Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Lightning Protection Question

To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Lightning Protection Question
From: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 09:46:10 -0700
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
Sorry to be so blunt, but that's a ridiculous distinction.  A theory 
doesn't need to deviate from fundamental scientific principles at all, 
although it might indeed involve an assumption of some kind.  Many 
theories simply involve unknowns/assumptions about an input parameter or 
physical state and have nothing to do with the soundness of the 
scientific principles involved.  I can theorize that my domestic contest 
runrate on 20m mid-afternoon drops significantly because my antenna is 
too high for the predominant arrival angles for that time period, and 
EVERYTHING about it would be based upon sound scientific principles.  It 
would remain a theory until I had some way to determine the actual 
arrival angles, but it's the input variable that's the assumption, not 
the theory itself.

Dave   AB7E



On 9/12/2010 9:31 PM, Doug Renwick wrote:
> Just a minute.  Using the words theory and fundamental science
> principles interchangeably is flawed.  There is a big definition
> difference between these two.  Theory can be defined as an assumption or
> guess which is clearly different from fundamental science principles.
>
> Doug
_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>