Cecil Moore wrote:

...
You missed the point, Jim. Calculating the age of the
universe, ever and ever more accurately, with a standard
that may be continuously changing is technical insanity.

Cecil:

This has become an impossible argument. And, Richards' comment about
paying some attention to staying on topic caught my attention.

My point is, with our present state of knowledge and understanding of
such things as time and the "mysterious 377 ohms" (not EVEN to mention
the permittivity of space) our antenna designs and advancements have
stagnated.

It is hard to prove a negative, as you have stated before. So, let us
not move forward to prove, rather to investigate--to leave no stone
unturned (not to mention to go where no man has gone before!)

Or, look at Roys' program EZNEC. The antenna, by present understanding
of the mentioned "standards", has become ALL TOO PREDICTABLE. (not to
offend Roy, he has done an EXCELLENT job and he is an asset) It is at
the point where we begin to dare advance that progress killing
statement, "All is known, all has been discovered."

When things become this predictable, when advancements are up against
the wall and stalled, isn't it time to go back and look at these
"truths" we began with in the first place? I would like to think a new
discovery is but around the corner ... we may not do it, but we can
create a forum where it will happen.

What kind of men would allow this to exist?

Warmest regards,
JS