View Single Post
  #90   Report Post  
Old November 10th 14, 08:21 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,uk.radio.amateur
gareth gareth is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,382
Default The prrof of he pudding?

"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...
On 10/11/14 18:46, wrote:
Further proof, if any were needed, that a short antenna is a poor
radiator.

All the proof so far having acutal numbers has been that "a short antenna
is a poor radiator" is arm waving nonsense, gas bag, and all you have
presented so far is arm waving and no numbers.


It is worse than that, he has dismissed solid theory and tried to replace
it with his nonsense. Just as he has done in the rotating
magnetic thread. In fact, this is his normal mode of operation, he
has a long history of such quackery. The pattern is always the same.
Post some nonsense theory, often dressed up as being something that
has troubled him or he has been studying. The theories are often rambling
nonsense- suggesting any studying has been limited to a 'scan'
of a few key terms. When people respond, hand out abuse, ignore anything
which clearly looks credible, etc. Hand out more abuse. Change theory,
claiming people didn't understand. Hand out more abuse. Claim he was right
and others were wrong. Don't be surprised if the same theory is recycled
several times.


Once again, Brian, you jump in with your childish remarks and chanting
your false mantra.

Why do you behave like that?

Why always shout out your childish interjections?

Why not contribute to the technical discussion?

FYI, it was jimp who originated the abuse by his pejorative use of, "gas
bag",
but I doubt that the truth of that will suit your own need to want to shout
out
your own abuse.

I have not dismissed any theory. Out your money where your (big) mouth is,
and cite your reference.

I do not have a history of quackery, unlike youwith your assertion that
reversing
the direction od a rotating vector makes it reduce in suze, or more
recently, claiming that
Maxwell's equations for static fields have no non-zero differential terms,
or that
Maxwell's Equations refer only to EM propagation and not to the whole of
electrical
phenomenon. (Perhaps it is no surprise that you do an M6CIR and reort to
bluster
to mask your own technical ineptitude?)

I have never changed any theory; I strongly suspect that your problem is
that you yourself
are the one who only does a quick scan, jumps to some irrelevant conclusion,
and then
dives in with your own abuse; abuse that you seek to lay at others' doors.
For example,
your recent faux pas when I was discussing what leads to a standing wave
and you jumping
in with what is extant AFTER that standing wave has been set up.

Physician, heal thyself.