On 10/24/2013 8:02 AM, J.B. Wood wrote:
On 10/24/2013 08:10 AM, W5DXP wrote:
On Thursday, October 24, 2013 5:54:05 AM UTC-5, J.B. Wood wrote:
So the above statements don't make sense.

I agree that the E/M ratio for far field signals in space is a
constant. That doesn't prohibit a receiving antenna from creating its
own unique near-field conditions and altering that ratio just as
there is nothing prohibiting a load from altering the E/M ratio that
exists in a transmission line. In fact, the E/M ratio must
necessarily be altered at impedance discontinuities.

Example: Two different antennas are receiving the same signal and
indicating the same signal level. As a human walks close to the two
antennas, the received signal strength of one antenna changes
radically while the received signal strength of the other is affected
by only a small amount. If both antennas were *accepting* the same
fixed far-field E/M ratio, a human body should have the same effect
on both antennas but we can demonstrate that it doesn't. -- 73,
Cecil, w5dxp.com


Don't have argument with the above, Cecil, but these phenomena appear to
be in addition to what I think was being discussed. Sincerely,

J.B. -

I have always understood EMF to be exactly as you have explained. I did
not know how to refute the misunderstanding by others on this topic.
Thanks for handling this discussion.