Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #681245
| From | Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | alt.checkmate, alt.atheism, sci.physics |
| Subject | Re: AIN IT GREAT |
| Date | 2018-04-16 09:50 -0500 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <pb2d75$m4$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | (13 earlier) <pb18ii$1vci$1@gioia.aioe.org> <ThXAC.50858$KZ2.24991@fx39.iad> <pb24bq$1gbm$1@gioia.aioe.org> <pb28e0$1nhp$1@gioia.aioe.org> <pb29pr$1pub$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
Cross-posted to 3 groups.
On 4/16/2018 8:51 AM, Dinsdale wrote: > On 4/16/2018 9:28 AM, Sergio wrote: >> On 4/16/2018 7:19 AM, Dinsdale wrote: >>> On 4/16/2018 2:21 AM, benj wrote: >>>> On 4/16/2018 12:24 AM, Sergio wrote: >>>>> On 4/15/2018 11:26 AM, kensi wrote: >>>>>> On 4/14/2018 6:24 PM, Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. wrote: >>>>>>> This being the case, it would indicate that the radio waves >>>>>>> suffer some sort of energy loss and would end up being radio >>>>>>> wave red-shifted and thus the next crystal receiver would >>>>>>> *see* them at a less energetic or lower frequency. But, this >>>>>>> seems not to be the case. So, just what the fuck's going on >>>>>>> and doesn't this make a mockery out of the second law of >>>>>>> thermodynamics? >>>>>> >>>>>> The signal will be attenuated by *any* receiving antenna, but it's >>>>>> the >>>>>> amplitude that will go down, not the frequency. If you could see >>>>>> radio >>>>>> like you see light, the transmitter would look like a bright >>>>>> light-bulb >>>>>> filament, but colored strongly rather than white, and receiving >>>>>> antennas would look dark, >>>>> >>>>> no. you're transmitter is "white" over broad radio frequency, >>>>> antennas >>>>> are tuned to small bands of frequency, so they will still look >>>>> white to >>>>> ones radio eyes over the broad radio frequency. >>>>> >>>>>> but maybe a bit reflective as well. A forest of enough >>>>>> of them in front of you might block out the view, >>>>> >>>>> Wrong. google "phase cancellation in back lobe of antenna(s)" >>>>> >>>>>> while fewer will just >>>>>> dim it, >>>>> >>>>> Wrong, entirely. >>>>> >>>>>> like the shade and dappled light on a forest floor. >>>>> >>>>> wrong. >>>>> >>>>> google "multipath" >>>>> >>>>>> Other materials and objects would look from translucent grey to >>>>>> black or >>>>>> even pale depending on how much they tended to absorb, reflect, or >>>>>> transmit that wavelength. >>>>> >>>>> wrong, >>>>> wavelength is too long for any of that unless your at 10 Ghz, >>>>> google "multipath" >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> You would also be able to tell AM transmitters from FM ones at a >>>>>> glance. >>>>>> AM ones would be flickering, >>>>> >>>>> Wrong, AM would be constant as they send out the LO constant, and >>>>> sidebands are down 50%, they do not flicker. >>>>> >>>>> while FM ones would look steady but >>>>>> shifting minutely in color. >>>>> >>>>> wrong, >>>>> scale, what is deviation of FM, and average modulation frequency ? >>>>> your >>>>> radio eyes cant see that. A spectrum analyzer can, but not full scale >>>>> of the radio band. >>>>> >>>>> And every station in your area would be a >>>>>> filament of a different color. >>>>> >>>>> wrong, your eyes could not seperate out 10^9 colors >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> (This is a bit of a simplification, as it ignores diffraction, >>>>>> interference patterns, and polarization. The first two, while almost >>>>>> unimportant with visible light, are significant with radio waves, >>>>>> because the wavelengths are comparable to the sizes of everyday >>>>>> objects >>>>>> such as trash cans, windows, human beings, and whatever sort of >>>>>> thingy >>>>>> you are. Polarization means some radio waves might be blocked by a >>>>>> fence >>>>>> with closely spaced vertical metal bars but only somewhat dimmed >>>>>> by one >>>>>> with horizontal bars, or vice versa, or similar consequences. When >>>>>> dealing with visible light, these three phenomena are much more >>>>>> infrequently encountered, but the bright colors on butterfly wings >>>>>> come >>>>>> from diffraction, the glittery speckly effect at the fringe of a >>>>>> laser >>>>>> beam dot is an interference pattern, and some sunglasses dim direct >>>>>> sunlight a lot more than they dim the reflected light from objects by >>>>>> exploiting the former's polarization.) >>>>>> >>>>> simplification excuse not accepted. >>>>> >>>> Sergio totally destroys "Dr. kensi's" PBS liberal science fantasy with >>>> actual engineering and science. >>>> >>>> This is primary evidence as to why one should NEVER learn your science >>>> from libs at PBS (or from ANY libs for that matter). >>> >>> You and your sidekick appear to be rather stupid. >>> >> (kensi pupa's simplification demonstrates no knowledge of radio wave or >> radio wave probagation(s), and incorrectly applies optical effects, it >> is a whole different critter- if you have any specific questions please >> bring them up, no problem. kensi pupa is still learning, it is ok) > > Probagation(s)? Don't you mean prorogation(s), Mr. Pooper guy, whom > aren't lerning much of anything due to stupid? > ah, I see, you are crossposting from alt.godless.narcissists so all things look stupid to you, even your mama.
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: AIN IT GREAT "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-04-09 12:44 -0400
Do you like it when she honks " Hee... Haw.. " ? ! Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-04-09 10:41 -0700
Re: Do you like it when she honks " Hee... Haw.. " ? ! benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-09 17:26 -0400
Re: AIN IT GREAT Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-04-09 11:44 -0700
Re: AIN IT GREAT % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-04-09 11:47 -0700
Re: AIN IT GREAT "Colonel Edmund J. Burke" <burkesbabes@bigass-babes.com> - 2018-04-09 19:38 -0700
Re: AIN IT GREAT % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-04-09 19:40 -0700
Re: AIN IT GREAT Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-04-12 05:14 +0000
Re: AIN IT GREAT "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-04-14 18:24 -0400
Re: AIN IT GREAT benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-14 20:28 -0400
Re: AIN IT GREAT Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-04-14 18:39 -0600
Re: AIN IT GREAT % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-04-14 17:57 -0700
Re: AIN IT GREAT Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-04-14 19:59 -0600
Re: AIN IT GREAT kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-04-15 12:26 -0400
Re: AIN IT GREAT Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-04-15 10:31 -0600
Re: AIN IT GREAT kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-04-15 13:10 -0400
Re: AIN IT GREAT Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-04-15 11:15 -0600
Re: AIN IT GREAT benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-15 18:22 -0400
Re: AIN IT GREAT Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-15 23:07 -0500
Re: AIN IT GREAT benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-15 18:17 -0400
Re: AIN IT GREAT mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> - 2018-04-15 13:17 -0400
Re: AIN IT GREAT benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-15 18:26 -0400
Re: AIN IT GREAT Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-04-15 22:58 -0700
Re: AIN IT GREAT Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-15 23:24 -0500
Re: AIN IT GREAT benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-16 02:21 -0400
Re: AIN IT GREAT Dinsdale <yup@ayup.yup> - 2018-04-16 08:19 -0400
Re: AIN IT GREAT Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-16 08:28 -0500
Re: AIN IT GREAT Dinsdale <yup@ayup.yup> - 2018-04-16 09:51 -0400
Re: AIN IT GREAT Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-16 09:50 -0500
Re: AIN IT GREAT "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-04-16 10:12 -0400
Re: AIN IT GREAT Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-04-16 09:51 -0500
Re: AIN IT GREAT benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-16 12:57 -0400
csiph-web