On Thu, 8 Apr 2004 10:20:58 -0500, "Dave VanHorn"
wrote:


"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Richard Clark wrote:
The recitation of any wavelength starting with a significant three is
enough to set off alarms when there is a concurrent claim of its
visibility. That is why I said it was impossible to be a decimal
error.

The point of the thing, which you seem intent on missing, is that EM
radiation is reflected by impedance discontinuities. Optical reflection is
very similar to what happens at lower frequencies.
I normally use this analogy when discussing the use of shielding and
absorbent materials for EMI supression.


Hi Dave,

I certainly am missing something from this post. How do you get from
my comment about visible wavelengths to one about shielding EMI?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:
I certainly am missing something from this post. How do you get from
my comment about visible wavelengths to one about shielding EMI?

Dave is probably missing the fact that you like to harp and pick
the same nit for weeks before you get it out of your system. :-)
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 8 Apr 2004 10:20:58 -0500, "Dave VanHorn"
wrote:


"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Richard Clark wrote:
The recitation of any wavelength starting with a significant three is
enough to set off alarms when there is a concurrent claim of its
visibility. That is why I said it was impossible to be a decimal
error.

The point of the thing, which you seem intent on missing, is that EM
radiation is reflected by impedance discontinuities. Optical reflection
is
very similar to what happens at lower frequencies.
I normally use this analogy when discussing the use of shielding and
absorbent materials for EMI supression.


Hi Dave,

I certainly am missing something from this post. How do you get from
my comment about visible wavelengths to one about shielding EMI?

By the intervening sentence, about the similarity of optical reflection to
reflection at lower wavelengths.

Hi Dave,

On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 11:48:53 GMT, Dave Shrader
wrote:

My EM guys, Physics types, [from my working days] indicated that the
three dielectric interfaces, adhesive to glass to adhesive, all with
different dielectric coefficients create reflections at the boundaries.

How much reflection is there from a device with sub wavelength
dimension? Cecil can't answer this, can you?

Let's cast this back to optics:
You have a mirror with 60nm sides
(a similar, proportional scale to the glass mount).

The question becomes, how much light (percentage or dB) is reflected?

For others following this: would you use this mirror to shave? ;-)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:
How much reflection is there from a device with sub wavelength
dimension? Cecil can't answer this, can you?

OK, genius, please tell us how much reflection is there from
a Through-Glass Antenna/Ford Taurus.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP