Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

MMX solved

5 views
Skip to first unread message

Androcles

unread,
Oct 8, 2003, 7:19:01 PM10/8/03
to

Harry

unread,
Oct 9, 2003, 3:27:37 AM10/9/03
to
"Androcles" <jp006...@blurbblueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:5X0hb.296$Ec6...@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...http://www.androc1es.pw
p.blueyonder.co.uk/MMX.GIF

And you think that drawing with the unsupported remarks "explains" it?!
Note that we already have so many explanations... just take your pick! ;-)

Harald


Androcles

unread,
Oct 9, 2003, 9:56:44 AM10/9/03
to

"Harry" <harald.v...@epfl.ch> wrote in message
news:3f850d57$1...@epflnews.epfl.ch...
Yep. "Unsupported" remarks are on the drawing. Some say a picture is worth a
thousand words, but think it's worth a megabyte.
Androcles

Dirk Van de moortel

unread,
Oct 9, 2003, 11:12:31 AM10/9/03
to
>
> "Androcles" <jp006...@blurbblueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:5X0hb.296$Ec6...@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
> http://www.androc1es.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/MMX.GIF

With the half-mirror oriented like *that*?

D (detector)

S / | (mirror1)

--- (mirror2)

How silly. You have one beam directly bouncing off the
half-mirror to the detector, and one beam travelling an
extra distance of 4 times the arm length, having passed
the half-mirror twice.
Clearly you have no idea what you are talking about.

Dirk Vdm


0 new messages