Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:49:04 +0000, Dave wrote:

Why don't you two get a room? This bull**** has nothing to do with ham
radio. However, maybe if we ionized your hot air we could bounce some
70 cm off the cloud.

I've always suspected that some hams hated math and other technical
subjects. While it is conceivable that you could build a ham antenna
without using math, I don't think the results would be optimal. There
are also those that advocate converting ham radio from a technical
hobby, to a sport, where the technical aspects are diminished to the
point of extinction, and the operational exercises of contesting, DX,
CW, and rag chewing are predominant. No math required. Perhaps the
FCC could balkanize the ham bands into technical and non-technical
sub-bands, where the clueless and those that still design, calculate,
and build their own equipment can be seperated for their own safety.

What equipment do you build for the amateur bands? Where does one
employ that much theoretical physics?

I have software and analyzers to help me; I don't need to throw
general theory around on a bulletin board that is over the head of 95%
of the people whose curiosity might be piqued by the name of the group.
Perhaps if you applied your quantoid lunacy to making a suitcase
quadrifilar helix for HF or something, I'd be less hurt.