Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Richard Clark wrote:
Everything you write about light is pretty funny; your sheer lack of experience is revealed where you can't name what frequency glare is. Care to hazard a guess? In the light experiments I have been talking about, the glare is the same frequency as the laser beam, somewhere around 3x10^6 angstroms. -- 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! =----- |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 17:58:25 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote: Richard Clark wrote: Everything you write about light is pretty funny; your sheer lack of experience is revealed where you can't name what frequency glare is. Care to hazard a guess? In the light experiments I have been talking about, the glare is the same frequency as the laser beam, somewhere around 3x10^6 angstroms. Quite Droll, I must admit. 3 MILLION Angstroms Hmmm? This is not a unit of frequency by the way, so I suppose some elementary instruction is in order. 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). That would seem to be more suitable for Masers, not Lasers, and hardly light any way that you -ahem- look at it. Let's not even suppose it is a slip of the decimal (because it ain't). Calling it glare is icing on the cake. :-) So, you wanna try for what's behind door number three? Only one more round, because humor has a limited shelf life. Given both frequency and wavelength are stumpers, how about something more remedial: "What is the color of glare?" |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Richard Clark wrote:
SNIP Quite Droll, I must admit. 3 MILLION Angstroms Hmmm? This is not a unit of frequency by the way, so I suppose some elementary instruction is in order. SNIP Why isn't an Angstrom a measure of wavelength?? You yourself simply translated it into a parameter of your choice as 0.3 mm. My 4.0 MHz antenna is 120 feet. Is the unit of feet not a measure of wavelength? Could I not use a furlong as a unit of length? I offer that ANY unit of length is acceptable in expressing wavelength. DD |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Dave Shrader" wrote in message news:eURcc.82679$gA5.1031413@attbi_s03... Richard Clark wrote: SNIP Quite Droll, I must admit. 3 MILLION Angstroms Hmmm? This is not a unit of frequency by the way, so I suppose some elementary instruction is in order. SNIP Why isn't an Angstrom a measure of wavelength?? You yourself simply translated it into a parameter of your choice as 0.3 mm. My 4.0 MHz antenna is 120 feet. Is the unit of feet not a measure of wavelength? Could I not use a furlong as a unit of length? I offer that ANY unit of length is acceptable in expressing wavelength. DD he said frequency - not wavelength |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Roger Conroy wrote:
"Dave Shrader" wrote: Richard Clark wrote: Quite Droll, I must admit. 3 MILLION Angstroms Hmmm? This is not a unit of frequency by the way, so I suppose some elementary instruction is in order. Why isn't an Angstrom a measure of wavelength?? You yourself simply translated it into a parameter of your choice as 0.3 mm. I offer that ANY unit of length is acceptable in expressing wavelength. he said frequency - not wavelength 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. -- 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! =----- |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 09:39:01 -0500, Cecil Moore
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 and demonstrated you know neither. :-) |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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! =----- |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Na
|
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Cellular through glass mounting | Antenna | |||
Best antenna to go through triple-pane glass | Antenna | |||
Larson glass mount question | Antenna | |||
Thru the glass antenna & tinted glass | Antenna | |||
'Gluing' a broken glass antenna insulator. | Antenna |