The walls get warm from the warmth of the food, which is conducted and conveyed by the air in the oven. There is no "focus," and you are misunderstanding the concept. The radiation is distributed around the food so the food can all "see" the radiation. Kitchen illumination has reflectors etc., but it is "focused" nowhere. Don't use the term to describe what it is not. The microwave oven is an example of...a microwave oven? What else does this? Radars will do this if you are unwise enough to step into their beams while they are under ground test. At higher wattages (kilowatts to megawatts), laser weapons can melt metal. But none of this is even a gnat's eyelash compared to the energies involved in an earthquake.
You must not have understood my comment about the lights in the sky. I was explaining a plausible reason why they could have been caused by the geologic stresses preceding an earthquake. In this matter, I think we are on the same page. But there isn't any power coming down. That would be easily detected if it were.
Your dad may have been a nice guy, but you have only one sample. Have you read Halton Arp's "Seeing Red," which outlines a completely different view of deep astronomical events...based on observational evidence? Have you read Frederick Kantor's "Information Mechanics," which derives both quantum and relativity theory from information theory (his test: a successful theoretical prediction of the rest masses of all the known leptons). Have you heard of the Journal of Galilean Electrodynamics? If you haven't read any of these, don't go around judging the closed-mindedness of others. (Where I came from, there were plenty of original ideas. I had one colleague who literally covered his office walls with all his patents.)
You also have an overblown understanding of patents. They are intended to commercially protect as intellectual property a product or process according to what is described therein. They are not proofs that said products or processes are worth a tinker's damn. I have 9 patents, all of which I am convinced could be implemented, and one of which spawned an actual product that was (regrettably) off patent. Unless you understand the disclosure of the patent well enough to know how it would actually work, you don't have a basis for either admiration or suspicion. (My last patent could be used to clear orbital debris or to de-orbit satellites. Saint or sinner?)
I know about patents. My dad authored several GE patents in his tenure. I understand about "intellectual property," and the corporate process and strategy of doing so. I don't care about the number of your patents, how well-read you are, or what your education is. I noticed you rattling off your qualifications to other GAW members, too.
I'm tired of you passing judgment about your assessment of my understanding of things. You were the one resurrecting this old thread, then misunderstand what I write, then dismiss me precisely the way my dad did when I tried to talk with him. Despite your proclamation, I judged NO ONE. You assumed I was, but I was only describing a personal experience I had with an engineer and drawing a similarity to this discussion. It is YOU using inflammatory language, such as "ignorance," "overblown," etc., etc. Perhaps you have no idea you are communicating this way to others, but it's clear from your other posts that you seem to enjoy demeaning others. You and I are on two different wavelengths, and I have no interest in continuing further.
Well, what do you call it when you are not displaying any knowledge of the underlying science? I have tried to discuss particulars of the science. You have dodged the particulars in favor of bludgeoning me with being "closed minded." I have been refuting that with reference to very non-traditional scientific views and offering you insight into what is going on and referring to material for your edification. I am interested in whether YOU have an open mind. But you pass that all by. You don't seem to get that an empty mind is not the same thing as an open mind.
The walls get warm from the warmth of the food, which is conducted and conveyed by the air in the oven. There is no "focus," and you are misunderstanding the concept. The radiation is distributed around the food so the food can all "see" the radiation. Kitchen illumination has reflectors etc., but it is "focused" nowhere. Don't use the term to describe what it is not. The microwave oven is an example of...a microwave oven? What else does this? Radars will do this if you are unwise enough to step into their beams while they are under ground test. At higher wattages (kilowatts to megawatts), laser weapons can melt metal. But none of this is even a gnat's eyelash compared to the energies involved in an earthquake.
You must not have understood my comment about the lights in the sky. I was explaining a plausible reason why they could have been caused by the geologic stresses preceding an earthquake. In this matter, I think we are on the same page. But there isn't any power coming down. That would be easily detected if it were.
Your dad may have been a nice guy, but you have only one sample. Have you read Halton Arp's "Seeing Red," which outlines a completely different view of deep astronomical events...based on observational evidence? Have you read Frederick Kantor's "Information Mechanics," which derives both quantum and relativity theory from information theory (his test: a successful theoretical prediction of the rest masses of all the known leptons). Have you heard of the Journal of Galilean Electrodynamics? If you haven't read any of these, don't go around judging the closed-mindedness of others. (Where I came from, there were plenty of original ideas. I had one colleague who literally covered his office walls with all his patents.)
You also have an overblown understanding of patents. They are intended to commercially protect as intellectual property a product or process according to what is described therein. They are not proofs that said products or processes are worth a tinker's damn. I have 9 patents, all of which I am convinced could be implemented, and one of which spawned an actual product that was (regrettably) off patent. Unless you understand the disclosure of the patent well enough to know how it would actually work, you don't have a basis for either admiration or suspicion. (My last patent could be used to clear orbital debris or to de-orbit satellites. Saint or sinner?)
I know about patents. My dad authored several GE patents in his tenure. I understand about "intellectual property," and the corporate process and strategy of doing so. I don't care about the number of your patents, how well-read you are, or what your education is. I noticed you rattling off your qualifications to other GAW members, too.
I'm tired of you passing judgment about your assessment of my understanding of things. You were the one resurrecting this old thread, then misunderstand what I write, then dismiss me precisely the way my dad did when I tried to talk with him. Despite your proclamation, I judged NO ONE. You assumed I was, but I was only describing a personal experience I had with an engineer and drawing a similarity to this discussion. It is YOU using inflammatory language, such as "ignorance," "overblown," etc., etc. Perhaps you have no idea you are communicating this way to others, but it's clear from your other posts that you seem to enjoy demeaning others. You and I are on two different wavelengths, and I have no interest in continuing further.
Well, what do you call it when you are not displaying any knowledge of the underlying science? I have tried to discuss particulars of the science. You have dodged the particulars in favor of bludgeoning me with being "closed minded." I have been refuting that with reference to very non-traditional scientific views and offering you insight into what is going on and referring to material for your edification. I am interested in whether YOU have an open mind. But you pass that all by. You don't seem to get that an empty mind is not the same thing as an open mind.
Perhaps you misunderstood your father...