On 24 Feb, 11:00, "Jimmie D" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

ups.com...





On 23 Feb, 20:05, Gene Fuller wrote:
art wrote:
On 23 Feb, 15:07, Gene Fuller wrote:

To keep it simple, Gauss' Law is precisely one of the four standard
Maxwell Equations. Gauss' Law has been part of electromagnetics and
antenna theory for eons.

As for electromechanics, who knows?

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Gene, forgive me if I am incorrect but I am going to assume you have
an engineering degree and are fully conversant with the work of the
masters. I f I am not correct then we can stop at this point Otherwise
I fully recommend that you check out the web foe a book on fields and
waves or something like that by a professor at Rutgers University. In
chapter 21 he delves very deeply into an array consisting of four
elements all of which are resonant.
Ofcourse he doesn't mention anything of mine but you will notice that
the array he chose is actually what I refer to as a Gaussian array
since it meets all the requirements that I have expoused on my page.
He doesn't use computor programs but basic mathematics to provide all
the desirables plus a radiation field. This array is really a
derivitation of one designed some 50 years ago and is the only one I
know that exists in literature. If you study this chapter and relate
it to what I am expousing then possible you will see things with fresh
eyes. But again if you are not fully educated in this field save your
self from the bother. I personaly have a program that if you isert any
fugure and tell it to obtain maximim gain I assure you it will not
produce a yagi but a gaussian array........ and I am thrilled with
that.
Nuff said
Art

Art,

You seem to have misunderstood my point.

AAALLLLLL antennas, regardless of structure, material, efficiency,
resonance, location, or phase of the moon are Gaussian. Gauss' Law is an
integral part of classical electromagnetics. Nothing can escape.

No, I do not have an engineering degree, but I do have several degrees
in physics. Unfortunately, I am significantly dumber than a rock, so I
have no more to offer in this thread.

73,
Gene
W4SZ- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Watch out Gene, I stated that Statics was a subset of electromagnetics
and I caught hell from everybody. Seems like things are infectional
around here.The book that I proferred would really be to much for a
lot of people no matter how much they over estimate their abilities
especially when they try to debate reasons why the writer is incorrect!
When I asked for academic help regarding research I got an Email from
a guy at the space antenna agency who referred me to chapter 1 and 21.
I never dreamt that I would find an actual array with all elements
resonant being discussed

Art

STATICS, I assume you man electrostatics is not a subset of magnetism but in
a lot a lot of ways an analogy can bee drawn between the two. For example
the attractive force betwen to charged particles is inversely proportional
to the square of the distance, this is also true for magnetic particles but
they really have nothing to do with each other.

Whoooa kind sir where is that written? Thats like saying kinetic
energy is not related to potential energy. Where on earth did that
saying come from? I'll be on the net for a while if you want to debate
that. I cleared all the snow off my driveway and the following day i
went down on ice.Now my leg is wrapped up straight and I am on
crutches. Make the rest of my day happy
Art












.. Art sometimes I think you
are confusing what Gauss wrote about statistics with statics. He did a lot
more work with mathmatics including statistics than he ever did with
magnatism. Your references to Gaussian field further strengthens my belief
since Gausian field refers to a statistical distribution also known as a
Guassian distibution, aka normal distribution.

Jimmie- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -