"art" wrote in message
ups.com...
David,

You have done a lot of talking but no walking. You have never said or
showed why my concept must be wrong, just possible this or possible
that. With all your books that you have does it say anywhere that
static equations cannot be used for electromagnetic problems?

yes, all of them.

Have you a book that says you cannot add curl to a Gaussian field ?

you may add whatever you want, but it doesn't make physical sense assuming
your 'Gaussian' field is actually the 'Electric'.

I challenge
you to find such a quote anywhere. You have never supplied anything
that supports your views used to disparaged mine not one. Now David are
you familiar with the NEC format antenna programs or familiar with
matlab?

yes, i am the writter of a modeling program for lightning on high voltage
power lines that uses similar techniques to NEC and other large finite
element programs. And i am intimitately familiar with modeling systems in
matlab, simulink, and easy5. none of them will give you the answer you want
if you use them properly. use any of them improperly as you have been and
you can get any answer you want, even ones that aren't physically
realizable.


I think that these are sufficiently disimmilar to show that if
they arrive at the same conclusion it is not a fluke. Do you own any
computor program of any sort?

i have AO and YO here, which are adequate for modeling amateur antennas. i
have used nec2, emtp, matlab, simulink, easy5, ansoft's 2d and 3d
eletrostatic and dynamic field analysis modules, written software for GE,
LM, GD, Chrysler, several US Navy projects, and EPRI. and am presently
gainfully employed working on a very large modeling project.

Frankly I have the idea that you don't
own one and have never played with one but then you may have one tucked
away that you never use. What program were you capable of using, that
you can now use even tho you are of advanced age?

pick one, but they are only as good as the input they are given.

I am willing to give you the opportunity of doing just a little walk to
prove your personal abilities. I can give you a dimensioned array that
proves my concept and no matter what program you use you are welcome to

no, you can't.

insert my array and thus shoot me to pieces and enhance your own statue
within the group. Your chance to show off your superiority with respect
to electromechanics, A simple way that affords you the chance to blow
your trumpet where it can really can be heard and appreciated.
So which way do you want to go,show a quotation that denies the
possibility of my concept or simply apply a dimensional drawing to any
program of you choice?
I really wanted to wait for a person to come along that I could trust
because of prior knoweledge, but I am getting tired of these assaults
that have no grounding so I give up and will submit.
I talked the talk and I walked the walk, in response you have only
talked and for what reason?

YOU HAVE WON,
I AM WILLING TO PROVIDE YOU AN ARRAY THAT DEMONSTRATES
MY ASSERTIONS AND WHERE USING ANY MEANS THAT YOU WISH YOU CAN
PUSH ME BACK TO THE STONE AGES AND STOP THIS NONSENSE

then build it and have it tested. that is better than any modeling that you
can do with existing programs, because none of them are going to prove your
concept... it just isn't physically realizable. i pointed that out on the
first example you gave and you never did seem to grasp the problem, go by
all means go back to the stone age, apply some heat to metal and build your
magic array.


SHOW EVERYBODY WHAT YOU ARE REALLY MADE OF
WHAT IS REALLY BEHIND THAT FACELESS MASK?

its only faceless to those who don't want to gaze upon it and understand.