Jim Kelley wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
I wrote you an email with a reference that I recomended you read.
It's the best explanation I've seen. I'll bet you haven't read it.

You simply cannot hurl nasty, obscene, ad hominem insults and still
expect someone to read your emails. You cannot say you weren't warned.

Waves don't cause other waves to change direction.

Normally, that's true.

As if you would know. It's of course always true.

It is, of course, not always true as proven by the quote from the
following web page. What is it about WAVE INTERFERENCE causing energy
to be "redistributed in a new direction" that you don't understand?

It clearly contradicts what you are asserting. It plainly asserts that
TWO INTERFERING WAVES can cause the energy in the two waves to change
direction. And it can only happen at an impedance discontinuity
which should be enough to satisfy your requirements.

"... when two waves of equal amplitude and wavelength that are 180-
degrees out of phase with each other meet, they are not actually
annihilated. All of the photon energy present in these waves must
somehow be recovered or redistributed in a new direction, according to
the law of energy conservation ... Instead, upon meeting, the photons
are redistributed to regions that permit constructive interference, so
the effect should be considered as a redistribution of light waves and
photon energy rather than the spontaneous construction or destruction
of light."

We are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. But I do
believe that my references outweigh yours by a long shot.
--
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 =---