art wrote:
On 8 Jul, 23:24, Richard Clark wrote:
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 20:39:09 -0700, art wrote:
Methinks that I need to study
up a bit more unless there is a physisist on board this news group
that can guide me

Have you invented your own vocabulary to substitute for what is more
commonly known as Pixie Dust? Research that term first to confirm or
deny.

As an aside, what has this got to do with the focus (eg. antennas) of
this forum? Did the moderators kick you out of eHam?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Every thing!
They are static particles that rest on diamagnetic materials
used for antennas. These particular lunar particle coverings was
predicted more than a hundred years ago by the masters which
is before radio was even thought of . I would have thought
that the subject of antennas would fit right in here!

OK, now we have an English word to work with.

From http://en.wikipedia.org:

"Diamagnetism is a form of magnetism that is only exhibited by a substance
in the presence of an externally applied magnetic field."

"All materials show a diamagnetic response in an applied magnetic field;
however for materials which show some other form of magnetism (such as
ferromagnetism or paramagnetism), the diamagnetism is completely
overpowered. Substances which only, or mostly, display diamagnetic
behaviour are termed diamagnetic materials, or diamagnets. Materials
that are said to be diamagnetic are those which are usually considered
by non-physicists as "non magnetic", and include water, DNA, most organic
compounds such as petroleum and some plastics, and many metals such as
mercury, gold and bismuth."

So would Art's magic pixie dust particles rest on a ferromagnetic
antenna such as one constructed of a ferrous based alloy?

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.