From Newsgroup: sci.math

J. J. Lodder wrote:

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

(AFAIK) *every* optical system (i.e., one based on light) has this
limitation. That is merely a consequence of light being an
electromagnetic wave. The best theoretical resolution is

So you misunderstood that too.

"given that Hubble is diffraction-limited"
is a statement about the quality of Hubble's optics.

Many optical systems cannot reach the diffraction limit,

no kidding, an optical system is light based. You are talking to an idiot.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.math

The 'nym-shifting troll trolled as "Jarvis Dobrov":

J. J. Lodder wrote:

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

(AFAIK) *every* optical system (i.e., one based on light) has this
limitation. That is merely a consequence of light being an
electromagnetic wave. The best theoretical resolution is

So you misunderstood that too.

LOL.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect>

"given that Hubble is diffraction-limited"
is a statement about the quality of Hubble's optics.

Many optical systems cannot reach the diffraction limit,

no kidding, an optical system is light based. You are talking to an idiot.

s/to/like/

In physics, by "light" we do not only mean human-visible light, but it is rather a shorthand for "electromagnetic waves".
--
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.math

inbreed troll wanker Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, puts the foot in his
mouth, like there is no day tomorrow:

no kidding, an optical system is light based. You are talking to an
idiot.

s/to/like/

In physics, by "light" we do not only mean human-visible light, but it
is rather a shorthand for "electromagnetic waves".

"human-visible light", in which country would be that? Keep your mouth
shut, idiot
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2