The CFA de-bagged (Was: Re: First "Del" and now "D'Alembertian"!)

Reg, IMO, only a naive person would ever use the words, "absolutely sure". :-)

"Reg Edwards"

_________

Admit it, Reg. You are just ready to pounce on me after I revealed the error of your belief that George Brown made a mistake by not measuring ground conductivity in the work for his landmark 1937 IRE paper (that you hadn't read) about ground systems for MW verticals. Don't pout.

RF

I'm not so sure, you must need a massive spew bag after a session with Beanie.

Even that would pale into insignificance compared to your need.

I'm OK thanks, I just turn the lights off, you must need a gas mask.

Sadly for you, and other unfortunates in your area, daylight comes.....

You have my deepest sympathy.

You have to make allowances for Mrs.Nugatory. As always, I responded very quickly to a genuine request for help, but responded to the lead given by the questioner who mentioned spring/damper rather than spring/mass, and so I responded off-the-cuff without too much forethought.

Better a quick response than none at all, or a response that had the hallmarks of a 13-year old mind that requires a literal meaning for everything, as does Mrs.Nugatory!

I acknowledged the error in a subsequent posting but Mrs. Nugatory is a chronic paranoid obsessive who latches onto every thing that I say, and hounds the thing to death, as she is doing below, many months after the ephemeral chit-chat has ceased to have any relevance.

For example, if you seek out the time that I alerted Usenet users to the availability of cheap dehumidifiers, Mrs.Nugatory managed to spin out over 50 pages of insistence that I knew nothing about them!

Mentally deranged, or what!

"Absolutely unique"

"Utterly obliterated"

Which accounts for the place-name "The Butts" to be found in many towns.

Pound = Pound Weight, mass of one pound, acceleration (due to gravity) of 32 ft/sec^2

Poundal = mass of one pound, acceleration of 1 ft/sec^2

(Cue Mrs.Nugatory to dive in with a 13-year-old's ridiculous insistence on literal detail?)

Pound, Money = sort of like a dollar, but twice as valuable and more robust.

Actually $1.76 as of today, but used to be worth $2.40. Any country too politically correct to call a terrorist a terrorist is not long for the world.

Tis a real shame the spawn of a great people that endured so much with the "stiff upper lip" are a bunch of wimps!

: Actually $1.76 as of today, but used to be worth $2.40. : Any country too politically correct to call a terrorist a terrorist is not : long for the world.

So... in a NON-POLITICAL way please describe those people of the mid to late 1700's who went around shooting soldiers who wore REDCOATS and GOVERNED a land the that was at one stage part of the GREAT BRITISH EMPIRE and had as one of its main cities BOSTON ?

Remind us please, what were you saying about libel in your 'Formal Warning' earlier today?

today: $1.77 (down 10% since Christmas shopping)

What a con job.

100 years ago, today: $4.87 40 years ago, today: $2.80 30 years ago, today: $2.20 20 years ago, today: $1.39 10 years ago, today: $1.60

Robust must mean slumped by 63% - One Time Constant?

Any boost of some 11% in the past decade certainly has to be attributable to the White House running the printing presses full steam.

73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Hmmm,

The British Empire must, as one would expect, have an Emperor, and particularly a British Emperor. If we scan the list of Royals over time, certainly Britain had an Emperor (Carausius) during the Roman era (hardly worth claiming as being British when you bend your knee to Rome and that empire didn't even claim Wales).

Nearly as far back ago, there was a ship called Emperor.

There are a specie of penguins called Emperor.

Almost 100 years ago there was a George who went by Emperor and like our own was numbered. But it wasn't George Trois, in fact it was suggested that this George adopt the title "Emperor of the British and Hanoverian Dominions," but he refused (and this suggestion only came after 1802).

If we rummage around the list of Monarchs, then we find our recent George, and Edward before him were "Emperors" and only of India. The first "Emperor" was in fact an Empress (of that same named India).

So, by the question above, it must be discerned that in fact no one ever took up arms against a GREAT BRITISH EMPIRE nor a MODEST BRITISH EMPIRE nor even a PIDDLIN' BRITISH EMPIRE. So this usage of BRITISH EMPIRE must in some sense mean the East India Trading Company (since the only monarchs called Emperor/Empress are uniquely associated with that sole state in our antipodes. The East India Trading Company held property in Hudson Bay, so to put this presumed conflict into the desired NON-POLITICAL way Canadian (the people, not the political country) Consumers revolting against a commercial entity - eh? What a bunch of hosers.

73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC

We, or more correctly our forefathers, were patriots as far as we were concerned, revolutionists, ingrates, and other labels as perceived by the British oppressors.

In this case I can give you a few for this situation ; terrorist, raghead, Muslim extremist. Take your pick.

The raghead is the one at the right in:

other two are probably the remaining names.

On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 20:21:34 +0100, "Polymath" Gave us:

Yes.

NOT!

On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 15:51:25 -0400, "Fred W4JLE" Gave us:

So much for being "more robust" Hahahahahaha...

That too.