Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 20:54:00 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote: a cruse missile design. ROFL And eventually this will lead to a balanced energy equation. :-) Well if there are no places of precision, you are already the 1 million monkeys with white-out. and the term irradiance was pulled out of a hat (it is radiant flux - iff we are to believe anything). Funny that Eugene Hecht, of "Optics" fame, disagrees with you. "When we talk about the 'amount' of light illuminating a surface, we are referring to something called the irradiance, denoted by I - the average energy per unit area per unit time." What unit of area? Do your power meters read in Watts/cM² ? SWR per acre? (or are you metric? SWR per hectare?) Funny is right and fame is fleeting when a fan posts your picture - face to the wall. 0% for effort, 10% for Xerox work 0% for graphics 0% for showing work 0% for correctness -10% for inability to use spell-checker (cruse indeed) ----- F- No one expects you to get it right. |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Richard Clark wrote:
0% for effort, 10% for Xerox work 0% for graphics 0% for showing work 0% for correctness -10% for inability to use spell-checker (cruse indeed) How much for everyone refusing to respond to the challenge at the risk of being proven wrong? -- 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 =---- |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 15:18:54 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote: Richard Clark wrote: 0% for effort, 10% for Xerox work 0% for graphics 0% for showing work 0% for correctness -10% for inability to use spell-checker (cruse indeed) How much for everyone refusing to respond to the challenge at the risk of being proven wrong? 0% for logic ----- F- Everyone? You quote me above and you ARE responding to the last in a chain of responses that annihilated your challenge. You were off by at least a factor of 10 and your material was grossly inaccurate - it was that easy to prove you wrong. Those details, have already been examined and their repetition will change nothing. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Metal film resistors? | Homebrew | |||
New Hitler film sheds new light on unique Finnish recording | Shortwave | |||
Why do we use thin antennas? | Antenna | |||
Tobacco film removal | Boatanchors |