Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<6381abe4798019e1560c0a044a2802cf@www.novabbs.com> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz) Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: The Shapiro's experiment HOAX. A 1968 TIME article. Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2024 21:57:33 +0000 Organization: novaBBS Message-ID: <6381abe4798019e1560c0a044a2802cf@www.novabbs.com> References: <db18709b6ba689b9c07245000ff1b094@www.novabbs.com> <EgMPO.1766243$4J12.285784@fx12.ams4> <670ffed7$1$32085$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <2fcf10d29b40e102861392bbb5f1cb0c@www.novabbs.com> <6712b99d$0$12930$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <788c11c48cd3bd847cf3812e2bd0fe2c@www.novabbs.com> <67140bc2$1$12939$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <7a47756e8a9b96d246d5d4667620198b@www.novabbs.com> <0c4d4f1515f9b4aa242af0c2072b7783@www.novabbs.com> <6f6b178559e67e5109dbb1b70d582c4f@www.novabbs.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="2942458"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="OjDMvaaXMeeN/7kNOPQl+dWI+zbnIp3mGAHMVhZ2e/A"; User-Agent: Rocksolid Light X-Rslight-Posting-User: 26080b4f8b9f153eb24ebbc1b47c4c36ee247939 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$3fXKZdWYxkXCC2oeB.lW8.wbiuGgjmZd53WFWbFU.1LwsxvxAhe92 Bytes: 3049 Lines: 36 On Sun, 20 Oct 2024 20:52:31 +0000, ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog wrote: > On Sun, 20 Oct 2024 17:36:33 +0000, ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog wrote: > >> On Sat, 19 Oct 2024 22:05:22 +0000, rhertz wrote: >> >>> You are the one who started this by asserting that passive reflections >>> of EM radiation decay with 1/r^4, and not the usual 1/r². >> >> But it is a well-known fact that the received power of the reflected >> radar signal from a point target goes as 1/r^4. >> >> Look up the "radar equation" >> https://www.ll.mit.edu/sites/default/files/outreach/doc/2018-07/lecture%202.pdf >> https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/radar-equation >> >> If the target cannot be modeled as a point, for instance if you are >> reflecting off of the ground, or if the target, say, is a corner >> reflector, then the equation will obviously be different. > > Clarification: I should have qualified "corner reflector" with > the word "giant", of course. A small corner reflector that does > not intercept the entire output beam would also exhibit 1/r^4 > behavior. This is correct. I was wrong, and sincerely apologize to Jan. The wide of the outgoing main lobe of the Cassegrain antenna increases with the distance such that, at interplanetary distances, causes that the beam area is almost flat. However, the reflection is not isotropic, even when it doesn't count in the reception of the reflection, which is proportional to the 1/R^4. This document is a little more elaborated. But I remark that the "real" radar equation is much more sophisticated than what was shown. https://www.ll.mit.edu/sites/default/files/outreach/doc/2018-07/lecture%206.pdf