Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 15:27:02 GMT, "Peter O. Brackett"
wrote: See anything wrong with this analysis? Hi Peter, One thing: you are expecting everyone to agree that the source has a characteristic Z. The chasm that separates factions is found in this alone where many who say, no "it is NOT 50 Ohms" (or "it doesn't matter") are loath to come up with an actual value to conjugate (in other words, a sterile position). Such a forced choice leads obviously to the deflation of pet theories. To date their best argument is you cannot possibly know that value (for any of a variety of reasons, unrelated to simply sitting down at the bench and measuring an actual value). In short, institutionalized ignorance, embraced with a mystic missionary zeal, is their crowing logic. But I do enjoy their examples and logic puzzles reminiscent of the necromancer's formulæ for transmutation of gold into lead. The unrequited dreams would be fulfilled if only the discovery of the Philosopher's Stone could be realized. Hence debate proceeds with the leaps and twirls of zen-cartwheeling. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |