On 29 Jun, 12:11, art wrote:
On 29 Jun, 11:50, "Dave" wrote:





"art" wrote in message

oups.com...

On 29 Jun, 07:02, art wrote:
On 25 Jun, 13:10, "Dave" wrote:

Ok, lets try it this way... step by step, inch by inch, we may yet
figure
out what this antenna is.

First question:
What is the least number of wires needed to build a gaussian antenna?

Posting check
Art

Isaac Newton like scientist before him observed the World and the
Universe
for clues about what it was all about. He determined that each
particle, each object,
each planet all had their own gravitational centers. And where each
minute particle
was made of atoms etc all orbiting around each other in a state where
these orbiting
partcles were able to move in isolation with respect to other
particles in orbit
because all forces became balanced with respect to each other. This
theory was
based on observations on the make up of the universe around us. This
balancing of
parts and particles is called being in a state of equilibrium. If an
exterior
force was applied the Universe has a whole would rearrange itself to
retain
equilibrium by accomodation
Thus we can see an element as something held together by equilibrium
and where
its constituent parts is a densily packed swarm of particles shaped
in longitudinal
physical form and where the surface of this entity has its surface
completely covered
by errant particles called electrons. This collection of particles are
so densly packed
that it appears to be a solid and where the make up of its constituent
particls and atoms
provide a distingtive appearance which allows identification with
respect to other combinations
of densly packed swarms of particles and atoms via weight, reflective
qualities e.t c
I have stated the above in a very generalistic way purely to give an
understanding of the
meaning of the word "equilibrium" which in a generalistic way can be
seen as a somewhat stable
existance of parts in concert with other parts in a three dimensional
existance where its "stable"
existance is created because of the totalility of all forces involved
equals the sum of ZERO.
Art Unwin KB9MZ....XG

but an antenna is by necessity a dynamic thing. it is meant to be radiating
or absorbing energy which to me means it can not be in equilibrium. it also
must have rapidly varying currents and voltages such that even along the
length of the wire there is no equilibrium, electrons pack up tighter in one
area and less in another forcing currents to flow continually. even a wire
that is not directly fed from a transmitter has currents and voltages based
on how close it is to a wire driven from a transmitter, it's orientation,
and it's length. electrically if all the fields from a wire summed up to
zero there could be no power flowing and hence no antenna.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I fully understand your quandry David because with your knoweledge
despite
what you say is trying to jump ahead of the story to get at the
desired end.
Just relax and follow my story without resistance as a child without
prior knoweledge
would when he is sitting down and listening to an orator describing a
story.
The point of the story is at a point of arranging two pieces of metal
that has no external forces exacted upon them and where each piece of
metal
can be seen as a static part of the earth even tho it is made of
zillions of gyroscopes spinning in a comppressed area and that because
of the
balanced rotation of parts are staying together as a swarm of parts
without disintergration to dust. You have to understand the nature
of mass or energy of things so you can anticipate the reaction to
an external force that impinges on its equilibrium . Until that
happens
we are reffering to an arrangement that is not dynamic but static
Art Unwin KB9MZ...XG- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

David, let me talk about equilibrium a little bit more as the lessons
learned
from many years on this newsgroup shows this to be a real stumbling
block.
For someone with a learned background there is a great emphasis on
the
mathematical side of proving concepts that were origional derived by
observation
of the universe where the student of the day concentrates more on the
mathematical
aspect which is required for a non oral examination. Thus it is
natural for
such a student to equate the "equal" term in mathematics to the word
"equilibrium"
Equilibrium can be used as an "equal" sign but certainly not always
and again the
"equilibrium" term cannot be interchanged easily with the term
"equilibrium"
As the Russian has pointed out that we have altered the path of
science by being
led by mechanical machines in number crunching style where numbers are
placed
into a grinder and where we examine the mix to see if anything usefull
comes out
and where the computor is used to magnify possible paths where the
resulting
mix in general goes no where. You now have to put another hat on and
rely on
that bit by bit observations becomes a story and where bits are
missing you use
intuition to bridge the gap that is consistent with the theme. It is
later
that mathematics comes into the picture where we check to see if there
is a
common realistic theme. Maxwell did this by collecting different
stories
and connected them by trails of a story into numbers and though he saw
a
connection between a static sbject and a dynamic subject he never
accumulated
enough clues to develop a story to match the mathematics. What we are
doing now
is going back in time using observations of the universe to form a
story even
tho the mathematical links are some what preknown as individual parts
as those
observers of the past would do by deduction and without the use of a
computor
Hope that helps rather than confused you but we are retracing the step
in the
past taken by Gauss.
Art Unwin KB9MZ......XG
Back to mowing the grass or.....coooo dee graaaar