On 9/10/2019 7:57 AM, John King via TowerTalk wrote:
who are so highly educated and possessing the "ultimate factual truth on the subject of
feeding a tower" to "pooh pooh EVERY other hypothesis
The various methods of feeding a tower are not hypotheses -- that is,
ideas or concepts to be proved. Rather, they are applications of the
fundamental principles of physics -- our understanding of how things
work, developed as a result of scientific study over hundreds of years,
the results of which are studied in an organized fashion, and written
down so that others can learn from, apply, and even study further to
learn about the subject in question.
Sometimes statements or recommendations made here (and elsewhere) are
the result of erroneous understandings of the fundamental principles.
Few, if any, of us with education and training in the sciences know much
about everything -- rather, nearly all of us have specialized in
scientific disciplines of interest to us. This is equally true in all
fields of human endeavor -- the law, in business, in medicine,
construction, mining, driving, teaching, and so on.
My formal education is EE; after that, I extensively studied photography
(including lighting, color, and other related technical issues); then
electrical construction methods, acoustics, sound systems, and music in
order to pursue a career as a sound system design consultant; then EMC
in order to address issues of interference to sound systems from AC
power and radio systems. Much of that is quite specialized, as a
professional, I learned to acknowledge what I know and don't know!
Problems arise when statements or recommendations are made on the basis
of faulty understanding of the principles and/or their application, or
even quoting erroneous statements and methods of others.
73, Jim K9YC
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|