On May 21, 5:48*pm, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
*"K1TTT" wrote
...
On May 21, 7:24 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:



In textbooks are prsented all theories and hipothesis.
It is your choose which one do you prefer: EM, photons or like sound.
S*

"Like sound " antennas are in sale for ages.
If Art's are or will be - I do not know. I am not an expert. (I have
trouble
with understanding Art's idea - he is using very sophistcated terms).
S*
show me the equations for modeling a dipole radiation pattern using

sound in free space, be sure to account for polarization.

I have something like this:http://perg.phys.ksu.edu:80/vqmorig/...ave/Slit/vq_mw...

See also 1864 in:http://online.physics.uiuc.edu/cours.../Lecture_Notes...

Transversal wves have no sense. The equations are usefull for teaching the
math.

S*

right, read this carefully from that 1864 note: 'the requirements of
his mechanical model keep him from finding the correct boundary
conditions, so he never does this calculation'. This is just one of
the basic shortcomings of using a mechanical analogy, you can not
satisfy the electric and magnetic field boundary conditions that the
final version of his equations handle properly. while some basic
effects like the interference patterns can be duplicated for both
longitudinal and transverse waves, they are not interchangeable in all
cases and trying to do so will only lead to absurd things like
electrons jumping off antennas or the need for an aether to transmit
em waves.