On 7 Jun, 06:50, "Mike Kaliski" wrote:
snip





But David, you reject the basics of a Gaussian antenna which is why I
have reservations about your logic tho granted others appear to
agree with you, so I want to read up on it for myself.
When reseaching the net I see numorous attempts to
provide a real time proof for it but nothing as factual as the
Gaussian antenna.So contrary to what you say there is a lot going on
in trying to find a proof for it even tho you at the same time reject
the Gaussian connection. After seeing the automatic rejection of
ANY ideas that represent new ideas in the amateur community I am
beginning to wonder if the E/H antennas is a victim of the same
syndrome . I am coming across many papers that suggest that there
is more to radiation than scholars presently believe so it is
natural to me that amateurs would automatically reject any new
aproach by derisive comments such as junk science or similar.
What does come thru is that members of this newsgroup state that
the Gaussian antenna has already been invented but fail to point
out the paper on it. Stating that Maxwell provided a connection
by mathematics of the E and H fields is not enough to provide
proof and certainly not without introducing the Gaussian
connection so its use can be seen and verified.
If it has actually been pre invented then there must be a
paper conecting Poynting's vector and Gaussian statics law in
existence rather than a conoctation in mathematics alone but
without qualification, and certainly a reference to it in
Jasik or Krauss. However, members have failed to point out
such a reference where normally they always point to old books
on the subject. It is for this reason I am looking for a
real time proof of the Poynting's Vector because not only
for the mathematical aproach but also for its connection to
Poynting which you for one reject out of hand because of
some gut feeling. If faced with the same problem I have
no doubt you would procede the same way.
Art

Art

I have arrived at this thread rather late but it appears you believe that
you have arrived at an idea for some kind of new antenna which works on the
principle of Poyntings vector and Gaussian statics law.

Poyntings vector refers to the direction of motion of an electromagnetic
wave is is frequently used to calculate power per square metre of an
idealised wavefront impacting on an imaginary surface at an arbitary
distance from an isotropic (single point) radiator. This figure can then be
used to make a comparison with real life antennas to establish directions of
preferential gain or loss.

Gaussian statistics refer to the distribution of typically, power over a
given area or range. Generally more power is concentrated at the centre of a
range with power falling symmetrically either side of a central high point.

Gaussian antennas are currently for sale and used as microwave horns to
modify low intensity radar beams used in intruder detection and door opening
systems. This ensures that the main lobe of power is directed to the most
useful area of detection. These devices typically generate a beam in the
form of a cone shape, with maximum intensity at the centre of the cone.

What you are proposing is a planar gaussian antenna which flattens the cone
into more of a fan shape, displays a flat impedence over a wide bandwidth
and requires around ten elements of different lengths mounted on a boom
support.

I could be wrong, but I believe that you have reinvented the log periodic
antenna. This antenna has a single feedpoint, operates over typically 10:1
bandwidths with flat impedence and requires a minimum of ten elements to
achieve reasonable gain and bandwidth. Log periodic antennae typically have
as many as 30 elements. It was much favoured by the military for it's
ability to transmit a directional beam on any discrete frequency across the
whole of the HF spectrum. The advent of direct satellite communication
equipment has rendered these antennae somewhat redundant because they are
fairly large and require substantial towers and rotators to be used to
maximum advantage. They are still used where reliable, frequency agile,
point to point HF links are required. VHF and UHF versions would be small
enough to be suitable for installation in a typical domestic garden.

No new maths or physics are required to explain how this type of antenna
works and the principles have been well understood for over 50 years. A
Google search for log periodic antenna should reveal a wealth of research
material for you.

Apologies if I have completely misunderstood this thread and you have
invented a completely new antenna design.

Mike G0ULI- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Thats O.K. Apologies accepted. It gave you a chance to write about
things that YOU wanted to write about.
Cheers and beers
Art