From: "Jerry" 
To: ,
        ,
        "'ATM List'" 
Reply-To: "Jerry" 




-----Original Message-----
From: James Lerch [mailto:jlerch1{at}tampabay.rr.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2003 9:13 PM To: ATM List
Cc: atm_free{at}yahoogroups.com
Subject: [atm_free] MORE Robo Data and a HUGE THANK YOU!

Greetings All,


BTW, the smudge near the center of the mirror is a "Doggy Nose
Print" (Carl, I promise I'll wash it off before I ship the mirror
out!)  However, the nose print doesn't appear to interfere with the test
results.  Also, notice the almost Ronchi band like apparitions that now
appear as a result of using the Slitted light source (very interesting in
my opinion..)

*****************************




What wave rating did the dog give the mirror? Or was he just checking for
dog biscuit? What breed is he? A schiefbeagle maybe? I'll bet he saw you
giving the mirror a lot of attention and he had to put his part into the
project. That makes him a DTM .... Dog Telescope Maker.

        The Ronchi like diffraction lines that lead the knife as it cuts
into the slit image are what I was referring to in a previous post. I think
you will find they will not be as conspicuous with a wider slit opening.
I'm not sure how wide you can make the slit before the quality of the test
is degraded. I think wider will be better until accuracy actually suffers.
That would be another experiment. To think of pinhole or slit width
relative to airy disk size is probably not a proper way to look at the
test. The test is more of a geometrical blocking of returning light from
the mirror than a wave theory test. You cut off half of the image of the
slit and at some zone you have cut out half the light from both left and
right sides of the mirror.


Jerry

I'm trying this again.

--- BBBS/NT v4.00 MP