Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 26, 2021, at 9:43 AM, Alex Goodwin - alex.goodwin at multitel.com.au <xxxxxx@simplelists.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>>> Greg, thanks for your feedback.
>>>
>>> As you have pointed out (and thank you for highlighting my error),
>>> _detection_ by no means implies anything further on its own.
>>>
>>> I'm wondering why you're assuming a given sensor has a single effective
>>> range _against all targets of all shapes, sizes, colours, aspects and
>>> emission coatings_?  Simplicity at the table?
>> Great point, and while furiously typing on my phone I forgot that! ;)
>>
>> The detection distance is a function of the detectee’s size/emissions and the sensor.
>>
>> For example you could detect a star at a longer range then you could detect a golf ball. ;)
>>
>>
>>
> <snip>
>
> If your golf ball is visually detectable with Mk 1 Eyeball from
> multi-(kilo)parsec range, I don't want to be that close!

That’s no moon, that’s a golf ball :)

>
> -----
> The Traveller Mailing List
> Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
> Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
> To unsubscribe from this list please go to
> http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=g8EYmpjfNu22Uwq2slNgbtlSYHMIUXYZ