On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 20:52:38 -0400, John Popelish
wrote:

Not much to discuss. I don't do such calculations often, but I get
about 5*10^-27 joule per photon. What do you calculate their energy
to be?

Hi John,

Closer to 4.63 · 10^-27 joule. Not enough difference to matter. So,
we are talking about a little more than 10^28 photons and when we
return to your statement (or is it twice that?)
I didn't mean that the mirror produces half of the total photons that are radiated.
or
I meant that half as many photons are produced, compared to the
full dipole antenna that produces the same fields above the center line.

I have to again exclaim:

No, I suppose not.

Further, as to your "stipulation:"
the field strength above the centerline
being constant, rather than the radiated power. I missed that we were
only talking about a case of radiating 100 watts.

It would be strange to talk about radiation without some expression of
power to the antenna. 100 watts has been a cardinal value in this
group for many years. Field strength is generally expressed in
volts/meter. Somehow, its translation into eV to follow the photon
metaphor seems rather strained. Going further with this convolution
of centerline partition that relates to same fields (same?) to explain
a difference is also quite odd. Would you care to elaborate on this
concept of the centerline?

Do you have some point?

This is odder yet, you introduce the topic and ask me what my point
is? My own separate observation is the introduction of photonics
doesn't add much does it?

Hard to escape, and makes a mess of describing mirrors too, especially
when they are skeletal approximations as well.

You have to start understanding mirrors, somewhere. Perhaps you
prefer a different starting point. There are several.

Starting with radials would seem to be in keeping with the thread.
Shifting starts when you haven't finished seems to defeat the
progression of where you were going.

I can offer more thread-busters when it comes to photonics, but that
is a slam dunk. Get us rolling on one ace proposition, and I will get
back to you in a couple of hours.

I have no idea what you are saying with these two sentences.

No doubt. I read these same admissions with some frequency. It
rarely keeps me up at nights worrying anymore.

You were going to tie this all together weren't you?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC