On Apr 28, 9:19*pm, tom wrote:
On 4/28/2010 6:48 PM, Art Unwin wrote:



On Apr 28, 3:42 pm, *wrote:
On Apr 28, 3:59 pm, Art *wrote:

On Apr 28, 1:53 pm, Michael *wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
A link to the Wikipedia page would probably have been sufficient:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity_scheme
The problem is that NONE of the diversity schemes mentioned in the
Wikipedia article apply to the single antenna example under
discussion. *In my never humble opinion, there's no way to provide any
form of diversity reception improvement with a single antenna, unless
one also has two feeds, going to two different receivers, and ending
in either a decision switch, or some form of intelligent combiner.

Trying to wrap my mind around this...

I wouldn't know how splitting the signal to two receivers would work..
The issue arises at the antenna doesn't it?

Indeed, if a single wire antenna would work for diversity reception,
wouldn't it then follow that you would not have to use diversity
reception? The signal would already be there for you.

Seems like a simple test could answer this one.

* * * * *- 73 de Mike N3LI -

I think the first place to start is to what the actual antenna pattern
represents in terms of polarity.
For instance, we have two vectors outside the earths boundary thus you
must have two vectors inside the arbitrary *boundary. Obviously the
gravity vector will be at right angles to the earths surface. The
other vector representing the rotation of the earth will naturally be
an circular pattern which is the "saucer" pattern portion of the
overall pattern, which is what hams mainly use. Thus we have to make
the first determination as being what each portion of the pattern
represents in terms of polarity, the centre being straight plume field
and the bottom circular field which is a rotational vector. Since they
are in vector form we can see them as a stream of particles where the
two vectors will be additive. It is only then that the problem of
different or the same phase factors *can be ascertained. Definitions
applied can be approach later. Personally, I view the gravity vector
as linear with the other providing a wobberly helical vector i.e
circular. but varying angles to the earths surface. Other thinkers
will surely disagree, if only to fight over near field over far field!

I have no doubt that gravity effects radio waves in the same manner
that it has been proven to effect light. The effects are going to be
such that unless your signal is passing by a black hole of no
practical concern.

Have a great day Art.

Jimmie

Totally wrong!
The vector inside the boundary opposes gravity!
The particle has a straight line trajectory and does not fall back to
earth during that trajectory.The rotary vector supplies spin to the
other vector force
just as the dimples in an golf ball or the rifling of a firearm
barrel. These same vectors are represented
by time varying electrical current (straight line) as well as
displacement current which generates a vortex by its circular motion.
When the current flow is completely outside the surface of the
radiator skin depth disappears as does resistance. So the radiator has
a skin of tightly bonded particles upon which the straight line
trajectory is imposed. Remember, earth gravity has zero effect on
propagation inside a arbitrary boundary otherwise straight line
projection could not exist.

Welcome back, Art!

And I'm quite serious.

Obviously you are no longer taking your medications or maybe they just
let you out.

Please keep it up. *I, for one, have missed your lack of connection to
reality. *It is very amusing.

tom
K0TAR

Perception is not the same as reality. A mixer in a radio is different
than what is required when seeking diversity. The first is the mixing
of two different frequencies where diversity requires the mixing of
two frequencies of the same except one has a delay. The output of the
latter is three traces where the two separate bone vibration of the
ears can separate the two and where your middle ear can provide the
summation. Your brain supplies the jumper of your choice. Without
discovery you can abide with perception and not with change. With
discoveries you must accept change. If all is known then one doesn't
have to accept change and can exist without a brain by being a
follower and not a leader.