XPost: sci.military.naval, sci.space.shuttle, alt.conspiracy   
   XPost: sci.astro.amateur   
   From: jeff@local.host   
      
   > The word was transmitt. The transmission is from the power source to   
   > the atmosphere. Nothing was said about beam density, it was   
   > transmitter output. Before the antenna, not after. No array is going   
   > to manufacture power from nothing. A watt is a unit of power, not   
   > intensity.ERP is pure fiction when discussing transmitter power which   
   > is always less than the ammount of electricity used. An antenna will   
   > not radiate more power than leaves the transmitter.   
      
      
   You seem to forget that Watts can also be used for the power received at the   
   other end of the link.   
   At the receiving end it is impossible to tell whether the transmitting   
   station is using low power into a high gain directional antenna or high   
   power into an omni directional one. That is why the concept of ERP is used.   
      
   Nothing is manufactured, but the number of Watts received goes up when there   
   is antenna gain; (in the direction where the gain is stated).   
      
   If the concept of ERP is so wrong then why does everyone in the world use it   
   for calculating link budgets?   
      
   Also the Watt is used as a measure of power density, well at least as Watts   
   per square metre.   
      
   Regards   
   Jeff   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)