[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ATM] Foucault/interferometry comparisons

To: "Koehler, Steve" <atm@atmlist.net>
Subject: Re: [ATM] Foucault/interferometry comparisons
From: Richard <cnc@cncservo.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 17:35:48 +0000
In-Reply-To: <2ED63F31975E1E428B3732A68923F480366BCD@rain.scur.com>
List-Archive: <http://home.simoivanov.com/pipermail/atm>
List-Help: <mailto:atm-request@atmlist.net?subject=help>
List-Id: The Amateur Telescope Makers List <atm.atmlist.net>
List-Post: <mailto:atm@atmlist.net>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.atmlist.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/atm>,<mailto:atm-request@atmlist.net?subject=subscribe>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.atmlist.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/atm>,<mailto:atm-request@atmlist.net?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <2ED63F31975E1E428B3732A68923F480366BCD@rain.scur.com>
Reply-To: Richard <cnc@cncservo.co.uk>
Sender: atm-bounces@atmlist.net

Hi Steve,

Thursday, March 24, 2005, 3:29:26 PM, you wrote:

KS> surface profiles derived from interferometry and Foucault
KS> so they can be compared directly.

I'm struggling to understand where this thread is going. Is it
to understand where and why Foucault falls down?. If it falls
down then why use it?. Surely there can be no suggestions that
the laws of physics govenerning interferometry are incorrect in
any way?.

-- 

Best regards,
 Richard



_______________________________________________
ATM mailing list http://www.atmlist.net/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [ATM] Foucault/interferometry comparisons
  - From: Michael Peck <mpeck1@ix.netcom.com>

References:
- [ATM] Foucault/interferometry comparisons
  - From: "Koehler, Steve" <Steve_Koehler@securecomputing.com>

Prev by Author: Re: [ATM] RC design
Next by Author: Re[2]: [ATM] Cerium Oxide.. and Color
Prev by thread: Re: [ATM] Foucault/interferometry comparisons
Next by thread: Re: [ATM] Foucault/interferometry comparisons
Index(es):
- Author
- Thread