On 29 Oct, 15:10, "Richard Fry" wrote:
"art" wrote (but not to me): Your questions go on and on as if you have never taken physics!
To get up to speed you need to take some classes and maybe ask
your lecturer some of the questions that you are asking of me.

__________

Art --

If you believe that either physics or accumulated field experience supports
your belief that "efficient" antennas need to be "tank circuits" where
"The DC blast removes the surface particles and in this moment
where equilibrium does not exist the static particles are projected beyond
the boundary before the boundary shape is repaired," etc etc, then
please post proven mathematical support for your concepts -- whether
your own, or that of others. Your intuition alone is not sufficient.

And if you can't, then would you not agree that you should NOT be
posting such concepts as proven reality, whilst abusing others who
doubt and/or ask for proof of your concepts, and misleading those
who might believe what you post, without proof of its accuracy?

RF

Just read the archives to get what you want instead of
getting personal attention. I am certainly not going to
start at the beginning again just for you.
The mathematical support is all there.
If you don't understand the math then you should
not jump to conclusions about who is misleading who.
Just get off my back .