The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
References: <%_wk9.52964$1C2.firstname.lastname@example.org> <3D9442F1.42F2FBAF@webaccess.net> <3D9467AC.9745AC66@webaccess.net> <8a%k9.56338$1C2.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: Any ideas on measuring radiation in the home ?
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2002 19:00:48 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2002 19:00:48 GMT
Organization: AT&T Worldnet
This is nit-picking.
I did not say the signal does not diverge or lose intensity. The point is
about how much is needed.
"Mike Poulton" wrote in message
> On 01 Oct 2002, "News2020" said:
> > The heat was off.
> > Also, I am aware of the inverse square, etc. Several watts with a
> > directed beam or laser will stay focussed.
> No, the inverse square law applies to ALL RADIATED ENERGY. There is no
> exception for lasers or other collimated sources. They behave like
> small sections from an isotropic radiator. Of course, your aperture
> must be small enough to be completely within the beam. What this means
> is that no beam will "stay focused" (you really mean "collimated").
> They all diverge according to the inverse square law.
> Mike Poulton
> MTP Technologies
> Not only do I speak for my company, I AM my company!
> Live free or die!
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup