Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"Ian Jackson" napisal w wiadomosci
...
In message , Rob
writes
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
The "dipole" where one element is connected to "live" wire and the
second
to a "ground" is the monopole.

It is your misunderstanding that:

1. amateurs always connect coax directly to a dipole. they don't.
those that are in the know will use a balun.

In the past, many amateurs did connect coax directly to a dipole.

And what they do if they have the monopole?

Connect it with coaxial transmission line, idiot.

The reason is that - on most occasions - it worked perfectly well, and they
'got away with it'. It was only when problems occurred (interference to TV,
radio, Hi-Fi etc) that much thought was given to the need for a balun.

And what if somebody have the monopole with the radials?

Since a monopole with radials is an unbalanced load, there is no current
flow on the outside of the coax, idiot.

In modern times, there is a lot more opportunity for amateurs to interfere
with - and suffer interference from - all kinds of domestic equipment, and
the use of a balun (or twin feeder) has more-or-less become an absolute
necessity.

The twin feeder ensure the electrical symmetry.

Yes, it does, as does a balancing device and coax transmission line, idiot.

2. the braid of the coax is "ground". this is not true. there will
be voltage at the braid of the coax at the antenna end when a balun
is not used.

Szczepan is obviously making the fundamental mistake of thinking that,
because the coax screen is grounded at the transmitter end (or at least
connected to the chassis of the transmitter), it is therefore at zero RF
potential - and that it is still at RF potential at the far (antenna) end,
where it is connected directly to the 'other' leg of the dipole. This is
wrong.

I know that in the coax screen something is induced. But I am sure that
such "dipole" is not electrically symmetrical.

That is because you are an ignorant, ineducable, idiot.

You have been told and you actually referenced a web link that shows how
a balancing device is used between a coax transmission line and and balanced
load, but no matter how many times you are told this and how many links
you post that say this, you are totally incapable of understanding any of
it.

He is then assuming that if the coax screen is at zero RF potential where
it is connected to the other leg of the dipole, then the other leg of the
dipole is also at zero RF potential (and doesn't radiate). This is wrong.

I am sure that the other leg radiate almost nothing.

That is because you are an ignorant, ineducable, idiot.

In Hertz time all scientists investigate which part of the Hertz apparature
radiate.

In Hertz's time the instruments to measure the voltages, currents, and
fields didn't exist.


He is therefore concluding that as both the coax screen and the other leg
of the dipole are at zero RF potential, the only part of the antenna
system that is 'RF live' is the leg of the dipole which is connected to
the inner conductor of the coax - which is what happens with a monopole.
As a result, he is then claiming that a dipole is really only a monopole.
This is wrong.

I am only claiming that it works like the monopole.

That is because you are an ignorant, ineducable, idiot.

In your literature is wrote that "monopole with the counterpoise works like
the dipole". But in your literature the dipole means the mechanical
symmetry.

That is because you are an ignorant, ineducable, idiot.

What you quoted means the far field for a monopole with a counterpoise is
the same as the far field as a vertical dipole.

It does NOT mean the antenna voltages and currents are the same.

However, I'm still convinced that Szczepan knows far more about radio than
he appears to, and is cunningly trying to get us to explain phenomena
which maybe we really don't know as much about as we like to think we do!

Exactly.

You know NOTHING about radio.

You are a babbling, ignorant, ineducable, idiot.

How many transmitters have you run in your lifetime?

How many antennas have you built in your lifetime?


But if I am right than the "counterpoise" leg of your dipole should be made
of the proper material and have the proper dimenssion not necesary the same
as the "live" leg.

You are NOT right.

Dipoles do not have a counterpoise.

You are a babbling, ignorant, ineducable, idiot.

So I start the new thread "Joels question".

The history of radio-amateur is so long that that issue is probably solved
long ago.

The "issue" was solved long ago, you are totally wrong about EVERYTHING
you say, and amateur radio has NOTHING to do with the issue other than
you are posting in an amatuer radio group.

Post your nonsense in sci.physics.electromag and you will get exactly the
same response, you babbling idiot.

How many antennas have you built in your lifetime?