Cecil Moore wrote:

SNIP

Shirley, you understand a conditional statement, Richard.

SNIP

Cecil, it's time for bed!! How did Shirley get into this discussion?? :-)

I hope you mean 'surely'??

Dave Shrader wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Shirley, you understand a conditional statement, Richard.

Cecil, it's time for bed!! How did Shirley get into this discussion?? :-)

From "Airplane": "Surely your jest!" - "No, I am not joking, and don't
call me Shirley!" - line by Leslie Neilson (sp?).
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Tdonaly wrote:
Cecil says there's a taper but he doesn't
attempt to say how much.

It is what it is, Tom, and can be measured.

Yuri thinks it's a lot. Cecil seems to agree
with him, but neither fellow has been willing to back his theory with a
$$$$ NEW $$$ [{### IMPROVED ###}] mobile antenna.

Your observation is accurate but irrelevant. I'm not interested in an
improved antenna since I already improved it many years ago and equaled
the top performers in the shootout with an essentially costless junk box
antenna. My main thrust here at the moment is to set the technical record
straight and BBQ one of ham radio's sacred cows represented by W8JI's
following assertion:

"If you look at HOW an inductor works, the current flowing in one terminal
ALWAYS equals the current flowing out the other terminal."

So do you agree with Tom or with me since Tom's own measurements proved
him wrong?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Tdonaly wrote:
Cecil says there's a taper but he doesn't
Cecil wrote,
attempt to say how much.

It is what it is, Tom, and can be measured.

Yuri thinks it's a lot. Cecil seems to agree
with him, but neither fellow has been willing to back his theory with a
$$$$ NEW $$$ [{### IMPROVED ###}] mobile antenna.

Your observation is accurate but irrelevant. I'm not interested in an
improved antenna since I already improved it many years ago and equaled
the top performers in the shootout with an essentially costless junk box
antenna. My main thrust here at the moment is to set the technical record
straight and BBQ one of ham radio's sacred cows represented by W8JI's
following assertion:

"If you look at HOW an inductor works, the current flowing in one
terminal
ALWAYS equals the current flowing out the other terminal."

So do you agree with Tom or with me since Tom's own measurements proved
him wrong?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Tom would be right if he were only talking in network-theoretical terms.
Since he makes
his coils for maximum Q, his coils may be small enough for him to make that
assertion. I don't know. I've never seen a Tom Rauch coil.
Since you're not too slick in the electromagnetics department, yourself, you
shouldn't
be throwing stones at Tom. When, and if, you can ever demonstrate a knowledge
of
even the most basic ideas of electromagnetic theory, then maybe you and I can
find
something to agree on.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

"Someone probably rejected relativity and said, 'How much
effect does the orbit of Mercury have on the people of earth?' "
_______________

The word "effect," (result, consequence) is a noun. "Affect" is a verb (to
act upon, to change or to cause a change), and, probably the appropriate
word for the context of your post.

Perhaps the use of correct English would reduce reader confusion?

"Best regards"

RF

Richard Fry wrote:

"Someone probably rejected relativity and said, 'How much
effect does the orbit of Mercury have on the people of earth?' "

The word "effect," (result, consequence) is a noun. "Affect" is a verb (to
act upon, to change or to cause a change), and, probably the appropriate
word for the context of your post.

Nope, I said exactly what I intended to say. Before relativity, the prediction
for the orbit of Mercury contained an error. How much effect did that error
have on the people of earth?

Perhaps the use of correct English would reduce reader confusion?

Perhaps you had better review your rules of English. "Effect" was used
properly as a noun.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

On Sun, 8 Feb 2004 17:04:45 -0600, "Richard Fry"
wrote:

"Someone probably rejected relativity and said, 'How much
effect does the orbit of Mercury have on the people of earth?' "
_______________

The word "effect," (result, consequence) is a noun. "Affect" is a verb (to
act upon, to change or to cause a change), and, probably the appropriate
word for the context of your post.

Perhaps the use of correct English would reduce reader confusion?

"Best regards"

RF

Hello RF,

From the Oxford English Dictionary
effect v. 1589
1. to bring about, to accomplish
...
4. confused with Affect

effect sb. 1812
1c. the amount of work done in a given time.

affect sb. 1626
1. a mental disposition

affect v. 1794
1. to aim at, seek

Correct English is, and has always been, a matter of usage within
context. Verbs can serve as Nouns and Nouns as Verbs. Further, even
clauses and phrases may serve as Nouns or Verbs. The English language
is rich with example. Languages such as French and Italian have
historically had the affect to effect a fixed and static meaning to
every word and thus affect rules of "correctness." This effect has
lead to those languages becoming museum pieces. The common usage of
"affect" generally implies a faddish mannerism (which is frequently
observed in this forum e.g. a lot posting is merely affectation).

However, as to the issue of the sentence:
"How much effect does the orbit of Mercury have
on the people of earth?"

"the orbit of Mercury" is the Subject with the Predicate "does have"
and the Compliment of "on the people of earth"

"How much effect" is an adverbial phrase modifying the Predicate
through describing degree using the noun "effect" modified by the
adjective "much."

Hence through usage, syntax, and definition, "effect" is a noun.

To test this usage, you can re-arrange the sequence to find:
"The orbit of Mercury does have how much effect on the people of
earth?" without changing the sense of the question. It is rather
stilted and perhaps "The orbit of Mercury has how much effect on the
people of earth?" flows better, but this, again, has no impact on the
noun usage of "effect."

The key to the analysis is found in the adverb "how" with the
proximity of the adjective "much" and "effect" a noun perfectly
offering the classic characteristic of degree.

In other words, the sentence is both grammatically correct and
conforms to your expectation. A better criticism would be that it is
gratuitous.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 17:23:10 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:
How much effect did that error have on the people of earth?
About as much as current taper in a coil.

Richard Clark wrote:
In other words, the sentence is both grammatically correct and
conforms to your expectation. A better criticism would be that it is
gratuitous.

In other words, when you can't find anything wrong with what is
being said, reply with an ad hominem statement. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

About as much as current taper in a coil.

Uh, Huh, Huh