On Jun 23, 6:03 pm, "Mike Kaliski" wrote:
wrote in message

...

On Jun 23, 1:10 pm, Art Unwin wrote:

I dislike the way you slandered John E Davis !
I'll send you a quarter and you can call someone
who gives a @#$%..

He has only made a few
posts on this newsgroup which are readily obtainable.

I'm well aware of his posts. I've retrieved them for others
at least once or twice.

He posted on this newsgroup purely to provide the equality of
mathematics of Maxwell and Gauss for which he is qaulified with a
doctrate from MIT working on astral matters for NASA.

I don't care if he's Navin R. Johnson, he was still useless to
your cause.

He made several
attempts to explain the math even in the face of caustic comments from
this group. After he had supplied the mathematics he then left the
newsgroup.

I don't recall him giving out any math at all.

He did not cut and run. He did what he set out to do and he
did it extremely well.

Then why couldn't he answer the simple questions posed to him?
He did what he set out to do, which was to cover his ass, and
he did it extremely well.

Since that time, months,Richard admitted that what Davis said was
true. No. He said of course it was true.

I'd have to let Richard speak for himself. I recall no such thing.

Others that followed Richard
in that lie have never recanted preffering to continually to pljunge
the knife. I suggest you recover John's posts on the mathematics and
apologize

You are not in a position to suggest anything. You can't even get
off your rear to fire up a rig and test an antenna when requested
to do so. If this were not the case, you would know your antenna is a
pseudo dummy load from prior experience, and we wouldn't be having
this usenet QSO.

Not that this is particularly relevant, but while training to be a Marine
Radio Officer many years ago in central London, a message was received from
the coast station at Dover requesting that we cease test transmissions on
480 kHz as we were causing interference to maritime coast station
operations. The transmitter was running less than 80 watts CW into a fully
screened dummy load at the time! This is a distance of around 70 miles as
the crow flies.

Art's antenna apparently contains what would be several wavelengths of
helically wound conductor at any HF amateur frequency (I recall seeing a
figure of 2000 feet mentioned). I see no reason why it wouldn't radiate
considerably better than a dummy load in an earthed screened box. If lack of
real estate means you have to use miniature antennas, it doesn't matter what
you use if it gets a signal out.

As I see it, Art is claiming that his antenna is a no tune, all band antenna
which is very compact and efficient for it's size. Experience suggests to m
that the radiation efficiency is nowhere near as good as a full sized
resonant or beam antenna and I doubt that new physical principles are
involved. Experience also suggests that the sheer amount of wire in the
antenna will present an acceptable match to most transmitters at HF
frequencies and above. Dummy load or not, if it is radiating even a quite
modest signal at low horizontal angles, it will suit many urban dwellers and
give relatively good DX performance for its size.

It really doesn't matter what the maths are or whether exotic new physics is
involved. If you stick a couple of thousand feet of wire up in the air (even
wound in a coil) the system is going to put out a signal.

This forum often degenerates into meaningless discussions as to the exact
meaning of a word, phrase, or measurement and specifications used. While
this might be necessary for a rigorous scientific analysis, the clue is in
the name rec.radio.amateur.antenna.

Don't get bogged down in meaningless minor theoretical details. Does it do
what is claimed? Yes or no. Job done.

Regards

Mike G0ULI

I am in full agreement except it needs clarification regards the
tuning portion. Yes it has a reasonable impedance at scource for all
frequencies and thus will radiate on all frequencies. For amateur use
they would want to choose a wavelength as the basis for equilibrium
because of gain and bandwidth effects. So for a spot frequency it is
better to jumper to the wavelength of the frequency of choice. I by
choice have several jumpers while at the same time using a variometer
to accommodate frequencies that do not exactly match the jumper
positions.Computer programs show that you can obtain gains with
multiples of wave length similar to a helix where the windings must
continue back to the feed point so that external lumped loads are
cancelled to bring the array into equilibrium, which means that
multiple wavelength unit can be used to advantage., I still haven't
found out why Maxwell did not emphasize the equilibrium status when
all that provided formulas for his work all emphasised Newtons laws. I
do know that he wrote a paper on equilibrium in his later years but I
have found no evidence he went back to add it to his prior
law( possibly he wanted to place his own mark on the formulae that he
garnished from others) One last thing I want to emphasise.
For TOTAL gain it matters little if you use a yagi or a non planar
arrangement the difference comes into play where the need is for a
maximum gain of a particular polarity where equilibrium comes to the
fore.
Regards
Art
Unwinantennas.com/