Comments on `Correction of Maxwell's equations for signals I andII' [by R.J. Mohr]

The commenter states that Harmuth's (see ibid., vol.28, no.4, p.250, 1986) characterization of Godel's (1931) work is incorrect, or, at the very best, extremely misleading. He also states that Godel did not show, as Harmuth claims, that every statement cannot be proven and that they can only be disproven using counterexample     

Comments on “Scattering from conducting rough surfaces: ageneral perturbative solution” [and reply]

The author comments that Vazouras et al. (see ibid. vol.41, no.9, p.1232-1241, 1993) presented an analysis leading to the general term of the perturbation series for scattering of horizontally polarized plane incident waves from a perfectly conducting rough surface. Other than Rice's 1951 seminal paper, they mention none of the other early work on this topic. Beyond this lack of references to other than the most recent work, however, Vazouras et al. state, "thus it seems that the scope of perturbation methods is considerably restricted by the fact that the general term of the perturbation series was, until recently, unknown." I (see RadioSci., vol.12, no. 5, p.719-729, 1977) was the first to derive the general term of a perturbation series for electromagnetic scattering from a rough surface. Vazouras et al. reply that the criterion for the selection of previous work cited in our paper was one of topic relevance rather than of chronological order. In view of the large amount of literature pertinent to the region of interest, we chose to mention mainly works dealing with the foundation of the particular class of perturbation solutions developed within the framework of the extended boundary condition, thus being important to the course of our treatment, plus some works the results of which we were explicitly commenting