Art Unwin wrote:
... Have all the antenna computer programmers also died or
do they have a quiet distrust of their work with respect to Maxwell ?
Now we have the relevalation that Neutrinos DO actually have mass
obtained frtom the Sun which puts another nail in the coffin with
respect to waves.
Yes, American Universities deserve their failing grade.( Read Asimov
thoughts on present science teaching)
NEXT engineer scientist/rocket engineer or what ever

Art Unwin KB9MZ....,..,.xg (uk)

Actually, no, general programmers fill the planet, competition for work
is high ... well, perhaps better in china, india, etc. :-(

However, programmers "don't much" appreciate programs which play
horseshoes. We like EXACT answers, exact measurements and routines
which CONSISTENTLY return EXACT figures, dimensions, etc. ... in true
math there is but one answer, artists see things in gray, programmers in
black and white. When a program says, "Well, you start here, with this
measurement, and prune, or lengthen", or, "You start with this
capacitance (or inductance) and then adjust as necessary", I feel ill.

Example:

IF Pi X 3 = circumference ever fails (I expect it to be just as accurate
for a 1 inch circle as a 1 million mile one), or returns a "figure to
begin experimenting from", I will see it as only a guess also ... and
requiring an artist to deduce.

Antenna design parameters are a nightmare ... indeed, since that which
is not a science is an art--antenna design looks very much an art to me
.... or, at least mixed fields of discipline are required.

Now, one Art should recognize another art ... grin

And, I am done with this whole discussion, someday we will have accurate
tools to work with ... end of story.

Regards,
JS