, no Standing Waves were interfered with in the making of this response." 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
what happens to reflected energy ?
On 3 jul, 21:00, Richard Clark wrote:
On Sat, 3 Jul 2010 16:13:27 -0700 (PDT), lu6etj wrote: Hi, hi, I do not quite understand/translate your jokes: do you dislike Resnick's "granularity"? I think it is a sort of energy acne :) Hi Miguel, Good joke. *Others may not be aware that Buenos Aires is one among cities that have the highest psychiatrist to population ratio in the world. *To set the record straight, Seattle has a very high suicide rate. *This in no way intimates that you are crazy and I am about to off myself (this may disappoint some that drawl). You said you could hear an insect shooting your window then I asked you if you can hear sound 80 dB below insect shooting your window. You presented the analogue of car vs mosquito. *You expressed the magnitude of difference. *I disputed neither, accepted them, showed that the difference(s) could be perceived. *Why add a new variable? If you are not, are you challenging your own analogue? 80 dB example it is only a about difference (quotient) of magnitudes. Or you do not read well or I not write well my sentences -the last has a probability of *0,99- :) You are now extending it to 160dB of difference. As I said, you either have your magnitudes inverted, or are now mixing metaphors. *The argument is in failure mode. *This is invariably the fate of metaphor/analog/allegory when it is forced to replace simple math for observable and demonstrable science. To touch on allegory, the snake in Eden (read Texas) introduced analogues (read Hallelujah - let there be Photons!) and seduced (read perverted) logic to obtain mastery over creation (read RRAA). * Don't blame the guy with the horn. *:-) Certainly, my book is in spanish, the original is "Physics" Vol II, Extended version, 4th ed. ISBN 0-471-54804-9 (I do not have it), read from here. Yes, it is dated 1992 a little old, doesn't it?. Not too many of us get new copies from the future, so I am not particularly upset about its copyright date. so... can we today measure quantum acne from large scale 3,5 MHz oscillator at room temperature? Did you miss my comments about noise floor? *Can you breath, unassisted, under water? *Does a tree make a noise when it topples on the Moon? *Can you feel the tingle of 110VAC when you are being struck by lightning? *Do these questions sound like Cecileo? *(As I have long ago blocked his postings, I assume our newsgroup victim has at least once made an allusion to his torment by the inquisition.) There are 10,000 ways to fail and you found at least one that was documented. *I showed you an equal number of success (1) and that is unsatisfactory. *Could it be answered that between the two examples that one exhibits a huge S+N/N? *In other words, why at:room temperature? Do you have a New York flight to catch to solve the Financial crisis? Plan on the next flight out tomorrow and cool the room down. (Use caution to answer me because your words can turn against us and someone may be tempted to postulate "The uncerntainty VSWR principle" and rots all here :D *) "However your VSWR may vary, no Standing Waves were interfered with in the making of this response." 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Hi hi, Why I find it more hard to translate your writings than another guys ones? is it a peculiarity of your playing with words or your zone manners? I am sorry because I miss some of your subtleties or grammatical tricks and I suspect they have more funny meanings that I can capture :) I believe what we have more here are psychoanalysts not psychiatrists (I read something about it time ago), but do not worry I am a little crazy too! :) Look, my first idea example was compare difference in marbels size with hydrogen atom size (about 10^8) to point to granularity, but inmediately I realized that dealing with differences in size was not a correct example and turn to Ec example. You said our retinas sometimes can perceive individual light photons, no? then I pointed to an eigty meters photon had 10^-8 smaller energy than green photon. I was telling we are talking about truly classics system therefore quantum effects (photon) it is useless because in our level of discussion oscillators/transmitters do not manifest quantum effects because its very high quantum numbers Of course I know (do I know?, really?, mmm) correspondence principle. Why at room temperature? Do we see if I understood your question... at room temperature because we Hams usually make our TL Bird Truline measurements at room temperatures. Answer this your question? (my freezer do not go beyond -20 Celcius degrees!). Theorical/extreme cases are welcomed too but... to rebut normal/standard situations? I do not believe you has blocking Cecil posts, no no, you say it = we have a lot of psychoanalysts he one of them are whispering to my ear just now, you really like him, remember TV series: "The odd couple"? :D ...... (You see?, I'm lost with some interesting sentences such "However your VSWR may vary, no Standing Waves were interfered with in the making of this response." If tomorrow I find my london friend I ask his helping to translate better your entire post :) ) 73, and now being 23:31 I will take my girlfriend LU2ET to a night trip motorcycle by the city. Well... 2ET has been my XYL for over thirty years :) Have you a really nice motorcycle as Cecil? eh? |
what happens to reflected energy ?
On Sat, 3 Jul 2010 19:34:14 -0700 (PDT), lu6etj
wrote: Hi hi, Why I find it more hard to translate your writings than another guys ones? is it a peculiarity of your playing with words or your zone manners? I am sorry because I miss some of your subtleties or grammatical tricks and I suspect they have more funny meanings that I can capture :) Hi Miguel, Sorry for the loss in translation. It is what is called "deep metaphors" that go beyond the simpler ones of mosquitoes against the windshield. I believe what we have more here are psychoanalysts not psychiatrists (I read something about it time ago), but do not worry I am a little crazy too! :) You are correct (about analysts...). Here, the game of language is found in the ellipsis (or the parenthetical aside - this one being doubly self-referential). Look, my first idea example was compare difference in marbels size with hydrogen atom size (about 10^8) to point to granularity, but inmediately I realized that dealing with differences in size was not a correct example and turn to Ec example. You said our retinas sometimes can perceive individual light photons, no? Yes, in the best of circumstances half of those that impact the retina. This returns us to background noise and S+N/N. then I pointed to an eigty meters photon had 10^-8 smaller energy than green photon. Hence the eight orders of scale comparison. Yes. I was telling we are talking about truly classics system therefore quantum effects (photon) it is useless because in our level of discussion oscillators/transmitters do not manifest quantum effects because its very high quantum numbers Of course I know (do I know?, really?, mmm) correspondence principle. You can experience one photon, however could you state that it was not two instead? I have designed with components that are specifically photon counters. These are called photomultiplier tubes (PMTs for short). Where they do not match up against the eye for dynamic range, spectral bandwidth, or quantum efficiency; they do present us with individual events within a group. Our eyes do not count very well. Why at room temperature? Do we see if I understood your question... at room temperature because we Hams usually make our TL Bird Truline measurements at room temperatures. Answer this your question? (my freezer do not go beyond -20 Celcius degrees!). So, I am to understand that you want to measure quantum effects at energy background levels in excess of 0.04 eV or roughly 10 TeraHertz. I don't think you can afford the Bird plug for that band. I come from a field called Metrology. This is so rare that many, many engineers have never heard of it. It is the science of measurement. If you want a quantum correlative to frequency, this field abounds in them. The Atomic Clock (Cesium Beam Standard) comes close, but the Josephson Junction is a direct translation of frequency to voltage. It is also an instrument in quantum computing. I will offer a page for your consideration: http://www.ptb.de/en/org/2/Inhalte/J...n/_josephs.htm Anticipating your objection that the frequencies involved are not in the 80M band; I would offer that is satisfied easily through frequency multiplication. (The Atomic Clock does this in reverse and no one complains about that.) Anticipating your objection that this is not done at room temperature; true, the junction is cooled far below what is available to you - but is this about your limited resources, or is it about being done? Don't join the legions pleading destitution (poverty) as that might migrate into the metaphors and analogies for a very poor (sorry for the pun) outcome. Theorical/extreme cases are welcomed too but... to rebut normal/standard situations? I do not believe you has blocking Cecil posts, no no, you say it = we have a lot of psychoanalysts he one of them are whispering to my ear just now, you really like him, remember TV series: "The odd couple"? :D Yes, I do block him. There are traces that sift through the cracks, but that doesn't elevate them to poignancy. Again (do I have to repeat this?), this is about S+N/N. "The Odd Couple" is a good cultural reference. I would suggest (and I hope you have access to) "House." Cecil is among those who cannot be trusted to write on the white board. If you don't have TV access to this series, try an episode from: http://www.hulu.com/search?query=house&st=0 You write and understand English quite well, but if listening to it is not easy, I am sure that watching 10 minutes around that white board will give you enough "body language" to translate the psychology easily. ..... (You see?, I'm lost with some interesting sentences such "However your VSWR may vary, no Standing Waves were interfered with in the making of this response." If tomorrow I find my london friend I ask his helping to translate better your entire post :) ) This might be lost on your English friend too, because it constructed with cultural references (it is suppose to be bad form to have to explain a joke - but here we go): "However your VSWR may vary" is a variant on YMMV that you may see as shorthand. It means Your Mileage May Vary. It is a reference to how car gas performance was reported by those who sold cars. They would quote government tests that were generally optimistic, and the real experience would disappoint customers who saw poorer results. The customers would complain to the vendor. Thus the vendor would qualify with "the government reports this car gets 50MPG on the Highway - but your mileage may vary." Thus the usage of YMMV is a cultural joke indicating disappointment was likely. " no Standing Waves were interfered with in the making of this response." is a variant on the disclosure you see at the end of movies: "No animal was harmed during the filming of this movie." You will, no doubt, draw out the meaning of Standing Waves, interference, and response as being related to soothing those people who cry uncontrollably when they see the movie "Bambi." We have a similar class of sob-sisters (your English friend should be able to translate that). 73, and now being 23:31 I will take my girlfriend LU2ET to a night trip motorcycle by the city. Well... 2ET has been my XYL for over thirty years :) Have you a really nice motorcycle as Cecil? eh? I drive an engineer's car with a rotary engine (pistons suck): Mazda RX-7. However, you would probably like House's ride. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
what happens to reflected energy ?
"lu6etj" wrote ... Hi hi, Why I find it more hard to translate your writings than another guys ones? is it a peculiarity of your playing with words or your zone manners? I am sorry because I miss some of your subtleties or grammatical tricks and I suspect they have more funny meanings that I can capture :) Try to understand. Richard gives the free English lessons. I have learnt a lot from him. S* |
what happens to reflected energy ?
On Jul 4, 8:28*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
*"lu6etj" ... Hi hi, Why I find it more hard to translate your writings than another guys ones? is it a peculiarity of your playing with words or your zone manners? I am sorry because I miss some of your subtleties or grammatical tricks and I suspect they have more funny meanings that I can capture :) Try to understand. Richard gives the free English lessons. I have learnt a lot from him. S* just nothing about electromagnetics i guess. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:12 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com