On 14 Jan 2004 03:13:25 GMT, oUsama (Yuri Blanarovich)
wrote:

Now we drifted to ferrites, we guessed Roy's difference and he measured it,
THERE WAS A DIFFERENCE 5% at the base. Is difference not a difference?

Sheesh,

For RF work you can get a difference of that much measuring the same
thing twice! (But only if you are extremely careful.)

What does that prove except you are having either a rough time, or
delusions of accuracy - take your pick as it seems both side of this
argument are looking through the bottom of the same glass.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On 14 Jan 2004 03:13:25 GMT, oUsama (Yuri Blanarovich)
wrote:

How come that
straight piece of wire (as antenna) can exhibit different current along its
length (where is Kirchoff)

Sheesh²,

Kirchhoff is explicitly violated by employing his laws at wavelength
scales. Kirchhoff NEVER said anything about current into/out-of a
device (which by necessity is of some obvious dimension). Rather, his
current law speaks of a POINT (which is dimensionless). In failing to
have come to terms with this simple issue, the entire course of, what,
600 postings yields little more than white noise.

If you want to talk Kirchhoff and nets, get your definitions right.
It is his voltage law that describes in terms of devices (across a
resistor, between two points, what have you).

Pretense to scholastic work begins with observing the first principles
of those you quote.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:
What does that prove except you are having either a rough time, or
delusions of accuracy - take your pick as it seems both side of this
argument are looking through the bottom of the same glass.

When measuring only current magnitude, to detect a 5 degree phase
shift through a base loading coil requires differentiation between
1 amp of RF on one end and 0.996 amps of RF on the other end. Are
you saying that the measured 1 amp at both ends might be suspect? :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Bill:

[snip]
No, at my level of understanding they both sound compelling. It's the
human interaction I find interesting. There's something about highly
educated people getting down in the mud and rasslin' with each other...

:-)

--
Bill, W6WRT
[snip]

What are you thinkin man!

Who wants to watch to old codgers like Roy and Cec rasslin
in the mud?

We all wanna see Britney and Madonna doing that, not Roy and Cec!

--
Peter K1PO
Indialantic By-the-Sea, FL

Peter O. Brackett wrote:
We all wanna see Britney and Madonna doing that, not Roy and Cec!

Cec agrees. Probably, so does Roy. Where can I buy tickets?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Richard Clark wrote in message . ..
On 14 Jan 2004 03:13:25 GMT, oUsama (Yuri Blanarovich)
wrote:

How come that
straight piece of wire (as antenna) can exhibit different current along its
length (where is Kirchoff)

Sheesh²,

Kirchhoff is explicitly violated by employing his laws at wavelength
scales. Kirchhoff NEVER said anything about current into/out-of a
device (which by necessity is of some obvious dimension). Rather, his
current law speaks of a POINT (which is dimensionless). In failing to
have come to terms with this simple issue, the entire course of, what,
600 postings yields little more than white noise.

If you want to talk Kirchhoff and nets, get your definitions right.
It is his voltage law that describes in terms of devices (across a
resistor, between two points, what have you).


73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC


Check out this gentlemen:

http://www.scientia.org/cadonline/Ph.../kirchoffq.ASP

Yeah, it's very simple, isn't it? But if you consider that
dQ/dt=I AT A SPECIFIC POINT, then it's all about conserving Coulombs,
it seems to me.

Kirchoff's current law applies when you have a junction between
multiple current-carrying paths, and it applies more to a DC current
situation.

The law isn't violated when you consider the AC current running
through
a capacitor, otherwise you would demand that there be a current
running through the dielectric, which there is clearly not (the
coulombs never travel across it). Likewise, an antenna can store
coulombs, more at the ends of the radials, and can therefore have a
different AC current distribution at the different
points on the antenna.

So Kirchoff's law stands the test of conserving coulombs, but is
easier
to understand in a DC situation.


Slick