[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu, T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl*Subject*: Re: OK, here the right calculus (I hope)*From*: KellySt@aol.com*Date*: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 15:12:11 -0500*cc*: kgstar@most.fw.hac.com, stevev@efn.org, jim@bogie2.bio.purdue.edu, zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl, rddesign@wolfenet.com, David@interworld.com, lparker@destin.gulfnet.com, DotarSojat@aol.com

Kevin > If it's not too much trouble, can you figure this for > a constant maser beam How much extra RM will we need? > A decreasing maser beam is possible, it's only a time > delay calculation, but a constant beam would solve > some engineering problems Don't wory. Most of the beam wount hit the sail/collector anyway. If you want less beam, furl in the sail a little. Kelly

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: OK, here the right calculus (I hope)***From:*Kevin C Houston <hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: OK, here the right calculus (I hope)** - Next by Date:
**Re: Broken Draft on New Lit Server** - Prev by thread:
**Re: OK, here the right calculus (I hope)** - Next by thread:
**Re: OK, here the right calculus (I hope)** - Index(es):