On Mar 31, 7:00 pm, Richard Clark wrote:

Hi Robert,

50 years ago they said Electricity would be so easy to produce they
would pay us to use it. They ignored Hiroshima and discovered
Chernobyl.

I believe ease of production is a subjective term. To obtain energy
one must consume energy, there's no free lunch. But ease may be
considered 'convenience' to us, i.e. what suits our production
capability better.


40 years ago they said DNA and genetics would allow us to design our
own babies. They ignored Thalidomide and discovered Dolly the sheep
that died before her time.

Genetics have indeed contributed to most important advances in our
understanding of the human body. Instead of relying only on physiology
and anatomy, we can now have a glimpse at the 'programming language'
at the core. What use do we put it to, that's a different problem.


30 years ago they invented modeling software that would allow us to
create the Gaussian dipole (or whatever) and discovered every dipole
that came before it performed better.

That's a bit of devil's advocate stance, isn't it? You can't
seriously say that modelling software didn't bring something to the
table.


Nearly 20 years ago Johnny Carson retired and we are still getting
jokes.

Not nearly 10 years ago with the Dow at 11658 and a budget surplus at
230 billion, the Republicans promised prosperity was around the corner
and their voters are now living in cardboard boxes with the Dow at
12176 and the national debt up 50%.

Scaling of antennas is clearly
possible, despite of what the Chu-Harrington limit states ( or to be
fair, by applying them in a new way ).

But you don't know how, and have never seen one either.

That's true, I am not an expert in this field, I only try to stay up
to date with the technology, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but
I have seen many advancements in this direction lately.


73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Best regards,
Robert