LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #14   Report Post  
Old September 12th 06, 08:05 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,951
Default Is antenna a transducer to 377 ohms?

On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 18:39:25 GMT, "Peter O. Brackett"
wrote:

Where then is Zo = 377 Ohms?


Hi Peter,

To how many places? Your question is rather oblique when we are
discussing near fields and antenna as "transducer" [not a choice of
term I subscribe to].

I seriously doubt that you've unhinged from the origins of that value,
however, it bears only tangentially on the matter.

That is an antenna itself has no effect on the fundamental u and e of the
media in which it is immersed.


Wrong.

[snip]

Surely uo, eo, Zo and c (velocity of light) are fundamental and invariant
properties of "free space", no?


And some toothpaste makes our teeth whiter, no? Your reply does
nothing to answer your error, however.

[snip]
After all the antenna is very small, and free space is very large (grin),
and so a tiny antenna cannot change u and e everywhere!


Abstracting from near space to everywhere is the source of your error.

[snip]

No, I'm "contracting" from outer space to near space... using the
contravarient tensor!


Then you have misapplied it, clearly. Arguing does not take the place
of easily demonstrable facts. AH! forgive me, wrong forum, arguing
is classic substitution. However, the entertainment value is rather
poorer this round.

There might just also be plane waves passing through identically the same
region of space, say emanating from a more distant antenna.


Wrong.
[snip]


Oh, and here I thought that at least tiny remnants of all radiation
eventually passes through every part of space, filling all of space as it
expands throughout the Universe..


Are "thoughts" related to "beliefs?" Bloated speculations of
background radiation don't change the basic assertion that in the near
field, there is nothing that remotely approaches the presumed 377 Ohm
specification. You've both (earlier) acknowledged this and (have
since) challenged it with a semantic fog such as:

I know that Special Relativity [Maxwell's equations] is not supported in
full by General Relativity, but surely even though space is warped by mass,
superposition must still be supported. The radiation in your neighbourhood
is a superposition of suitably delayed and reduced (by path attenuation) of
all radiation, no?


EZNEC demonstrates the violation of your "beliefs," yes?

I miss Reg Edwards already :-(


Certainly you're a poor substitute for Punchinello. (and Kelvin is
winding up a pitch to wing a chunk of chalk off your noggin.)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why Tilt ? - The Terminated Tilted Folded Dipole (TTFD / T2FD) Antenna RHF Shortwave 2 April 18th 06 10:21 PM
Putting a Ferrite Rod at the Far-End of a Random Wire Antenna ? RHF Shortwave 22 November 15th 04 08:15 PM
The "TRICK" to TV 'type' Coax Cable [Shielded] SWL Loop Antennas {RHF} RHF Antenna 27 November 3rd 04 01:38 PM
The "TRICK" to TV 'type' Coax Cable [Shielded] SWL Loop Antennas {RHF} RHF Shortwave 23 November 3rd 04 01:38 PM
50 Ohms "Real Resistive" impedance a Misnomer? Dr. Slick Antenna 255 July 29th 03 11:24 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017