Current circulating in one antenna generally induces a voltage across the feedpoint of nearby antennas or antenna elements. The mathematics presented below are useful in analyzing the electrical behaviour of antenna arrays, where the properties of the individual array elements (such as half wave dipoles) are already known. If those elements were widely separated and driven in a certain amplitude and phase, then each would act independently as that element is known to. However, because of the mutual interaction between their electric and magnetic fields due to proximity, the currents in each element are not simply a function of the applied voltage (according to its driving point impedance), but depend on the currents in the other nearby elements. Note that this now is a near field phenomenon which could not be properly accounted for using the Friis transmission equation for instance.
If it is possible to answer this question, answer it for me (else, reply "unanswerable"): Where are the indiviual array elements known?
Ah, so.. antenna arrays

Prior to Confederation in 1867, residents of the colonies in what is now Canada served as regular members of French and British forces and in local militia groups. The latter aided in the defence of their respective territories against attacks by other European powers, Aboriginal peoples, and later American forces during the American Revolutionary War and War of 1812, as well as in the Fenian raids, Red River Rebellion, and North-West Rebellion. Consequently, the lineages of some Canadian army units stretch back to the early 19th century, when militia units were formed to assist in the defence of British North America against invasion by the United States.
If it is possible to answer this question, answer it for me (else, reply "unanswerable"): What year wasn't Canada united in a confederation?
Ah, so.. unanswerable

Hunting is claimed to give resource managers an important tool in managing populations that might exceed the carrying capacity of their habitat and threaten the well-being of other species, or, in some instances, damage human health or safety.[citation needed] However, in most circumstances carrying capacity is determined by a combination habitat and food availability, and hunting for 'population control' has no effect on the annual population of species.[citation needed] In some cases, it can increase the population of predators such as coyotes by removing territorial bounds that would otherwise be established, resulting in excess neighbouring migrations into an area, thus artificially increasing the population. Hunting advocates[who?] assert that hunting reduces intraspecific competition for food and shelter, reducing mortality among the remaining animals. Some environmentalists assert[who?] that (re)introducing predators would achieve the same end with greater efficiency and less negative effect, such as introducing significant amounts of free lead into the environment and food chain.
If it is possible to answer this question, answer it for me (else, reply "unanswerable"): What does using migration as population control have no effect on?
Ah, so..
unanswerable