On Sun, 4 Jul 2010 18:51:19 -0700 (PDT), lu6etj
wrote:

I apologize for my insistence dear Richard, I do not want to be
stubborn but I remember Carl Sagan telling: "Extraordinary claims
require extraordinary evidence"

Hi Miguel,

Sagan never impressed me, and this quote even less. It relies on
mystical explanations when ordinary works quite well.

and my posting about the very large
quantum number of the 3.5 MHz Xmtrs play here the "conservative"
role :)

The link leads to a lot of tedious and pedantic writing.

Your new analogy fails as quickly as the rest, so by extension I must
presume that the work revealed at your link fails too. That is the
usual fate of tying two things together when one is a rhetorical
anchor.

When I speak of S+N/N, this is to mean that extraneous detail (fables
of mosquitoes, large cars and even larger blimps) only adds noise.

Skip the "extraordinary," stop the fables, and simply state your case.
When you remove all this noise, you may discover you are not writing
about a quantum system at all, but numbers without meaning. A simple
test: what changes its quantum state at 3.5MHz? Is it sub-atomic,
atomic, or molecular?

Richard: Why a "white board"? has a special meaning? - You are
saying Cecil it is as Dr. House? - Really nice car your RX-7, I envy
you! - My London friend is "missing2 I owe you some answers :(

Dr. House refuses to let students write on his white board.

I've driven RXs for 28 years: a 1978 and a 1990 GTU.

London is a nice place to be missing in. I've spent time near
Vauxhall bridge in Westminster.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC