Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+10dB\s+and\s+propagation\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+10dB\s+and\s+propagation\s*$/: 58 ]

Total 58 documents matching your query.

41. Re: [Amps] 10dB and propagation (score: 1): Author: David Kirkby <david.kirkby@onetel.net>; Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 02:25:50 +0000; gdaught6@stanford.edu wrote: On 7 Feb 2005 at 23:32, David Kirkby wrote: (paraphrasing another) Your article says radio waves don't propagate by reflection, What? I guess we'd better trash our Yagis; /archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00279.html (10,654 bytes)
42. Re: [Amps] 10dB and propagation (score: 1): Author: "Michael Tope" <W4EF@dellroy.com>; Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 18:48:55 -0800; Did they publish any papers on this phenomenon? What do you mean by long - seconds, minutes, hours? And by time constant do you mean to say that at the first instant of comparison, the instantaneous; /archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00288.html (12,008 bytes)
43. Re: [Amps] 10dB and propagation (score: 1): Author: R.Measures <r@somis.org>; Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 04:02:04 -0800; On Feb 7, 2005, at 5:53 PM, K3BU@aol.com wrote: In a message dated 2/7/2005 5:35:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, ka1xo@juno.com writes: Does this then mean that every transmission is contributing to the; /archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00293.html (9,967 bytes)
44. Re: [Amps] 10dB and propagation (score: 1): Author: R.Measures <r@somis.org>; Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 05:10:47 -0800; On Feb 7, 2005, at 6:48 PM, Michael Tope wrote: -- Original Message -- From: "R.Measures" <r@somis.org> On Feb 6, 2005, at 6:09 PM, Michael Tope wrote: You stole my thunder, Ian. Yuri and Rich seem t; /archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00295.html (15,930 bytes)
45. Re: [Amps] 10dB and propagation (score: 1): Author: Ian White G3SEK <G3SEK@ifwtech.co.uk>; Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 13:38:26 +0000; R. Measures wrote: Indeed, Yuri. In the early 1900s, when an Austrian patent office clerk and amateur physicist theorized that photons (which have zero-mass and travel at the speed of light) were ben; /archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00298.html (8,941 bytes)
46. Re: [Amps] 10dB and propagation (score: 1): Author: R.Measures <r@somis.org>; Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 07:12:53 -0800; On Feb 8, 2005, at 5:38 AM, Ian White G3SEK wrote: R. Measures wrote: Indeed, Yuri. In the early 1900s, when an Austrian patent office clerk and amateur physicist theorized that photons (which have z; /archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00301.html (9,521 bytes)
47. Re: [Amps] 10dB and propagation (score: 1): Author: Ian White G3SEK <G3SEK@ifwtech.co.uk>; Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 15:39:53 +0000; R. Measures wrote: When measurements don't fit in with everything we already know, real scientists and engineers are trained to ask themselves: "Is this something really new - am I really another Ein; /archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00303.html (9,019 bytes)
48. Re: [Amps] 10dB and propagation (score: 1): Author: R.Measures <r@somis.org>; Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 08:02:10 -0800; On Feb 8, 2005, at 7:39 AM, Ian White G3SEK wrote: R. Measures wrote: When measurements don't fit in with everything we already know, real scientists and engineers are trained to ask themselves: "Is; /archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00304.html (10,030 bytes)
49. Re: [Amps] 10dB and propagation (score: 1): Author: Bill Fuqua <wlfuqu00@uky.edu>; Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 11:30:05 -0500; I don't think there was any mention of gravity waves. Bending of light by gravity is a result of the fact that light has finite speed and that acceleration due to gravity is no different from acceler; /archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00305.html (10,285 bytes)
50. Re: [Amps] 10dB and propagation (score: 1): Author: "Kim Elmore" <Kim.Elmore@noaa.gov>; Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 10:47:19 -0600; I think the point being made here is not that the equipment is questionable (the attenuator could be accurate to +/- 10^-13 dB) but that other things, none of which are contrary to what we currently; /archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00306.html (10,886 bytes)
51. Re: [Amps] 10dB and propagation (score: 1): Author: Mark Hill <g4fph@mjha.co.uk>; Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 17:04:02 +0000; Folks, Say, did somebody here mention amplifiers recently? Anybody? Please! I'm sure I can see a nice, cherry red 3-500 at the end of this tunnel full of dead horses!! Regards. Mark. ** Mark Hill - G; /archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00307.html (9,378 bytes)
52. Re: [Amps] 10dB and propagation (score: 1): Author: Colin Lamb <k7fm@teleport.com>; Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 09:22:29 -0800 (GMT-08:00); "Say, did somebody here mention amplifiers recently? Anybody? Please!" Well, we have been talking about amplifiers. But, instead of using vacuum tubes, we are discussing using hot air to amplify. In; /archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00308.html (8,421 bytes)
53. Re: [Amps] 10dB and propagation (score: 1): Author: R.Measures <r@somis.org>; Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 09:26:07 -0800; On Feb 8, 2005, at 8:47 AM, Kim Elmore wrote: I think the point being made here is not that the equipment is questionable (the attenuator could be accurate to +/- 10^-13 dB) but that other things, no; /archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00309.html (12,074 bytes)
54. Re: [Amps] 10dB and propagation (score: 1): Author: "Michael Tope" <W4EF@dellroy.com>; Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 09:56:08 -0800; So what you are saying is that at one instant with the 8171 off the signal was S-xx and then in the next instant (e.g. in the span of a few seconds) the operator turned on the 8171, and the Rx signal; /archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00311.html (10,597 bytes)
55. Re: [Amps] 10dB and propagation (score: 1): Author: Jan Erik Holm <sm2ekm@telia.com>; Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 19:46:41 +0100; Yes that´s the driver for the extra 10 dB!! 73 Jim SM2EKM -- Mark Hill wrote: Folks, Say, did somebody here mention amplifiers recently? Anybody? Please! I'm sure I can see a nice, cherry red 3; /archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00314.html (8,969 bytes)
56. Re: [Amps] 10dB and propagation (score: 1): Author: Gary Schafer <garyschafer@comcast.net>; Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 14:39:20 -0500; Colin Lamb wrote: "Say, did somebody here mention amplifiers recently? Anybody? Please!" Well, we have been talking about amplifiers. But, instead of using vacuum tubes, we are discussing using hot a; /archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00315.html (8,939 bytes)
57. Re: [Amps] 10dB and propagation (score: 1): Author: R.Measures <r@somis.org>; Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 14:59:57 -0800; On Feb 8, 2005, at 9:56 AM, Michael Tope wrote: -- Original Message -- From: "R.Measures" <r@somis.org> Some mornings, 20db more Tx suds produced 20db more Rx signal and on other mornings, 20db more; /archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00321.html (12,540 bytes)
58. Re: [Amps] 10dB and propagation (score: 1): Author: TexasRF@aol.com; Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 22:46:01 EST; I don't recall any mention of polarization changes in this discussion. Being an EME operator I am keenly aware of the faraday rotation problem at VHF. As the frequency is lowered the rotation speed i; /archives//html/Amps/2005-02/msg00328.html (8,538 bytes)

Current List: 41 - 58
Page: [1] [2] [3]