On Thu, 12 May 2005 19:23:55 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:
Please specify the system.
Further elaboration is unnecessary.

Richard Clark wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Please specify the system.

Further elaboration is unnecessary.

OK, the answer is that if the conjugate mirror involves RF
waves, as it does in "Reflections", you would see nothing.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Fri, 13 May 2005 07:21:42 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:
if the conjugate mirror involves RF waves
As I said, an unnecessary elaboration (it is redundant);
you would see nothing.
Yes.

....Why?

Waves are exactly equal and opposite and cancel.

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 13 May 2005 07:21:42 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:
if the conjugate mirror involves RF waves
As I said, an unnecessary elaboration (it is redundant);
you would see nothing.
Yes.

...Why?

Richard Clark wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
if the conjugate mirror involves RF waves
you would see nothing.

Yes.

...Why?

Because human eyes cannot detect RF? :-)

A source impedance of 100+j100 ohms ensuring 100 volts
at the source output terminal to a load impedance of
100-j100 ohms through one wavelength of lossless 50 ohm
coax is conjugately matched.

A source impedance of 50 ohms ensuring 100 volts at
the source output terminal to a load impedance of 100-j100
ohms through one wavelength of lossless 50 ohm coax is
not conjugately matched.

All conditions of voltage, current, and power external to
the source output terminal are identical in both cases,
i.e. making only passive measurements, one cannot tell
the difference between a conjugate match and a mismatch.
Except for a minor effect on my power bill, I fail to see
what the hullabaloo (concerning conjugate matching) is
all about.
--
73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Richard Clark wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2005 07:21:42 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:

if the conjugate mirror involves RF waves

As I said, an unnecessary elaboration (it is redundant);

you would see nothing.

Yes.

Please cite your reference for this 'conjugate mirror'.

Thank you.

ac6xg

Jim Kelley wrote:
Please cite your reference for this 'conjugate mirror'.

In "Reflections", Walt has a chapter entitled "Into the
Conjugate Mirror" or something like that.
--
73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Cecil Moore wrote:

Jim Kelley wrote:

Please cite your reference for this 'conjugate mirror'.


In "Reflections", Walt has a chapter entitled "Into the
Conjugate Mirror" or something like that.

I'm hoping to buy the third edition. The reason I asked is because the
only thing I can find is something called a phase conjugate mirror,
which has some really interesting behavior. And not exactly the
behavior being discussed in this thread. Time reversal for example.
For starters, check out:

http://www.optics.kth.se/fysik2/staf...sis/node7.html

I doubt Richard had considered all the possibilities when he said to
elaborate would be redundant.

73, ac6xg

On Thu, 12 May 2005 10:04:12 -0700, Jim Kelley
wrote:

Effluvium for the sake of effluence, and vice versa.

On Fri, 13 May 2005 10:47:02 -0700, Jim Kelley
wrote:

I doubt Richard had considered all the possibilities when he said to
elaborate would be redundant.

Hi Jim,

In the 18th century politics, someone who straddled the fence was
called a Mugwump - their mug on one side and their wump on the other.

The reason I asked is because the
only thing I can find is something called a phase conjugate mirror,

It was suitable enough, but rather slim.

which has some really interesting behavior. And not exactly the
behavior being discussed in this thread. Time reversal for example.

This issue of what "is" and "is not" behavior being discussed is
strictly a matter of interpretation. Insofar as discussion continues,
it is quite evidently what "is" being discussed (a tautology). After
all, how many could mistake a director from a reflector and after
discussion still emerge confused?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

You would see nothing.

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 12 May 2005 19:23:55 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:
Please specify the system.
Further elaboration is unnecessary.