art wrote:
On 13 Mar, 08:02, Gene Fuller wrote:


Gene, I was just reading the archives of 2004 where you fought with
everybody in ham radio,QEX as well as on this newsgroup as to how
everybody was inerpretating Maxwells laws plus used a lot of
accusatory words against Walt and many others. You couldn't push any
of them away then so what makes you think that all are going to line
up behind you to get rid of me? Now you are lining up with the amateur
group and the West Coast without resolving your past disagrements with
every body about your disagreements with Maxwell resolved . Are you
going to start a third front about what Maxwell really meant? NASA has
been in error before, remember the "O"
ring saga . They then dug a hole for themselves thinking that the
deeper they dug the closer they were to escaping, maybe you are of the
same thinking.Think about all those clever guys that were part of MIT
and you are going to take them on with respect to Maxwell's teachings
or at least what you thinl he meant? I'll back MIT anyday against you
and others with respect to electrical laws.He gave the mathematical
analysis which all have been craving for and he gets accused of
spreading mis information. What is it that this group and the West
coast NASA want with respect to Gaussian arrays, remove him from all
the text books and replace him by Stokes?

Art


Art,

You need to learn to read more carefully. My one and only argument with
Walt Maxwell was about the fuss between him and Steve Best. My position
then, and still today, was that both of these experts were correct in
their technical analysis.

Walt chose a novel approach involving "virtual short circuits", and
Steve chose a more traditional wave model. The physical, measurable
results were identical, and there would have been no way that anyone
could test the difference in the two analyses by any sort of measurement.

I believe there were some harsh words in addition to the technical
analysis, but I was not part of that. There was also a huge amount of
chatter along the lines of 2 + 2 is not equal to 7, from our favorite
nit-picker.


I have no idea why you have lumped me into something to do with MIT. I
have been there a few times over the years, but I don't think that would
have any connection to RRAA.



73,
Gene
W4SZ