wrote in message
oups.com...

Yuri Blanarovich wrote:

Yea Tom, it all started with ALL coils, it is MY theory and you can ruin
MY
theory.

What is your theory Yuri?
You didn't explain it.
73 Tom


Nice twist again! (That was sarcasm and take on your comment about ALL
coils)

I didn't produce any MY theory. I simply realized that there is something
weird (effect) when I burned heatshrink tubing on the bottom of my Hustler
80m coil, W9UCW measured and did experimenting with that and brought to our
attention that there is significant difference in the current distribution
across the loading coil. W5DXP put some explanations on as far as mechanism
of the effect. I give credit where its due, I didn't produce any theory, I
simply tried to bring attention to the effect, tried to find explanation and
set the record straight for the benefit of hams, who were misled for decades
(including myself), provide (with others) correction pointers so we can
correctly model antennas and get better, more accurate results. If W7EL can
capture the effect and provide tool to model the loading coil (lumped
inductance) as what the hairpin of the same inductance does, we have a major
improvement in modeling and designing loaded antennas and arrays.

Sooo, we have the effect, we have some measurements to quantify it and we
have explanations going back to Dr. Nikola Tesla and we are trying to set
the record straight and correct the years of false information in the ham
literature, going back to J. Belrose first article in ancient QST.

What you have? Misinformation on your web site and refusing to admit that
you could be wrong (again). Not answering technical questions, nitpicking on
things to confuse and cloud the issue "proving" that you are right.

Funny how you object to "personal" attacks, when it is the first thing you
do when someone posts something that doesn't jive with your understanding of
the subject. Been there, you have done it to me few times. Tom, it's not
personal attack on YOU, it is correction ("attack") on what you (wrong) say
and parade on your web site.

The bottom line is, that you claim that loading antenna coil behaves
according to "DC circuit laws" and has the same (or almost) current at both
ends. When in reality there is quite a difference (talking about case of say
quarter wave loaded radiator). The significance is, that the efficiency of
the antenna is proportional to the area under the current distribution
curve. If that distribution is portrayed wrongly (not showing, calculating
drop of current across the coil) then we get false results, which will be
magnified in multielement loaded array.
So you can keep up the mumbo-jumbo and cloud the issue all you want, reality
is there and won't go away.

One more experiment that "scientwists" can do: Stick some neon bulbs at the
bottom and top of the coil with equal "tail", or just move the neon bulb
along the coil whil holding in your hand. I bet you would see that there is
noticeable difference in brightness from top to bottom, top being brighter,
meaning higher voltage. We know (not mine theory) that if voltage is higher
then the current has to be lower, meaning that current at the bottom of the
coil is higher than on the top. Meaning that it is not EQUAL as W8JI is
insisting on. Nice science project for a 7th grader kid of a ham. (To avoid
mumbo-jumbo detours - we are talking say 80m mobile Hustler or similar
quarter wave antenna at resonant frequency). No need for phasors,
distributed this or that, inside or outside of the coil wire and other
"clouds".

Can you answer questions that are posted, instead of sidestepping them and
nitpicking on unrelated stuff? That's just MY theory, I may be wrong, and I
would admit it, if I am shown the right.

So can you ANSWER Cecil's question?
Where did you get the engineering degree and usage of "JI Engineering"?

Yuri, www.K3BU.us