Danny,
You can't ever discard the factor Q in any discusion with respect to antenna
efficiency or any calculation for that matter.
Q is intrinsic in any calculation that determines efficiency especialy when
considering what the object of an antenna is.
Cecil's aproach to what it is the 'object' is to provide a total system ,
not a system that is led around by its nose by a predetermined antenna
structure is an example. The idea of designing a house around a workable
door that is pre-supplied is what we do today with respect to communication,
and is why I use a different antenna to the norm. When I am confident that
personal attacks come to a halt per Antennex statement I will be happy to
explain more in depth.
If you are content with what you have then that is understandable as humans
always resist change, including myself. You being an antenna guru I
understand even more the resistance to accept the possibility of advancement
from one who is less educated in the field than oneself.
Regards
Art




"Dan Richardson @mendolink.com" ChangeThisToCallSign wrote in message
...
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 13:07:46 -0600 (CST),
(Richard Harrison) wrote:

A receiving antenna must be resonant to enable full acceptance of
available energy,

Where did you come up with that one?

I suggest you revisit capture area.

Danny, K6MHE