Recreating the math behind the first stealth aircraft

The whole mirror analogy for angular facets breaks down when you realize airplane is a moving object and at some point in its trajectory, one of the facets is likely to be facing the radar (maximum cross section).

If I remember from my numerical analysis days, it was the ease of numerical computing that necessitated the facets. Think 3D graphics from the 90s. All polygons.

It makes me sad, and to some extent offended, that so many people want to use AI to replace the human element in art. It dilutes what makes art impressive.

Not an average software engineer--beautiful page (imperfect spelling)! Why does detection scale as the 4th root of the RCS? Nice problem for the radiation theory part of a graduate electrodynamics class.

The instant I realize it's an LLM generated piece. I'm out. Thanks for adding all the animations to make it abundantly obvious.

Thanks. I needed that reminder to sometimes NOT just solve a matrix of 3000 * 3000 equations and merely make an assumption and take an integral, metaphorically.

A random professor's academic website is usually barebones, no CSS, only HTML, mostly text. But the value one finds there is incredible.

As opposed to this, vibe coded slop which neither explains the stuff that's already there, nor is pedagogical. Why use AI for this?

I'm very surprised honestly that this has picked up as much as it has, and have been mulling over the polarized responses to it.

few things I'd like to clarify: - yes, I do use claude quite a bit. I don't have much background in frontend design or do it for work (which is mostly low level perception and controls, ironically something I'm seldom able to use AI for), so it makes tasks for me way more accessible. I try, as much as possible, to use LLM content to increase the creativity of a human behind it as much as possible (all the drawings on the site are drawn by visitors, for example, and I actually storyboarded the site's design by hand before implementing it).

- for writing, it is for better or worse mostly me, but I'm starting to see the parts that unravel. I've always been known to be rather verbose, and I tried to use LLMs to suggest strategies to make my drafts more palatable to a reader. I feel in retrospect that these attempts may have added a synthetic tinge. Mostly everything I write about is something I first make code for and investigate in my own time, without any expectation of explaining; there is a lot of real effort that's disproportionately put there over packaging.

This article was genuinely my first time making something educational of the sort, and I had my physics major friends checking in and auditing, and was gleefully showing progress wherever I could. I used manim for the first time to make those very shitty looking animations as well. I did not want to nor claim to look like an expert on this. I just wanted to show an exploration I did in my free time earlier, to maybe spark a little bit of interest in one of my random discord peers regarding the subject matter. I can say that for the close group of people around me in real life who this article was originally intended for, that I was successful. tl;dr I'm now somewhat embarassed that I've immortalized and publicized my lackluster first attempt at making educational content

>where RR is the distance from the target (imagine the radar being very far away) en.wikipedia.org . This formula might look intimidating, so let's break it down:

You didn't even read your own slop. Why should anybody else?

[dead]