Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly is radio
On May 6, 9:55*pm, wrote:
tom wrote: On 5/6/2010 8:42 PM, tom wrote: On 5/6/2010 3:25 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote: Charged particles can move at any speed from 0 to c and always produce the electric field. Why not? Incorrect. A particle has mass, and cannot attain light speed. tom K0TAR Should have said "charged particle" rather than "particle". tom K0TAR You were correct the first time. Nothing with mass can attain light speed and it doesn't matter if it is charged or not. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Wrong. Spin produces the charge. Without spin you cannot achieve straight line trajectory as it will surely tumble. One must have the minumum mass possible to achieve the speed of light. A neutrino which translates into " little one" is the smallest particle known and thus can achieve the speed of light. If a particle smaller with respect to mass than that is found then the speed of light can obviously be exceeded. Einstein stated that the speed of light cannot be exceeded! |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly is radio
Art Unwin wrote:
On May 6, 9:55Â*pm, wrote: tom wrote: On 5/6/2010 8:42 PM, tom wrote: On 5/6/2010 3:25 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote: Charged particles can move at any speed from 0 to c and always produce the electric field. Why not? Incorrect. A particle has mass, and cannot attain light speed. tom K0TAR Should have said "charged particle" rather than "particle". tom K0TAR You were correct the first time. Nothing with mass can attain light speed and it doesn't matter if it is charged or not. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Wrong. Spin produces the charge. Without spin you cannot achieve straight line trajectory as it will surely tumble. One must have the minumum mass possible to achieve the speed of light. A neutrino which translates into " little one" is the smallest particle known and thus can achieve the speed of light. If a particle smaller with respect to mass than that is found then the speed of light can obviously be exceeded. Einstein stated that the speed of light cannot be exceeded! Babbling gibberish. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly is radio
"K1TTT" wrote ... On May 6, 8:00 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote: "K1TTT" ... On May 3, 7:25 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote: Radio waves from the dipole are polarized. Does it mean that light is emitted by a dipoles? sure, why not? but polarized waves can be emitted from other things also. We can shield the one end of the dipole. no you can't. A whip antennas on a car is not such? no, the other half of the dipole is the body of the car itself. Have you ever seen the dipole which one end is without a cap and the other with the huge cap (the body of the car? The body is rather a mirror for the monopole. Why the dipoles exhibit the directional pattern? because they do, its well measured and accurately described in the equations. Are the measured and the calculated from the equations in agreement? yes, to within many, many decimal places... if they did not agree to within the limits of measurement then someone would have had to make a new theory to explain the difference. No such need. For the radio waves apply all knowledge for the acoustic waves. The monopole works like the Kundt's tube. The dipole like the two. The directional pattern is the same for two loudspeakers like for the dipole. S* |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly is radio
Uzytkownik "K1TTT" napisal w wiadomosci ... On May 6, 8:25 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote: you mangled the replies so badly that i couldn't even follow what you were saying. light and radio waves are the same thing, as are gamma, infra red, x-ray, etc... all the exact same phenomena explained very well by maxwell's equations. scientists for 100 years have been unable to come up with anything better, you aren't going to by your misguided assertions that have no mathematics or experimental evidence behind them. Maxwell's electricity is incompressible. Todays electron gas is compressible. Behind them is mathematics (plasma physics) and experimental evidence. sound waves and water waves are VERY different things. while some of the equations take the same form because they share sinusoidal repetition properties, Sinusoidal means harmonics. Real waves are not harmonics. They are rather the chain of the solitons. the underlying physics is VERY different. you have to abandon the analogies you learned in elementary school and learn the proper physics to understand why electromagnetic waves are not like sound or water. Sound and water waves are the real waves and such have always the two components (longitudinal and transversal). Maxwell' em waves are pure transversal. Maxwell wrote that it is a proposition. .. start with this, why can you polarize light or radio waves but not sound waves? I did it. Radio waves and sound waves have the same directional patterns for the same numbers, configurations (and phases). The two waves emitted from the dipole (ACOUSTIC OR ELECTRIC) are "polarized". You can experimentally determine the plane in which the dipole is. The same is with more sources. S* |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly is radio
"tom" wrote t... On 5/6/2010 8:42 PM, tom wrote: On 5/6/2010 3:25 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote: Charged particles can move at any speed from 0 to c and always produce the electric field. Why not? Incorrect. A particle has mass, and cannot attain light speed. tom K0TAR Should have said "charged particle" rather than "particle". What do you think. Is the electron a charged particle? Maxwell assumed that the electricity is massles and incompressible. He would be right if the electron is a charged particle. S* |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly is radio
On May 7, 12:15*am, Art Unwin wrote:
What better place exists to delve further into the Masters thoughts rather than the manufacture of another theorem? To justify another theorem you must do a couple things: 1. predict something that is not currently predicted. 2. explain all known phenomenon at least as well as existing laws/ theories. In order to do both of those you must be quantitative. Provide exact equations that combine what is predicted by maxwell with your magical levitating colored bosons from the sun, show the link to the earth rotation precisely so the tipping effect can be calculated and proven or disproved by an experiment, explain why diamagnetic materials must be used and what happens differently if you use paramagnetic or ferromagnetic materials in a form that can be measured... but these all require equations, not handwaving general statements about the big bang and your magical equilibrium. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly is radio
On May 7, 7:49*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
*"K1TTT" ... On May 6, 8:00 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote: "K1TTT" ... On May 3, 7:25 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote: Radio waves from the dipole are polarized. Does it mean that light is emitted by a dipoles? sure, why not? but polarized waves can be emitted from other things also. We can shield the one end of the dipole. no you can't. A whip antennas on a car is not such? no, the other half of the dipole is the body of the car itself. Have you ever seen the dipole which one end is without a cap and the other with the huge cap (the body of the car? The body is rather a mirror for the monopole. Why the dipoles exhibit the directional pattern? because they do, its well measured and accurately described in the equations. Are the measured and the calculated from the equations in agreement? yes, to within many, many decimal places... if they did not agree to within the limits of measurement then someone would have had to make a new theory to explain the difference. No such need. For the radio waves apply all knowledge for the acoustic waves. The monopole works like the Kundt's tube. The dipole like the two. The directional pattern is the same for two loudspeakers like for the dipole. S* wrongo buckaroo. there is no such thing as a monopole... when you have a feedline are there not always 2 conductors? search for some basic circuit theory about current and voltage sources, you will see they always have 2 ports. there must always be a return path that is the other half of the dipole, even if you can't see it as such. all antennas derive from the infinitesimal dipole which when degenerated even father can be represented as a single oscillating charge. it always goes back and forth or around in circles to create the propagating wave, if it only moves in one direction as it would have to in a monopole there is no wave only a simple field. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly is radio
On May 7, 8:35*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
*"tom" se.net... On 5/6/2010 8:42 PM, tom wrote: On 5/6/2010 3:25 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote: Charged particles can move at any speed from 0 to c and always produce the electric field. Why not? Incorrect. A particle has mass, and cannot attain light speed. tom K0TAR Should have said "charged particle" rather than "particle". What do you think. Is the electron a charged particle? Maxwell assumed that the electricity is massles and incompressible. He would be right if the electron is a charged particle. S* have you ever measured the charge on an electron? that is a standard college physics lab experiment, measure charge and mass and compare to text book values. a very simple experiment actually, look up the millikan oil drop experiment and give it a try. maybe you could get together with art and go through a few of those simple experiments to gain a better understanding of basic physics. |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly is radio
On May 7, 8:26*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
I did it. Radio waves and sound waves have the same directional patterns for the same numbers, configurations (and phases). The two waves emitted from the dipole (ACOUSTIC OR ELECTRIC) are "polarized". You can experimentally determine the plane in which the dipole is. The same is with more sources. S* they may have the same patterns for some cases, that is why they are used in lower grades, to keep the explanations of waves simple for those who don't have the mathematical background to understand the full detail of it. but pattern does not show polarization. by matching an interference pattern you are not showing how a wave is polarized, only that superposition principles work for both types of waves. show me an experiment where a sound wave is polarized, that one i would like to see. you might want to start with a couple of these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave http://universe-review.ca/R12-03-wave.htm http://www.answers.com/topic/polarization-of-waves http://www.isvr.soton.ac.uk/spcg/Tut...ther-light.htm |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly is radio
Uzytkownik "K1TTT" napisal w wiadomosci ... On May 7, 7:49 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote: Radio waves from the dipole are polarized. Does it mean that light is emitted by a dipoles? sure, why not? but polarized waves can be emitted from other things also. We can shield the one end of the dipole. no you can't. A whip antennas on a car is not such? no, the other half of the dipole is the body of the car itself. Have you ever seen the dipole which one end is without a cap and the other with the huge cap (the body of the car? The body is rather a mirror for the monopole. Why the dipoles exhibit the directional pattern? because they do, its well measured and accurately described in the equations. Are the measured and the calculated from the equations in agreement? yes, to within many, many decimal places... if they did not agree to within the limits of measurement then someone would have had to make a new theory to explain the difference. No such need. For the radio waves apply all knowledge for the acoustic waves. The monopole works like the Kundt's tube. The dipole like the two. The directional pattern is the same for two loudspeakers like for the dipole. S* wrongo buckaroo. there is no such thing as a monopole... when you have a feedline are there not always 2 conductors? search for some basic circuit theory about current and voltage sources, you will see they always have 2 ports. there must always be a return path that is the other half of the dipole, even if you can't see it as such. all antennas derive from the infinitesimal dipole which when degenerated even father can be represented as a single oscillating charge. it always goes back and forth or around in circles to create the propagating wave, Yes. But one end of the dipole may have the better conditions to propagate. if it only moves in one direction as it would have to in a monopole there is no wave only a simple field. I am writing about a dipole with one end visible and the second shielded. In nature is always as you wrote. The both ands are always "visible". Light is always directional. Radio waves can be omnidirectional. Of course light is emitted by many dipoles. Radio waves by halve, one, two (circular polarity) or many (phase radar). S* |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|