Re: Waves vs Particles
- From: Roy Lewallen <w7el@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 02 Feb 2008 14:00:30 -0800
AI4QJ wrote:
"Roy Lewallen" <w7el@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:13q89hvg3g8af2a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
AI4QJ wrote:"Cecil Moore" <nospam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in messageI'm sure you mean relative permittivity and relative permeability.
news:jmQoj.1450$R84.898@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
pdrahn@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:I should say "characteristic" impedance is 377 Ohms. It also has aCecil Moore <nos...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:Maybe "an incredibly complex substance"Quoting "Alpha and Omega", by Seife,Are you saying space is a fluid?
"Empty space is an incredibly complex substance, ...
exhibits some characteristics of a fluid?
permitivity and permeability of 1 ;-)
No, this is not correct. The permitivities and permeabilities of all materials are relative to free space. Free space is assumed to be 1 and the other values are relative to it.
The characteristic impedance is the square root of permeability divided
by permittivity, so if both are one, the characteristic impedance would
have to be one.
No, this is not correct.
Wow. Sometimes even this newsgroup surprises me.
Roy Lewallen, W7EL
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Waves vs Particles
- From: K7ITM
- Re: Waves vs Particles
- From: Richard Clark
- Re: Waves vs Particles
- References:
- Waves vs Particles
- From: Cecil Moore
- Re: Waves vs Particles
- From: pdrahn@xxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Waves vs Particles
- From: Cecil Moore
- Re: Waves vs Particles
- From: AI4QJ
- Re: Waves vs Particles
- From: Roy Lewallen
- Re: Waves vs Particles
- From: AI4QJ
- Waves vs Particles
- Prev by Date: Re: Waves vs Particles
- Next by Date: Re: Waves vs Particles
- Previous by thread: Re: Waves vs Particles
- Next by thread: Re: Waves vs Particles
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|