"Mike Kaliski" wrote in message
...

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 02:13:42 -0000, "Mike Kaliski"
wrote:

While gravity is often quoted as exhibiting the weakest force of the four
major forces, that force appears to exhibit effects at far longer ranges
than the other three.

Hi Mike,

Without pursuing the other three (you may resolve this in response),
the force of gravity is inversely proportional to the square of the
distance between those bodies being acted upon. This is the same
relation to radiated power (in this case 100W) and the same two bodies
(if we are doing substitutions) if they are located in the far field.

In the near field, the force of radiation varies to the third power,
and in the very close field this power is substantial: if that remote
body is resonant, and in that near field, then it can absorb at least
half of that power or more.

Unfortunately, those who want to hoist Newton's corpse on their
shoulders for a parade celebrating their powers of insight; they
cannot offer that gravity is tweaked even by a thousandth part - and a
thousandth part is easily measured.

... At any substantial physical distance from a
point, gravitational force exerted per unit area is generally the largest
force observed.

This is, no doubt, a reference to nuclear forces where electric and
magnetic dominate in geometries larger than a bacteria. Perhaps
Arthur's levitating particles that dance to RF and leap off the
antenna are fried virii. Unfortunately, for Arthur's levitating
particles, the RF would have to be tuned to several thousand THz.
(Art, a sunlamp would do the same thing cheaper.)

...Gravity may seem to
be the weakest force here on earth

I dare say that any subjective test of that would invert the "sense"
of your statement.

, but at cosmic scales it rules supreme.

The human response aside, at cosmic scales you have cosmic mass in
relation to less than cosmic scale. That is, comparing two galaxies'
gravities is necessarily heavily leveraged with billions of suns, and
yet the distance between the two centers (of galaxies) is probably on
the order of 100's to 1000's of either galaxy's radius. Newton would
shrug that off as being unremarkable - still only square law stuff.
Newton would probably have expressed the force within 20% on the first
pass. Push those two galactic systems to the edges of the cosmos will
only reduce that force by the square law (it certainly won't increase
it).

However, none of this answers how gravity can be an all band antenna's
friend as much as Arthur would like to have them wed.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Hi Richard

Art believes that gravity is the force that is holding unbound and by
inference, 'neutral' electrons (or possibly some other particle), to the
surface of his antenna radiating element. I personally doubt that gravity
is the main force involved, but for want of a better description of the
phenomenon, I am prepared to continue to let Art describe his antennas as
working by this mechanism. It is his theory and as he often reminds us, he
is primarily a practical hands on engineer and not an academic. If his
antennas work better than anything else of the same dimensions, then
someone will eventually arrive at the correct scientific explanation. In
the meantime I am content to let him continue to describe his antennas and
their workings in terms he understands. It certainly provides for a lot of
debate on r.r.a.a.

Cheers

Mike G0ULI

if only his antennas worked anywhere near as good as he dreams they do we
would all be lining up at his door to buy them.