Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Richard,
As often happens, I don't think we're fully communicating. Richard Clark wrote: I presume by your response that it affirms my description. Moving on to your comments, it stands to reason that the reduction of the argument proves you cannot build an antenna with directivity within a very specific constraint - the null space. As there is zero dimension on the axis that connects the two sources, then no directivity can be had from a zero length boom as one example. Other examples would demand some dimension other than zero along this axis is where I see the counter-argument developing. In the two antenna example, the null space is a plane. Since the plane is infinite in extent, you can create in that plane an antenna with a boom of any length, and therefore with arbitrarily high directivity. However, if you restrict that antenna to lie entirely in the null plane, that directivity won't be in a direction such that the antenna will favor one radiator over the other. Therefore it can't tell if the null plane is simply an area in space with no field, or whether it's the result of two superposing fields. And I believe this is true for any antenna, of any size, orientation, or design that you can construct which lies completely in that plane. This then suggests that there is something special about null space that is observed no where else. That is specifically true, but not generally. What is implied by null is zero, and in a perfect world we can say they are equivalent. Even a dipole inhabiting that null space would bear it out, whereas an antenna with greater directivity along that axis would not. But I'm claiming you can't get directivity such that you can favor one radiator over the other, by any antenna lying entirely in the null space. In other words, any antenna you build in that null space will detect zero field. The special thing about null space is simply that it's a limit, and it makes a good vehicle for illustration because we can more easily distinguish between nothing and something than between two different levels. However, if we open up the meaning of null to mean a point, or region, within which we find a minimum due to the combination of all wave contributions, then I would say a directive antenna is back in the game, and that it exhibits Owens proposition (if I understand it - but I still need to see Owen's elaboration). I'll extend my hypothesis to include all such regions. Create a null space or region of any size or shape by superposing any number of waves. I claim that any antenna, regardless of size or design, lying entirely in that space or region will detect zero signal. In fact, no detector of any type which you can devise, lying entirely within that null space or region, will be able to detect anything or otherwise tell the difference between the superposition and a simple region of zero field. It will take only a single contrary example to prove me wrong. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 12:46:50 -0700, Roy Lewallen
wrote: But I'm claiming you can't get directivity such that you can favor one radiator over the other, by any antenna lying entirely in the null space. In other words, any antenna you build in that null space will detect zero field. Hi Roy, No dispute there either. The special thing about null space is simply that it's a limit, and it makes a good vehicle for illustration because we can more easily distinguish between nothing and something than between two different levels. That is distinctive as being binary, certainly; but I am sure there is something between two different levels that are distinguishable to the same degree. The difference between 0 and 1 is no greater than between 1 and 2. However, if we open up the meaning of null to mean a point, or region, within which we find a minimum due to the combination of all wave contributions, then I would say a directive antenna is back in the game, and that it exhibits Owens proposition (if I understand it - but I still need to see Owen's elaboration). I'll extend my hypothesis to include all such regions. Create a null space or region of any size or shape by superposing any number of waves. But this says nothing of the quality of "null" as I extended it above which could be supported by a directional antenna. As I am still unsure of the nature of Owen's proposition, I will leave the quality of "null" for Owen to discuss or discard. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
freedom and independence | Homebrew | |||
Independence from the King and from God | Shortwave | |||
Happy Independence Day to All! | CB | |||
Traveling Waves, Power Waves,..., Any Waves,... | Antenna | |||
Happy Independence Day | Policy |