Re: World Phones


"David" <someone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:7USCg.10005$gY6.9592@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Scott" <how.do@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:b6CdnQzbwORHaEbZnZ2dnUVZ_oGdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"David" <someone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:PvSCg.10000$gY6.7083@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


Scott,

The Wikipedia reference is correct.
If:
1) the antenna gains are set to unity to reflect only the path,
2) the power ratio is inverted to express the path loss as a positive
decibel quantity,
3} and the result is expressed in decibels,
the two equations are identical. Do not call the reference
miss-information unless you are sure of yourself.

David


I'm sure enough of myself to state categorically that the equation cited
by Cowboy is indeed correct and actively used in the field of cellular
communication by all carriers. Is that being sure enough of myself?
Scott,
Here is a quote from you about the reference being discussed:
---
"Let me get this right- the cellular tech guy is wrong and wikipedia is
right. Wikipedia is ripe with misinformation- a sad result of people
trhinking that they know whatthey are talking about.

And Novice- do you have any experience with the topic at hand?"
---
That was the origin of my comment.


And while this is an instance where the information contained is correct,
all you need to do is look at the wiki refernce that Navas uses in his sig
to see an entry that contains questionable material, to put it politely.
John Navas has become a pro at googling and posting links that contain
information that is beyond his knowledge. As a result, most of it, while
correct information, does not apply to the conversation at hand. This is
one of those cases- he posted factual information that he has no experience
with- it simply is not the correct information for the discussion being
conducted.


.

Loading