On Sep 6, 5:07*pm, "christofire" wrote:
"Richard Fry" wrote in message
...
On Sep 5, 7:00 pm, Art Unwin wrote:
* Where do you get this stuff from? Please visit a library - you could
do
yourself a lot of good.
Chris
Chris, what I believe he is referring to is that computer programs
support a tipped vertical over one at right angles to earth. Computer
programs are supposed to be based on Maxwell's formula. Is this an
error and how do we fix it. If it is not an error then it supports the
presence of the Coriolis force in collusion with gravity. and not
gravity alone.
------------
The NEC computer programs are not in error. *The error is in
understanding how far-field patterns develop.
Art, please read the following link about "tipped verticals," which
hopefully will lead to a better understanding of this issue.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...a/browse_threa...
RF
* Richard, thank you for that. *I stand by what I have stated in several
places earlier in this thread, that if tipping-over a monopole or dipole
results in more gain in one direction then that will be counteracted by less
gain in another direction (i.e. azimuth) as your eznec pattern illustrates.
There is also the question of polarisation purity.
Chris
Equilibrium is when there is no gain. When this occurs there is
polarisation purity.
Gain is not a factor in equilibrium so why muddy up the question. Or
is that being arrogant
because you disagree with me LOL