Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"Jeff Liebermann" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 17:51:31 +0200, "Szczepan Bialek"
wrote:


snip

All is O.K. Oscillating molecules produce the electron waves and in this way
lost its energy rather quickly.
But no smaller species than the electrons.
Tunnig fork transfer its energy to air molecules, air molecules to electrons
and no next step.

Babbling gibberish.

The same is with the electron waves speed and the electron beam (drift)
speed.

Same as what? There is no such thing as an electron wave.

There no such thing as the EM waves.

It is the modern definition, you babbling idiot.

There are
electron beams, and radio waves, with very little overlap.

Like wind and sound.

No, not at all.

If think that electrons fly off the ends of an antenna, there should
be a way to directly detect those electrons. For example, a CRT has a
phosphor screen that lights up when hit by electrons from the electron
gun. If your mythical electrons are really there, you should also be
able to place a phosphor screen near a transmitting antenna, and have
it light up.

Cathode rays were idenified in 1895.

But they have nothing to do with radio or anything else you have been
babbling about.

Also, if your electrons are leaving the antenna, and flying off into
the ether, there should be a rather large positive charge left on the
antenna.

You call it "static".

No, we do not as nothing of the sort happens.

You are an idiot.

If you then claim that the transmitter is replacing the
electrons as fast as they are radiated, then the positive charge
should reside in the transmitter. If you then claim that the local
electric utility is supplying electrons to the transmitter, then the
utility generating station must have a huge positive charge.

For this reason the all electronic equipment have the
earth/chassis/counterpoise as e remedy.

Yet more babbling nonsense with no basis in reality.

snip

It could not be wrong because such Giants as Ampere, Faraday, Stokes,
Lorenz, Tesla and Dirac were "using real world examples and numerical
calculations."

And still they mangaged to get some of the things they wrote wrong due
to lack of information not available until well into the 20th Century.

snip

Ampere, Faraday, Stokes, Lorenz, Tesla and Dirac analyzed and explained
everythig.

No, they did not as they didn't have information that became available in
the 20th Century.

"Maybe this will help":

snip 187 year old quote

Teaching and science are the two different things. In teaching is the
hydraulic analogy in science are electrons.

Gibberish.

"It is unfortunate that electrodynamics and relativity decide in favor of
Biot and Savart rather than for the much more sophisticated Ampere".

Babble.

You are an idiot.