Antennas led astray
"art" wrote in message
ups.com...
Before the mathematical equations comes about you must understand the
concept,
it is that which requires an open mind . We are not back in college
where we take every
thing in so we can pass an examination. Ask your self why dx/dt is nor
included
when a conservative field is described by the experts and then we have
the
beginnings of a debate where you can explain your points. Don't shoot
the messenger!
Art
\
craigm wrote:
how about some real math and equations. You should present some
technical
basis for your conclusions other than some verbal handwaving.
You also seem to make some assumptions which are irrelevant ( parallelism
being good for manufacturing being one) that may not be valid.
As an engineer I can say that elements in a varying three dimensional
form
to each other is more difficult and more costly than parallism on a
single plane,
No amount of mathematical juggling will allow you to escape that
analysis,
but I am willing to debate around that point
Art
You are looking for open minds, but present nothing of substance.
If you are not willing to try and understand the concept then your
mind must be closed. Yes we can debate that to
Art
craigm
In antennas the math is the concept. No one will ever have a clue how one
works without understanding the math. May I suggest that everyone hold there
responses until you say all you have to say encluding posting the relevant
equations with references. This will be the only route fair to you and
prevent the normal bickering. Your ideas if presented in a professional
maner will recive a professional response.
Jimmie
|