 | | Re: Evolution of Earth and moon (was: Couldn't resist) —Jeff Jardine
|
| | | (...) My first inclination is that there should not be a difference. When measuring distances with light, the accuracy *can* be limited by the wavelength. I think one can measure accurately down to roughly half the wavelength of the light used. I (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.space, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Evolution of Earth and moon (was: Couldn't resist) —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | (...) I think most of this sounds reasonable, but I'd guess that laser still follows the inverse square "law". ROSCO (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.space, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Evolution of Earth and moon (was: Couldn't resist) —Jason J. Railton
|
| | | | | | (...) I thought that the whole point of a laser is that it doesn't - it's a directed beam of parallel waves of light. The inverse square law is for a diverging beam. As distance from the source increases, the area the beam is spread over increases (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.space, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Evolution of Earth and moon (was: Couldn't resist) —Tom McDonald
|
| | | | In lugnet.space, Jeff Jardine writes: <snip> (...) I'll address this point to fill in a bit of a hole, as a lot of the other concerns are past me. Yes, radio waves are affected by gravity which is why they travel along the surface, so in a sense (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.space, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | |
