RE: THOR Bang energy vs. streamer length measured

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "Denicolai, Marco" <Marco.Denicolai-at-tellabs-dot-com> 

 > Original poster: "jimmy hynes" <chunkyboy86-at-yahoo-dot-com>
 >
 > It depends on how you define length. If it's the length that
 > it can hit once per second, then it does matter.

Well, you could be right in a situation were you shoot, sometimes reach
the target and sometimes get too short streamers.

In my measurement setup I always either reach the target or completely
miss it, not for length problems but just for bad trajectory. I need to
score a hit otherwise I can't count how many bangs it took to get there.

 > --- Tesla list <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com> wrote:
 >
 >  > Original poster: "Denicolai, Marco"
 > <Marco.Denicolai-at-tellabs-dot-com>  >  > Hi Steve,  >  >  > I
 > thought about it some more- This needs a correction. Marco  >
 >  > did his calculations on the basis of probability per bang,
 >  >  > i.e. at a given set of conditions, 1 out of every 50
 > bangs  >  > would result in a spark hitting the target.
 >  >  >
 >  >  > Now, even if that probability did not alter with bps,
 > the  >  > sparks would still appear to get longer as the bps
 > increases,  >  > just because there are more sparks per
 > second, so the  >  > probability of seeing a freakishly large
 > one in a given time  >  > interval is that much higher.
 >  >  >
 >  >  > Steve C.
 >  >
 >  > Sorry but it was the other way round. It was just the
 > probability of a  > hit that changed with the BPS. The spark
 > length did NOT change with the  > BPS.
 >  > The fact that there are more hits doesn't mean that length grows!
 >  > Remember that I count the number of bangs needed to score
 > a hit. Their  > distribution didn't change! Same number of
 > bangs are needed to hit the  > rod.
 >  >