Real time proof of Poyntings vector
 

Good luck with the project anyway, it makes for an entertaining and
enlightening read.

Mike G0ULI

You find this entertaining? You must be into self flagellation and masochism
too. What part was enlightening?

W4ZCB

Real time proof of Poyntings vector
 

On 7 Jun, 07:59, "Mike Kaliski" wrote:
What you are proposing is a planar gaussian antenna which flattens the
cone
into more of a fan shape, displays a flat impedence over a wide
bandwidth
and requires around ten elements of different lengths mounted on a boom
support.
Incorrect. It is a cluster of elements in equilibrium where all
elements
are resonant as is the array in its entirety. I t all ha sbeen well
defined
in past postings on Gaussian antennas

I could be wrong, but I believe that you have reinvented the log
periodic
antenna.
Yes you are wrong

Art

Thank you for your courteous response. I thought I had to be missing
something. It was of course the fact that the cluster of elements and the
array were all in equilibrium and resonant in their entirety. That's the bit
that is obviously causing people problems and upsetting them although I must
confess I don't quite understand the advantages over existing designs. The
antenna is obviously directional and exhibits gain but apparently not at
levels that would render existing antennae obsolete.

Good luck with the project anyway, it makes for an entertaining and
enlightening read.

Mike G0ULI- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Real time proof of Poyntings vector
 

On 7 Jun, 07:59, "Mike Kaliski" wrote:
What you are proposing is a planar gaussian antenna which flattens the
cone
into more of a fan shape, displays a flat impedence over a wide
bandwidth
and requires around ten elements of different lengths mounted on a boom
support.
Incorrect. It is a cluster of elements in equilibrium where all
elements
are resonant as is the array in its entirety. I t all ha sbeen well
defined
in past postings on Gaussian antennas

I could be wrong, but I believe that you have reinvented the log
periodic
antenna.
Yes you are wrong

Art

Thank you for your courteous response. I thought I had to be missing
something. It was of course the fact that the cluster of elements and the
array were all in equilibrium and resonant in their entirety. That's the bit
that is obviously causing people problems and upsetting them
Yes, that is about it, you could also match that same definition
to Poyntings vector but even that comes under fire. There was also
a mathematical anylysis made by an individual contributor
connecting Gauss but that got hammered also. But lets face it they
are amateurs by definition.
although I must
confess I don't quite understand the advantages over existing designs. The
antenna is obviously directional and exhibits gain but apparently not at
levels that would render existing antennae obsolete.

Certainly not, it achieves things other than focussing for gain
which is primarily the intent of the yagi. If the yagi satisfies all
then there would not be a need for other types of antennas
or multi books on the subject. Amateurs concentrate on the word
gain to the exclusion of consideration of other attributes.
The antenna trade magazine feels that the biggest needed advancement
is to get drivers to handle impedances lower than 5 ohm. Weather
people
are striving for minimum cross polarisation. Wi fi is striving for
maximum uniform coverage. Gauss's and Green's functions are being
utilised
to have multi channel operation at the same time using what is termed
a Gaussian antenna so named becaus of iterations used before
transmission.
Thus many things are sought after in todays world besides the almighty
gain.
It is unfortunate that the amateur community refuses the introduction
of antennas based on Gaussian law as well as Poynting's vector but the
fact
is that as amatures they cannot be expected to understand the
underpinnings
of radiation or to visualise a cluster of elements that some would
consider
it as an individual mass. The very idea that a single point of energy
supply
can evoke the emmission of flux from multi radiators that are randomly
arranged
and in equilibrium without reflectors or directors is completely
beyond
their ken and thus want to see it as a bolloxed Yagi.
I see advancement as the provision of something new that may or may
not
provide a clue for major advantage even tho each clue may not
necessarily
on its own be outstanding. By adding the unit of time to both sides
of the
gaussian equation for statics I have provided a correllation to
Poyntings vector
and a antenna array that follows that hypothesis. Existing mathematics
and computor programs confirm this aproach but amateurs have been
seething with
anger at the idea of some thing new as you can see by the comments.
Fortunatly there are some scholars around outside the amateur
community
who have verified independently what I have produced and the days
have
gone over this side of the pond that used to flourish in past glory
days
of ham radio.


Good luck with the project anyway, it makes for an entertaining and
enlightening read.

Yes it has been entertaining for some who relish the idea of slander
and insulting behaviour which is what this newsgroup is famous for.
Basically that is what all things are about now on this side of the
pond
": You are either with us or against us" is now the mantra of the day.
Cheers and beers from an old East Ender
Art





Mike G0ULI- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Real time proof of Poyntings vector
 

Mike Kaliski wrote:
"Gausian statistics refer to the distribution of typically, power over a
given area or range. Generally more power is concentrated at the centre
of a range with power falling symmetrically either side of a central
high point."

Art replied:
"Correct, very nuch like a band pass filter."

In a band pass filter we are interested in frequency response. Mike was
speaking of beam forming. There is a difference between beam width and
bandwidth. I am still trying to decipher Art`s "Gausian antenna". It
would help me if Art didn`t muddle topics.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Real time proof of Poyntings vector
 

Art wrote:
"But let`s face it, they are amateurs by definition."

Kraus was an amateur, not to be disparaged!. W8JK.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Real time proof of Poyntings vector
 

On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 15:59:13 +0100, "Mike Kaliski"
wrote:

It was of course the fact that the cluster of elements and the
array were all in equilibrium and resonant in their entirety.

Hi Mike,

Anticipating that Arthur will use you as a authoritative reference,
what do you mean by equilibrium?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Real time proof of Poyntings vector
 

"Richard Harrison" wrote in message
...
Art wrote:
"But let`s face it, they are amateurs by definition."

Kraus was an amateur, not to be disparaged!. W8JK.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI


And Art is no Professional.
If Art had been a professional he would have made a comparison with his
antenna and a typical Yagi. That way he could demonstrate which is the
better. He would have posted design information, he would have met honest
questions with honest answers instead of telling his peers they are thick
headed and have no insight becuse they will not follow his lead like
Lemmings.

Jimmie

Real time proof of Poyntings vector
 

Thank you for your courteous response. I thought I had to be missing
something. It was of course the fact that the cluster of elements and
the
array were all in equilibrium and resonant in their entirety. That's the
bit
that is obviously causing people problems and upsetting them
Yes, that is about it, you could also match that same definition
to Poyntings vector but even that comes under fire. There was also
a mathematical anylysis made by an individual contributor
connecting Gauss but that got hammered also. But lets face it they
are amateurs by definition.
snip


Art

I now know what you are trying to achieve and why. I was initially thinking
purely in terms of amateur band HF frequencies rather than the higher end of
the spectrum, where this antenna makes sense. Obviously as frequencies
increase, the properties of electromagnetic waves change in the way they
interact with materials. I still doubt whether any new physical theories are
needed to explain what is happening and doubtless careful analysis in the
future will reveal how it all works. As you suggest, spread spectrum, multi
channel communications are becoming more and more essential in order to
efficiently utilise the limited spectrum available and antenna designs like
yours will help to minimise unnecessary interference to other users while
preserving a high quality link.

Harold

Arts' postings have prompted me to investigate some areas for myself with
which I was unfamiliar. While I don't subscribe to needing to find some new
physical theory to explain how these antennae work, there are some
interesting ideas being developed in the GHz frequency ranges. My previous
professional experience revolved around radar (sorry about the pun). I
haven't really been paying too much attention to the way in which wi-fi and
other high frequency signalling systems worked, even though they were in
similar frequency bands.

I have learned something new and see some humour in posts on this subject.

Hence entertaining and enlightening - not sadism or masochism.

Cheers

Mike G0ULI

Real time proof of Poyntings vector
 

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 15:59:13 +0100, "Mike Kaliski"
wrote:

It was of course the fact that the cluster of elements and the
array were all in equilibrium and resonant in their entirety.

Hi Mike,

Anticipating that Arthur will use you as a authoritative reference,
what do you mean by equilibrium?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard,

I am not certain that I have got it all completely straight in my head, but
I have taken it to mean that all the elements making up the array and the
array itself are designed to be resonant about a particular frequency. As
this type of antenna is intended for use with spread spectrum
communications, control over directivity is probably more of a consideration
than gain. At the multi GHz frequencies I believe these antennas will be
operating, they probably won't have any direct correlation to HF amateur
band techniques. The propogation properties of electromagnetic waves change
as frequency increases, so I believe that there is no hidden method behind
how these antennas might work, merely at best, an as yet unrecognised mode
of propogation.

Arts' postings have prompted me to do a little research into GHz frequency
techniques which is an area where I had virtually no knowledge apart from
installing commercial radar waveguide and making sure it was matched to the
scanner. I would hate to think I was an authoritative reference in this
field :-/

Cheers

Mike G0ULI

Real time proof of Poyntings vector
 

"Mike Kaliski" wrote in message
...
Thank you for your courteous response. I thought I had to be missing
something. It was of course the fact that the cluster of elements and
the
array were all in equilibrium and resonant in their entirety. That's
the
bit
that is obviously causing people problems and upsetting them
Yes, that is about it, you could also match that same definition
to Poyntings vector but even that comes under fire. There was also
a mathematical anylysis made by an individual contributor
connecting Gauss but that got hammered also. But lets face it they
are amateurs by definition.
snip


Art

I now know what you are trying to achieve and why. I was initially
thinking
purely in terms of amateur band HF frequencies rather than the higher end
of
the spectrum, where this antenna makes sense. Obviously as frequencies
increase, the properties of electromagnetic waves change in the way they
interact with materials. I still doubt whether any new physical theories
are
needed to explain what is happening and doubtless careful analysis in the
future will reveal how it all works. As you suggest, spread spectrum,
multi
channel communications are becoming more and more essential in order to
efficiently utilise the limited spectrum available and antenna designs
like
yours will help to minimise unnecessary interference to other users while
preserving a high quality link.

Harold

Arts' postings have prompted me to investigate some areas for myself with
which I was unfamiliar. While I don't subscribe to needing to find some
new
physical theory to explain how these antennae work, there are some
interesting ideas being developed in the GHz frequency ranges. My previous
professional experience revolved around radar (sorry about the pun). I
haven't really been paying too much attention to the way in which wi-fi
and
other high frequency signalling systems worked, even though they were in
similar frequency bands.

I have learned something new and see some humour in posts on this subject.

Hence entertaining and enlightening - not sadism or masochism.

Cheers

Mike G0ULI





I have learned quite a bit from those who have rreplied to Art.

Jimmie