View Single Post
  #10   Report Post  
Old December 1st 09, 09:50 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Lostgallifreyan Lostgallifreyan is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Sep 2006
Posts: 613
Default Faraday shields and radiation and misinterpretations

Ian White GM3SEK wrote in
:

http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek/misc/skin.htm

This is exactly equivalent to Tom's explanation above. The detailed
proof is quite mathematical but it is solidly based in classical physics
- Faraday's Law and Ampere's theorem (both of which are embodied in
Maxwell's equations). This derivation produces the well-known equations
for current density as a function of depth, conductivity and
permeability.


Thanks, that linking of laws and theories will help me (and the confirmation
that classical physics will be enough to describe it, as I hoped). The OP
mentioned Maxwell too... so did he make some error I have yet to grasp? Other
than taking pot shots at an establishment, that is...

The special feature of this particular proof is that it's much more
general than the ones you see in better-known textbooks - and therefore
much more powerful. It shows that if RF current is flowing in/on *any*
conducting surface, for *any* reason, then the skin effect will be
present.


That appeals to me. I think the more something can be seen to apply
generally, the more it helps. Proportion can't be gauged with a model that
denies it.