"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 15:57:23 GMT, "Frank"
wrote:

For 100 W input the total radiated power is 2 mW.

-47dB

It will take a whole lot more signal degradation to reach the Weak
Force threshold (about 83dB more, just to compare to the Strong Force
- much less a standard dipole).

Hi Frank,

With the disclaimer:
On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 10:38:06 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin
wrote:
My program is not Nec based so I am not familiar with that routine.,

Your results will no doubt be shunned as unauthentic (in spite of his
program being NEC based, but 20+ years older - we won't go into his
confusion of not knowing what NEC is).

I've noticed an old hobby horse trotted out to the starting gate:
On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 12:21:17 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin
wrote:
based on radiation per unit length of radiator

This nostrum was offered years ago to explain "efficiency," and no
doubt the corruption of what "efficiency" means will be used to muddy
the stupendous loss into figures of amazing merit.

It should come as no surprise that even allowing (patronizing the
authur as several contributors here desire) for this aberrant reading
of "efficiency" (per unit length) that the authur's Weak Force Antenna
design is not one ten-thousandth the size of the standard dipole. As
such, this new design is still not as "efficient per unit length" as a
standard dipole when the authur's terms are accepted.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Not sure what to say. I have designed some ultra compact vehicular
helices for 0.54 to 210 MHz. Network analyzer measurements
indicated the models as very close to that predicted by NEC2.

The project was abandoned due to very poor results -- even with
a 30 dB pre-amp the reception was unsatisfactory. The auto
manufacturers are desperate to have a vehicular BC/FM/Digital
antenna that fits into a "Sharkfin" shaped radome.

Heck, I may have to build one of Art's models and measure the
parameters.

73,

Frank