On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 09:30:47 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Richard Clark wrote:
Let's see, ten billion angstroms equal 1 meter. If we do a simple
conversion we find that your laser light operates at a wavelength of
0.3 millimeters (thicker than a hair).

Yep, I misread the units from a chart in Reference Data for Radio
Engineers. I accidentally picked a point in the low infrared region.
Macular Degeneration is playing havoc with my eyesight. But, FYI,
infrared lasers are readily available.

They are high in glare no doubt :-)


And after how many lines? No response to the original question
name what frequency glare is.

But in all honesty I never expected any answer that didn't have an
egregious error. Let's see, you don't know the wavelength, you don't
know the frequency, you don't know the color; but you can argue the
math - quite Droll. I quite expected it wasn't on that one page you
xeroxed. Well, as I figured this was good for only one more round,
that round has closed without an answer every driver on a wet rainy
night would know (experience counts).

On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 13:55:24 +0200, "Roger Conroy"
wrote:

I offer that ANY unit of length is acceptable in expressing wavelength.

DD


he said frequency - not wavelength

Thanx Roger,

I am not such the pedant as to demand frequency however. But for this
particular exercise 0.3mm is invisible to everyone, as is 0.03mm,
0.003mm, or 0.0003mm. The revealing point is that there is no
wavelength with a significant three that is visible!

Such is my style to reveal the paucity of experience. As for this
mystery frequency/wavelength/color, I will offer a clue, very very
short so as to not confuse (but it will) in a follow up post to this
as an attempt to mine the humor beyond its expiration date :-)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Na

Richard Clark wrote:
In the Navy my students learned at every level of instruction to:
RTMFQ!
That question was:

name what frequency glare is.

Now and then a student would come through who would respond
"the frequency is such and such meters"
as they passed out into the fleet as a deck-ape.

So follow your own advice. You answered your question as to what
frequency, not with a frequency, but with a wavelength, just in
different units from mine. You failed your own test.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Richard Clark wrote:

wrote:
He said frequency and then turned around and used wavelength. Wavelength
is also NOT a unit of frequency. His "elementary instruction" violated
his own objection and was thus inconsistent.

HE Knows both the Frequency AND the Wavelength ...

Actually, HE hasn't yet demonstrated that to be true. :-)
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Richard Clark wrote:
Let's see, you don't know the wavelength,

I gave the wavelength. You apparently missed it. Here it
is again - 632.8 nm.

you don't know the frequency,

Frequency is 300,000/wl in meters. Need help with the math?

you don't know the color;

I assumed you knew the color of a red laser is red. Sorry,
I guess I assumed too much.

All the distractions about frequency, color, and wavelength
are just a typical logical diversion of yours to keep from
facing the fact that you don't understand interference and
refuse to discuss the subject. Very old trick, doesn't work
anymore.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP






-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 15:11:52 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Richard Clark wrote:
In the Navy my students learned at every level of instruction to:
RTMFQ!
That question was:

name what frequency glare is.

Now and then a student would come through who would respond
"the frequency is such and such meters"
as they passed out into the fleet as a deck-ape.

So follow your own advice. You answered your question as to what
frequency, not with a frequency, but with a wavelength, just in
different units from mine. You failed your own test.

No, again you failed, the answer was yours 6 MILLION Angstroms. There
is no such glare wavelength. I will leave another very, very simple
clue. :-)

Ar

4.0 MHz and 75 meters define the same phenomena.

I'm currently tuned to 2.926829 meters and listening to Classical Music,
WCRB Boston.

Question for the new Extra Class: If 2.926829 meters is the wavelength,
what is the frequency??

My Physics books indicate that wavelengths greater than 610 nm are 'red'.

To the original 'Glare' question:

Glare is a scattered reflection of source light. It's wavelength/color
is a function of the color temperature of the source, or the color
spectrum of the source as in solar, and the absorption coefficient[s] of
the reflecting material[s] at the wavelength or over the spectrum of the
source.

So, in general terms, the color of glare has the primary color of the
source and a second component based on the absorption cross section
[color] of the glare producing material.

In simple terms, glare contains two or more spectral responses that may
be line sources, or spectral sources and line reflections from 'pure'
material or spectral sources from compound materials.

Potentially, glare can contain the entire visible spectrum. [400 nm to
approximately 700 nm]

At RF, HF, VHF, UHF, SHF, etc. the parallel to glare is scattering from a
reflective surface where the line spectral response is the single frequency.
And reflection of spectral powwer density is scattered background noise;
like from BPL :-)

Deacon Dave