On Mar 26, 11:04 am, (Richard Harrison)
wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:

"But the Method Of Moments used by NEC for antenna radiation patterns
calculates the interference at a point in space based on radiation from
different elementary dipole sections of the antenna."

Completely logical and it works. Interference or vector sum?

Terman illustrates radiation from an elementary doublet (dipole) , and
it is mostly at right angles to the antenna axis, on page 865 of his
1955 opus. On page 866 he shows an actual antenna consisting of numerous
elementary doublets and on page 867 he says:
"The result is that the fields radiated from different elementary
sections of a long wire add vectorially to give a sum that depends on
direction."

Kraus devotes Chapter 14 in the 3rd edition of "Antennas" to: "The
Cylindrical Antenna and the Moment Method (MM)."

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Richard,
Surely you are aware of the two vectors which represent the electrical
field and the magnetic field
If the current carrying member is a diamagnetic material both of thes
vectors will be in the same direction.
But the diamagnetic material is just a myth of mine right ? So I will
go along with you and say the vectors are at right angles to each
other
just like all your books say. But later in your books they then refer
to the vector "curl. This vector must be added to the two vectors at
right angles to each other so a resultant vector can be found. Now you
and the books state that radiation is at right angle to the axis of
current flow.
So the question becomes'Where must the 'curl' vector be placed in
general terms to justify the right angle radiation statment that all
your books
apparently parrot? Simple question isn't it? Did all your learning get
discarded because of books because you are unwilling to challenge
them?
Terman was not made a saint, nor was Kraus or Feldman or even
Einstein. None of these would state that they never have made a
mistake.
Stop imitating Andy Capp and draw on your own thoughts for once
Art