Re: On The Irrelevance Of The Absolute Rest Frame In Special Relativity


Sorcerer wrote:
"Sue..." <suzysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1165515944.925705.299760@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
| Sorcerer wrote:
| > "Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1165512455.347383.65400@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > |
| > | Sorcerer wrote:
| > | > What inverse square law, shithead?
| > |
| > | (Androcles wants everyone in every thread to know he believes
| > | parabolic antennas produce beams that do not spread, and
| > | that do not obey the inverse square law. I'm happy to help
| > | spread his message.)
| >
| > How kind.
| > Poe wants everyone in every thread to know he believes parabolic
| > antennas radiate omnidirectionally,
|
| << and that they obey some inverse square law as an
| omnidirectional antenna would. >>

You are very selective on minor points but totally ignorant of mathematics.
<< Blind Poe and I are debating 1/r^2, which he claims will spread a
laser beam. >>

I am having a bit of trouble finding where Randy Poe even
uses the word laser in this thread or the related parabola
thread in sci.physics.

But it shouldn't matter anyway. Are you advancing an argument
that the terms r^2 in these equations:

http://www.rp-photonics.com/gaussian_beams.html

....owe their existance to something other than the inverse
square law?

Sue...



Do you agree that a cylinder is a cone as Blind Poe claims, or do
you think a cylinder is a cylinder.... err.... fuckwit? Or do you
think a cylinder is a sphere... err... shithead ?

| I'm asking the
| > fuckin' idiot how he comes to that ridiculous conclusion.
| >
| > Hint: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/omnidirectional
|

.

Quantcast