> Now, I can tell this is made-up. I mean, who could measure the
> glazing reduction so accurately as to come up with a number like
> 86.9% ? Such precision is not attainable even by scientists, like
> the guys that built the Hubble Space Telescope...
>
> Dana K6JQ
Indeed, if you want to attain that level of accuracy, you need an ENGINEER!
In fact, as part of the California Foxhunting Team's research in the field,
we found by computer modeling that the highest practical reduction in
glazing was 78.843% even though the scientists would dispute that. We
demonstrated by modeling and by actual experimentation that at a certain
point, corresponding to a 78.844% glazing reduction, a singularity
developed in the modulus of expansion, thus preventing any realizable
glazing reduction gain beyond that point. In other words, the wire broke.
One scientist that we consulted still disputes our results, claiming that
the mathematical functions clearly reduce to 100% reduction at the limit.
The 86.9% reduction claimed is obviously fictitious.
[
QRP-L Archive |
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000
]