![]() |
Phase Shift through a 75m Texas Bugcatcher Coil
Richard Harrison wrote:
Repetition of "along the helical conductor" implies to me, thal like Terman, Kraus says the signal follows the actual wire, not sprinting across the coil as if it were a straight rod. Yes, I believe you are right about that. -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com |
Phase Shift through a 75m Texas Bugcatcher Coil
Gene Fuller wrote:
"Waves don`t cause radiation." Waves induce current into an antenna. Any mismatched antenna reradiates most of the energy induced into it. A perfectly matched antnna only reradiates 50% of the energy it receives. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI |
Phase Shift through a 75m Texas Bugcatcher Coil
Gene Fuller wrote:
I also forgot that all standing waves are identical, whether in free space or on a wire. The same laws of physics apply to both. There are not, as you are trying to imply, a separate set of laws for EM waves on a wire and EM waves in free space. Reversing the question you posed above, what do you gain by including the photonic nature of EM waves? It keeps some people from sweeping the photonic nature of EM waves under the old standing wave rug. I won't mention any names. -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com |
Phase Shift through a 75m Texas Bugcatcher Coil
On 10 May, 13:38, (Richard Harrison) wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote: "Waves don`t cause radiation." Waves induce current into an antenna. Any mismatched antenna reradiates most of the energy induced into it. A perfectly matched antnna only reradiates 50% of the energy it receives. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Richard, Some time ago I stated that a yagi antenna operated under a mathematical binomial function. This was termed as junk science in this group which raises the question again as where does the energy that is not reradiated go ? " A perfectly matched antenna only reradiates 50 % of the energy that it receives" This also suggests that an array without parasitics required for reradiation is a lot more efficient than an antenna with parasitics. Seems like this group is going around in circles unless this 50% finds a way to radiate in some alternative way ! Is the 'perfectly matched' statement of any importance that demands it's inclusion with respect to re-radiation efficiency of an antenna? Regards Art |
Phase Shift through a 75m Texas Bugcatcher Coil
Richard Harrison wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote: "Waves don`t cause radiation." Waves induce current into an antenna. Any mismatched antenna reradiates most of the energy induced into it. A perfectly matched antnna only reradiates 50% of the energy it receives. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Richard, That is a well-known factoid. Do you think it differs from something I said? You note that current is involved in the reradiation. 73, Gene W4SZ |
Phase Shift through a 75m Texas Bugcatcher Coil
Richard Harrison wrote: Repetition of "along the helical conductor" implies to me, thal like Terman, Kraus says the signal follows the actual wire, not sprinting across the coil as if it were a straight rod. It seems to me there is more than just one way to use a wire to convey a signal. In fact it can be difficult to prevent a wire from using more than just one, especially when there are other wires nearby. 73, Jim AC6XG |
Phase Shift through a 75m Texas Bugcatcher Coil
Gene Fuller wrote:
Richard Harrison wrote: Gene Fuller wrote: "Waves don`t cause radiation." Waves induce current into an antenna. Any mismatched antenna reradiates most of the energy induced into it. A perfectly matched antnna only reradiates 50% of the energy it receives. That is a well-known factoid. Do you think it differs from something I said? You note that current is involved in the reradiation. Hint: If waves cause currents that in turn, cause re-radiation, then Richard has proved your, "waves don't cause radiation", assertion to be false. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Phase Shift through a 75m Texas Bugcatcher Coil
Jim Kelley wrote:
It seems to me there is more than just one way to use a wire to convey a signal. In fact it can be difficult to prevent a wire from using more than just one, especially when there are other wires nearby. Yep, I'm afraid that Kraus was wrong to a certain degree. Of course, he didn't have NEC in 1950. If we double Kraus' calculated relative phase velocity for loading coils, we will be closer to the results predicted by EZNEC. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Phase Shift through a 75m Texas Bugcatcher Coil
Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote: I also forgot that all standing waves are identical, whether in free space or on a wire. The same laws of physics apply to both. There are not, as you are trying to imply, a separate set of laws for EM waves on a wire and EM waves in free space. Reversing the question you posed above, what do you gain by including the photonic nature of EM waves? It keeps some people from sweeping the photonic nature of EM waves under the old standing wave rug. I won't mention any names. -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com What rug? What are you talking about? How does the (unnecessary) use of photons change anything? 73, Gene W4SZ |
Phase Shift through a 75m Texas Bugcatcher Coil
Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote: Richard Harrison wrote: Gene Fuller wrote: "Waves don`t cause radiation." Waves induce current into an antenna. Any mismatched antenna reradiates most of the energy induced into it. A perfectly matched antnna only reradiates 50% of the energy it receives. That is a well-known factoid. Do you think it differs from something I said? You note that current is involved in the reradiation. Hint: If waves cause currents that in turn, cause re-radiation, then Richard has proved your, "waves don't cause radiation", assertion to be false. Cecil, Back to playing the moron role? If you no longer want to discuss anything in technical terms, then I will go away again for a while. Is there a lot of current in your free space world? 73, Gene W4SZ |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:06 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com