On Sun, 12 Sep 2010 15:30:04 -0700 (PDT), lu6etj
wrote:

Hello dear Richard, how are you? I hope very well with yours:

Mylar conductive ballon replacement it is not a valid refutation for
the hipotesis analized, that antenna was only a "test antenna", any
liquid antenna can be replaced by a metalic antenna...! what prove
that?

Hi Miguel,

What does it prove? What does water prove? That it is a poor
replacement? Yes.

I do not know lens dielectric antennas, I learnt radiation it due
accelerating charges,

That repeated epithet is rather too simple. An electron is always
accelerating. A circular orbit guarantees that.

electrons are charges, free ions also, non free
dielectric charges (E field induced dipoles) too; alternating electric
field applied to them produce movement on them, then acceleration,
then = radiation. Am I wrong? (yes I know, loss too sometimes).

Does swinging a battery around produce radiation?

You say: "This reflection is a function of a severe mismatch between
two poor
conductors. You don't need sea water to achieve the same thing"

What "two" conductors?

POOR conductors.

you know air not work as a "conductor" in this
analitic environment,

Right, it is a very poor conductor (and, yet, we still see lightning
conducting through it on a summer evening - all a matter of degree).

it would the same it there were empty vacuum,
reflecting medium properties are responsibles for earth reflections.

I suppose so.

"Mismatch" it is another magic word, improper of you indeed my
friend!, not an explanation :)

Magic happens.

Classic EM radiation (or the same "re-irradiation") it sometimes
explained due accelarating charges, and YES, I agree with you,
certainly "you do not need sea water to achieve the same thing", you
can do it with any other vibrating charge, sea water charges it is
only one possibility, conductors, soil substances are other familiar
things capable to do it.

So then, classic EM radiation is pretty common, and has lost its
magic.

We know waves are reflected to ionosphere by those mediums, we can
explain that reflections with incident electromagnetic fields and
earth surface induced currents; however, "current" not implies here
free electrons traveling miles inside a conductor, we have a "current"
with any little induced movement on a charge and if this movemente is
not constant we have acceleration then = EM radiation, what other
classical process could explain the EM earth reflection? I do not
know.

Mismatch.

However I am not supporting practical liquid antennas here, I have not
made the experience and I have not theoretical enough knowledge
neither to prove or refute the hipotesis without much more working, I
only have some pointers to think over about it.

Ever hear a flame speaker? No magnets, no cone, just a flame and an
amplifier feeding two probes and *sound* comes out. No one builds
them either.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC