LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #8   Report Post  
Old June 30th 05, 09:25 PM
Richard Clark
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 13:43:13 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:
An angle of incidence of 30 degrees
is irrelevant to this particular example.

Changing the question to suit the answer, Hmm? As if it mattered!

How much power is reflected from Surface A (first incidence)?

The reflectance is 0.01, so 1%. First incidence 0.01 watts

depending upon the polarization r¬ = 1.583% and r|| = 0.5485%
Splitting the difference (1.066%)
0.0107W
or
0.9893W @ 24° available at the next interface
How much power is reflected from Surface B (first incidence)?

The reflectance is 0.01, so 1%. First incidence is 0.0099 watts

depending upon the polarization r¬ = 1.3381% and r|| = 0.7099%
Splitting the difference (1.024%)
0.0101W
or
0.9792W @ 19° available at the next interface
How much power is transmitted through all interfaces?

One watt net to the "load".

Already provided as 0.9792W

**********************************

Since you couldn't answer the original question, let's explore how
accurate your answer to your own question was:

How much power is reflected from Surface A (first incidence)?

The reflectance is 0.01, so 1%. First incidence 0.01 watts

depending upon the polarization r¬ = 0.9999% and r|| = 0.9999%
Splitting the difference (0.9999%)
0.0100W
or
0.9900W @ 0° available at the next interface
How much power is reflected from Surface B (first incidence)?

The reflectance is 0.01, so 1%. First incidence is 0.0099 watts

depending upon the polarization r¬ = 0.9998% and r|| = 0.9998%
Splitting the difference (0.9998%)
0.0099W
or
0.9801W @ 0° available at the next interface
How much power is transmitted through all interfaces?

One watt net to the "load".

Already provided as 0.9801W

But, hey, what's 2% error in a conservation of energy equation? You
can prove anything (especially your absolute proofs) if you simply
discard precision. Pons and Fleishman proved cold fusion by throwing
away fewer digits than you.

Well, for 1W of light and presuming cancellation (you cannot achieve
full cancellation); this leaves 100µW of light reflected from a
non-reflecting layer - which is quite bright.

So, energy is conserved, and there is no such thing as complete
cancellation.

By the way, the math is available from:
Hecht, Eugene, Optics, 2nd Ed, Addison Wesley, 1987
or perhaps you should invest in:
Hecht, Eugene, Optics, Schaum's Outline Series, McGraw-Hill ,1975
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mobile Antenna Matching Question wb5cys Antenna 128 June 15th 05 03:41 AM
A Subtle Detail of Reflection Coefficients (but important to know) Dr. Slick Antenna 199 September 12th 03 10:06 PM
Complex Z0 [Corrected] pez Antenna 41 September 11th 03 05:00 PM
The Cecilian Gambit, a variation on the Galilean Defense revisited Richard Clark Antenna 11 July 24th 03 07:30 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:57 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017