Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 16 Mar, 16:25, "Richard Fry" wrote:
"art" quoting RF: All you need to do then is to prove it, and get the FCC to accept it. RF What about the use of complex circuitry methods od design does that present any advantage? We now can insert lumped constants ? ___________ Note the responsible party in this, which I re-post below with emphasis: "All __YOU__ need to do then is to prove it,..." If YOU, Art Unwin, want to be recogniz(s)ed for introducing a new application or concept about "Irregular Gaussian Radiation Fields," shouldn't that first be based upon your own theoretical and experimental research and proofs, which after your publication of same, are capable of being proven true by other scientific investigators? If both of those situations exist, then maybe you will have a chance for the commercial and governmental acceptance/success of your concepts, and your personal recognition for the same. But until then, you may wish to keep such revelations closer to your vest. With respect to your claimed English background, I wish you the best, Sir, and remain your humble and obedient servant etc, etc, RF Thanks for the warning but the patent application is well along on it's progress. Even if it wasn't the denial of it's possibility is so strong I could wait another year before I processed it and I will still be first in line. Frankly the Dr from MIT convinced most of the group on the first part as being valid but they still have to be convinced of the second part so time is very much on my side. When the PTO office prints it industry will then take over and the people on this newsgroup will be after my autograph instead of the blithering idiot type comments. Anyway, what do you think about using complex circuitry for the antenna such that one has fairly constant gain across the band width and then steep drop off's, swr curve is close to being the mirror image because of zero parasitics which then gives advantages by reduction of compromising choices of desirables. I would imagine that true experts would use that for multi array design but that aproach is beyond me.Either way since the computor programs migrate to the Gaussian design over a Yagi selection somebody out there will pick it up and go running with because of advantages I have not got round to .Lets face it since more gain can be obtained using only half the boom length people with small gardens will jump upon it. I would love to more Britts on the band with big signals. Art Art |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Gaussian law and time varying fields | Antenna | |||
electric & magnetic fields ?? | Antenna | |||
Electric and Magnetic fields | Antenna | |||
On address fields in AX.25 packets | Digital | |||
On address fields in AX.25 packets | Digital |