Maybe "polarization" sounds political now.
On June 6, 2026 2:01:38 PM CDT, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: >I guess if you could somehow induce a charge onto the signal it could have a >polarity. > >________________________________ >From: AF <[email protected]> on behalf of Tim Hardy <[email protected]> >Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2026 8:18 AM >To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]> >Subject: Re: [AFMUG] would therapy help? > >On a similar note - still gets me when knowledgable folks talk about >“polarity” of the signal rather than the correct term “polarization”. >Something that was drilled into my brain (along with how to use a slide rule) >first year in University. > >On Jun 5, 2026, at 11:55 AM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote: > >Is there some kind of psychiatric therapy, maybe hypnosis, that would cure me >of getting annoyed every time someone calls an antenna a “satellite”? > >It’s almost the norm now, so you’d think I’d just get used to it, but if >anything it bugs me more as time goes on. > >Maybe if I’d made the switch to fiber I wouldn’t have to worry about antennas >and what they’re called. Probably there are annoyances in the fiber world as >well. Like the people who think “fiber optic” is better than “fiber”? Or why >is nothing a wire or cable anymore, it’s a “cord”? But not having to hear >about “satellites” and “modems” and “boosters” and “bouncing the signal” would >be nice. >-- >AF mailing list >[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> >http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >
-- AF mailing list [email protected] http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
