>Jon, if you believe in those theories that strongly then I suggest that
>you and Rich team up and publish an article in a reputable journal. I am
>a strong believer in peer review and this reflector is read by only a
>tiny fraction of engineers.
ARRRGH!
How many times do I have to say it:
I AM NOT ANY KIND OF AN EXPERT ON THE STRUCTURE AND MAKE-UP OF TUBES! I
CANNOT SAY WHAT THE EXACT MECHANISM IS. IT WOULD BE IDIOTIC FOR ME TO
TRY AND WRITE A PAPER ABOUT SOMETHING THAT I KNOW VERY LITTLE ABOUT!
Sorry to yell, but I wish people would actually read my posts.
All I am saying is that I see how Rich's theory COULD work. Is it right?
I don't know. Is it POSSIBLY right? Based on my limited knowledge I
think it could. Do I know for sure? No. Will I ever? Probably not.
Do I care? No.
Is it fun to see all you guys get your undies in wads and start to hurl
insults over theories? Yes!
I've never claimed that Rich is correct in all his theories. I could
care less about bent filaments. What I have been talking about is the
suppressor circuit and mechanism of oscillation. That I understand
somewhat.
Now, I asked Carl for this, but he has neglected to respond, so maybe
someone else can:
Can someone else put forward a detailed and reasoned theory of what does
bend filaments helixes? Supposedly they are there. So far though in all
this debate all I hear is, "No, Rich is wrong, wrong, wrong. Rich is
senile. Rich is a schlock designer." etc. etc.
I haven't seen any logical discussion of why Rich's theories are wrong
and what the alternatives are?
How about that? Dick, why don't you and Carl write a technical paper on
your theories?
73,
Jon
KE9NA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Ogden
jono@webspun.com
www.qsl.net/ke9na
"A life lived in fear is a life half lived."
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|