20 gaussian questions for art
 

"art" wrote in message
ps.com...
On 28 Jun, 12:42, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

oups.com...





On 27 Jun, 15:28, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

groups.com...

On 27 Jun, 14:24, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

roups.com...

On 27 Jun, 14:02, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

roups.com...

On 26 Jun, 16:36, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

groups.com...

On 26 Jun, 16:09, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

groups.com...

On 26 Jun, 15:17, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

groups.com...

On 26 Jun, 14:21, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

groups.com...

On 25 Jun, 13:10, "Dave" wrote:
Ok, lets try it this way... step by step, inch
by
inch,
we
may
yet
figure
out what this antenna is.

First question:
What is the least number of wires needed to build
a
gaussian
antenna?

Not necessary Dave. Richard is very familiar with
the
subject
at
hand
as well as its underpinnings that can be
understood
by
EEs
and is providing a reference that will make all
things
clear.
You asked for it and your wish is going to be
granted
in
a
clear
and precise manner that you and the group have
requested.
You should now be able to build it yourself with
out
mumbo
jumbo
from me to confuse you.
No need for me anymore, you now have an expert at
your
call.
Don't forget Poyntings input.
Art

whats a 'Richard'??

I want to hear it straight from the source. I have
asked
over
and
over
for
you to define the terms and you can't put it into
words
this
poor
engineer
can understand, so i thought we would try to build
an
example
from
the
bottom up. but if you can't help with that then
maybe
the
whole
thing
is
just out of my reach and i should go back to good
old
yagis
and
phased
arrays.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sounds reasonable

if it sounds so reasonable, how many wires does it
take?-
Hide
quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

As many as you want and have fun.
The subject is dead. Let it go
Join the boiling water saga that
is where the action is
Art

no, this is my subject so i'll say when it's dead... i
don't
want
to
know
how many i can use, i want to know the minimum number
necessary.-
Hide
quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

One

ok, thats a start.

assuming i want to operate on 14195khz, how long should the
wire
be?-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Whatever wire you have throw it away and get a longer one

ok, random length... can do. now how do i connect it to a piece
of
coax?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

O.K. For the last time I will go along until such time
it is obvious you have other intentions.So I start again.

Make a dipole of random shapes and heights that is resonant
at your design frequency. Note the radiator can be any length
as long as it is resonant. For the sake of this discussion
or interrogation let us use a plain half wave dipole.
The feed coax feeds the dipole at it's center in the normal way.
Art KB9MZ......XG

ok, so its a plain half wave dipole, fed with normal coax in the
normal
way.
so what makes it 'gaussian'?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Because it's resonant at the desired frequency. This is the
basic form of a Gaussian antenna which is also the starting
point of a Yagi antenna if viewed as a single radiator
Art

so 'gaussian' == 'resonant'
why didn't you say so in the first place?
so a properly tuned yagi-uda array is a 'gaussian' antenna?- Hide
quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

First David before I go on others may jump in
and take the thread away from you. If that occurres
we can talk via E mail so that you are not penalised
They can use another thread in parallel which
I will respond to. This thread will remain a
civil and academic interrogation as you have requested.
.........
No, I would not stretch things that far based on
just one element or one piece of a jigsaw puzzle
A Yagi array is based on an array of elements
not just one. You wanted to procede in small steps
as provided by you, specific and to the point.
For starters a Yagi array is planar and a Gaussian
array antenna can be and usually , from my
research, is otherwise. Note the Gaussian element
is of random shape and height but always resonant
and not necessarily tied to a 1/2 wl.
Art

no, the interrogation isn't over... it was just my bedtime.

ok, so ignore the yagi for now. you classify a resonant random length
wire
as a gaussian element. is there any other essential characteristic
besides
resonance? How does 'equilibrium' fit into the description?- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

First of all we are talking about arrays and not just a
single element . Now one must consider where to put the
next element. If we are space concious it would seem that
putting both elements close to each other but not as close
as the wire dia compared to the spacing. This element has the
same confines as the first element so one must attain
resonance of both elements at the same time while in
the proximetry of each other which allows for a descision
loater as to which element/s is going to be driven.
Ofcourse you will notice that major differences occurs
to the norm because of the close proximetry of the elements.
Since I suggested that we use 1/2 wave elements it would
also be advisable at this time all elements straight
but at different heights and angles to each other
so that multishaped elements,which can be used, do not
complicate the theme of what I am describing.

( The following side note goes beyond what the question
is but I am sure it will help the further you travel down the road.)

What we are now simulating is a Gaussian field with
its normal pill box. Normally one only sees static
particles in equilibrium but I have taken the liberty
of adding the array elements upon which the static
particles are resting upon and inside the arbitary border.


whoa! too fast! lets talk about the minimum antenna, the 1/2 wave (or
there abouts) resonant element. You said that was all i needed to make a
gaussian antenna. So it doesn't have to be a classic dipole or any other
specific shape, as long as it is resonant. But is resonance alone enough to
classify it as a gaussian antenna?

20 gaussian questions for art
 

On 28 Jun, 13:23, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

ps.com...

On 28 Jun, 12:42, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

groups.com...

On 27 Jun, 15:28, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

groups.com...

On 27 Jun, 14:24, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

roups.com...

On 27 Jun, 14:02, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

roups.com...

On 26 Jun, 16:36, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

groups.com...

On 26 Jun, 16:09, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

groups.com...

On 26 Jun, 15:17, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

groups.com...

On 26 Jun, 14:21, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

groups.com...

On 25 Jun, 13:10, "Dave" wrote:
Ok, lets try it this way... step by step, inch
by
inch,
we
may
yet
figure
out what this antenna is.

First question:
What is the least number of wires needed to build
a
gaussian
antenna?

Not necessary Dave. Richard is very familiar with
the
subject
at
hand
as well as its underpinnings that can be
understood
by
EEs
and is providing a reference that will make all
things
clear.
You asked for it and your wish is going to be
granted
in
a
clear
and precise manner that you and the group have
requested.
You should now be able to build it yourself with
out
mumbo
jumbo
from me to confuse you.
No need for me anymore, you now have an expert at
your
call.
Don't forget Poyntings input.
Art

whats a 'Richard'??

I want to hear it straight from the source. I have
asked
over
and
over
for
you to define the terms and you can't put it into
words
this
poor
engineer
can understand, so i thought we would try to build
an
example
from
the
bottom up. but if you can't help with that then
maybe
the
whole
thing
is
just out of my reach and i should go back to good
old
yagis
and
phased
arrays.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sounds reasonable

if it sounds so reasonable, how many wires does it
take?-
Hide
quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

As many as you want and have fun.
The subject is dead. Let it go
Join the boiling water saga that
is where the action is
Art

no, this is my subject so i'll say when it's dead... i
don't
want
to
know
how many i can use, i want to know the minimum number
necessary.-
Hide
quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

One

ok, thats a start.

assuming i want to operate on 14195khz, how long should the
wire
be?-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Whatever wire you have throw it away and get a longer one

ok, random length... can do. now how do i connect it to a piece
of
coax?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

O.K. For the last time I will go along until such time
it is obvious you have other intentions.So I start again.

Make a dipole of random shapes and heights that is resonant
at your design frequency. Note the radiator can be any length
as long as it is resonant. For the sake of this discussion
or interrogation let us use a plain half wave dipole.
The feed coax feeds the dipole at it's center in the normal way.
Art KB9MZ......XG

ok, so its a plain half wave dipole, fed with normal coax in the
normal
way.
so what makes it 'gaussian'?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Because it's resonant at the desired frequency. This is the
basic form of a Gaussian antenna which is also the starting
point of a Yagi antenna if viewed as a single radiator
Art

so 'gaussian' == 'resonant'
why didn't you say so in the first place?
so a properly tuned yagi-uda array is a 'gaussian' antenna?- Hide
quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

First David before I go on others may jump in
and take the thread away from you. If that occurres
we can talk via E mail so that you are not penalised
They can use another thread in parallel which
I will respond to. This thread will remain a
civil and academic interrogation as you have requested.
.........
No, I would not stretch things that far based on
just one element or one piece of a jigsaw puzzle
A Yagi array is based on an array of elements
not just one. You wanted to procede in small steps
as provided by you, specific and to the point.
For starters a Yagi array is planar and a Gaussian
array antenna can be and usually , from my
research, is otherwise. Note the Gaussian element
is of random shape and height but always resonant
and not necessarily tied to a 1/2 wl.
Art

no, the interrogation isn't over... it was just my bedtime.

ok, so ignore the yagi for now. you classify a resonant random length
wire
as a gaussian element. is there any other essential characteristic
besides
resonance? How does 'equilibrium' fit into the description?- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

First of all we are talking about arrays and not just a
single element . Now one must consider where to put the
next element. If we are space concious it would seem that
putting both elements close to each other but not as close
as the wire dia compared to the spacing. This element has the
same confines as the first element so one must attain
resonance of both elements at the same time while in
the proximetry of each other which allows for a descision
loater as to which element/s is going to be driven.
Ofcourse you will notice that major differences occurs
to the norm because of the close proximetry of the elements.
Since I suggested that we use 1/2 wave elements it would
also be advisable at this time all elements straight
but at different heights and angles to each other
so that multishaped elements,which can be used, do not
complicate the theme of what I am describing.

( The following side note goes beyond what the question
is but I am sure it will help the further you travel down the road.)

What we are now simulating is a Gaussian field with
its normal pill box. Normally one only sees static
particles in equilibrium but I have taken the liberty
of adding the array elements upon which the static
particles are resting upon and inside the arbitary border.

whoa! too fast! lets talk about the minimum antenna, the 1/2 wave (or
there abouts) resonant element. You said that was all i needed to make a
gaussian antenna. So it doesn't have to be a classic dipole or any other
specific shape, as long as it is resonant. But is resonance alone enough to
classify it as a gaussian antenna?

Yes, if it is in place where it is determined to be
resonant because that takes consideration of it's surroundings.
If one takes the surroundings into account one is taking
into account equilibrium
I say this because this interrogation could then
decide to move it and still call it a Gaussian antenna
and say they have a gottcha!
Please excuse me if I am a bit wary of how the questions
are placed and for what reasons. But I don't want
to be part of a word game where things can be misconstrued.
Civility must be kept without being underhand if your
intent is to be pure.
Art KB9MZ....XG

20 gaussian questions for art
 

"Yuri Blanarovich" wrote in message
...
After poring myself mango margarita and energizing my dead brain cells, I
am cocluding that:

We see all kinds of dormant "geniouses" coming up with antenna designs
that defy the laws of physics and 100 some years of antenna developments.
Claims to various miraculous new principles and patent applications aimed
at those who have no clues about antennas, but are a potential suckers for
commercialization.

We know how the dipole or vertical work, their designs and factors
affecting reduced size were beaten to death over 100 years and basic
principles are known regardles if someone claims to have purple electrons
skirting the laws of physics. Freaken fractals outdoing the full size
radiators, EH splitting the atom and E - H fields, UofRI storing the
energy in a coil, yadayadayada etc.

Art's mumbo-jumbo troll and superiority of XG mechanical engineer over
dumb amateurs is another pathetic example of trying to mirror his "patent"
immortalizing his "invention" that director is a reflector and vice versa.
Poor reflection on patent office and the "inventor". Yet another try with
"Goosian soup", equilibrium and who knws what.

I have been foolling around with radio and searching and designing killer
antennas for some 50 years. In the category of horizontal beam antennas I
designed my Razor Beams, which I believe produce the highest gain per
booml ength (or number of elements) and decent pattern and bandwidth. They
were tested in the numerous contest and nailed bunch of world records
demonstrating their performance over other designs. If Art's Goose can
beat that, I will write a check for $1000 to him and apologize for
doubting his superiority. Judging by his posts on other subjects, I doubt
that I would ever need to do that.
So far it appears that it is just another Artroll and craving for
arguments and attention. It is getting tiring and pathetic.

Feeding the dipole and telling it that the electrons or photons are purple
Gausians, is not going to change it to far-out performance, unless really,
for 100 years of antenna engineering we were dumbasses amateurs, including
W8JK.

The glass is empty, time to ingore the drivell and gat back to real life
and antennas.
Time for the fine cigaaaar!

73, Yuri da bada k3BU/m


He may not know crap about antennas but I think he may be the greatest troll
artist of all times.

Jimmie

20 gaussian questions for art
 

Jimmie D wrote:

...
He may not know crap about antennas but I think he may be the greatest troll
artist of all times.
Jimmie

Without doubt, the first antenna "was" before the theory/math was
invented to define it ...

Without a doubt, this WILL occur again, and if it already has, only if
you do the construction will you know. The math/models have been
defined within too narrow of parameters, indeed, it is easy to prove
some of this math is based on sheer fallacy. The
permeability/permittivity of "nothing" being involved demonstrates, at
the very least, some things need redefining!

nothing = 0 permeability = 0 permittivity; end of story.

Now, let's find the real math ...

JS

20 gaussian questions for art
 

On 28 Jun, 16:04, John Smith I wrote:
Jimmie D wrote:

...

He may not know crap about antennas but I think he may be the greatest troll
artist of all times.
Jimmie

Without doubt, the first antenna "was" before the theory/math was
invented to define it ...

Without a doubt, this WILL occur again, and if it already has, only if
you do the construction will you know. The math/models have been
defined within too narrow of parameters, indeed, it is easy to prove
some of this math is based on sheer fallacy. The
permeability/permittivity of "nothing" being involved demonstrates, at
the very least, some things need redefining!

nothing = 0 permeability = 0 permittivity; end of story.

Now, let's find the real math ...

JS

John, What is so interesting about all this is
the arrival of that paper from the Russian scientist who is now head
of the Russian nuclear industry where his delving into the history
of Gauss showed that Gauss's assistant was responsible for taking some
of Gauss's work and thus hiding(we will never know) any
information that may have passed on to him before Gauss died.
There is a gap of knoweledge here because Gauss gave up mathematics
and took up with the Italian Observatory thinking a living
could not be made via mathematics! The progression that I am
describing
may well be a casualty of that descision but now the information
is to be revealed . If the information was known and made available
to science at that time one could easily see Gaussian law providing
the underpinnings of Maxwellian laws instead of being held to laws
of others where the connection to statics was tenuous at best.
Readers can find the Russian paper listed in the "Gaussian antenna
planar form" thread of a few days ago on this newsgroup to get hold
of the history of this mystery of a few hundred years ago to
form their own detective story of yesteryear.
Regards
Art Unwin KB9MZ......XG

20 gaussian questions for art
 

"art" wrote in message
oups.com...
On 28 Jun, 13:23, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

ps.com...

On 28 Jun, 12:42, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

groups.com...

On 27 Jun, 15:28, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

groups.com...

On 27 Jun, 14:24, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

roups.com...

On 27 Jun, 14:02, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

roups.com...

On 26 Jun, 16:36, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

groups.com...

On 26 Jun, 16:09, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

groups.com...

On 26 Jun, 15:17, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

groups.com...

On 26 Jun, 14:21, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

groups.com...

On 25 Jun, 13:10, "Dave"
wrote:
Ok, lets try it this way... step by step,
inch
by
inch,
we
may
yet
figure
out what this antenna is.

First question:
What is the least number of wires needed to
build
a
gaussian
antenna?

Not necessary Dave. Richard is very familiar
with
the
subject
at
hand
as well as its underpinnings that can be
understood
by
EEs
and is providing a reference that will make all
things
clear.
You asked for it and your wish is going to be
granted
in
a
clear
and precise manner that you and the group have
requested.
You should now be able to build it yourself
with
out
mumbo
jumbo
from me to confuse you.
No need for me anymore, you now have an expert
at
your
call.
Don't forget Poyntings input.
Art

whats a 'Richard'??

I want to hear it straight from the source. I
have
asked
over
and
over
for
you to define the terms and you can't put it into
words
this
poor
engineer
can understand, so i thought we would try to
build
an
example
from
the
bottom up. but if you can't help with that then
maybe
the
whole
thing
is
just out of my reach and i should go back to good
old
yagis
and
phased
arrays.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sounds reasonable

if it sounds so reasonable, how many wires does it
take?-
Hide
quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

As many as you want and have fun.
The subject is dead. Let it go
Join the boiling water saga that
is where the action is
Art

no, this is my subject so i'll say when it's dead... i
don't
want
to
know
how many i can use, i want to know the minimum number
necessary.-
Hide
quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

One

ok, thats a start.

assuming i want to operate on 14195khz, how long should
the
wire
be?-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Whatever wire you have throw it away and get a longer one

ok, random length... can do. now how do i connect it to a
piece
of
coax?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

O.K. For the last time I will go along until such time
it is obvious you have other intentions.So I start again.

Make a dipole of random shapes and heights that is resonant
at your design frequency. Note the radiator can be any length
as long as it is resonant. For the sake of this discussion
or interrogation let us use a plain half wave dipole.
The feed coax feeds the dipole at it's center in the normal
way.
Art KB9MZ......XG

ok, so its a plain half wave dipole, fed with normal coax in the
normal
way.
so what makes it 'gaussian'?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Because it's resonant at the desired frequency. This is the
basic form of a Gaussian antenna which is also the starting
point of a Yagi antenna if viewed as a single radiator
Art

so 'gaussian' == 'resonant'
why didn't you say so in the first place?
so a properly tuned yagi-uda array is a 'gaussian' antenna?- Hide
quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

First David before I go on others may jump in
and take the thread away from you. If that occurres
we can talk via E mail so that you are not penalised
They can use another thread in parallel which
I will respond to. This thread will remain a
civil and academic interrogation as you have requested.
.........
No, I would not stretch things that far based on
just one element or one piece of a jigsaw puzzle
A Yagi array is based on an array of elements
not just one. You wanted to procede in small steps
as provided by you, specific and to the point.
For starters a Yagi array is planar and a Gaussian
array antenna can be and usually , from my
research, is otherwise. Note the Gaussian element
is of random shape and height but always resonant
and not necessarily tied to a 1/2 wl.
Art

no, the interrogation isn't over... it was just my bedtime.

ok, so ignore the yagi for now. you classify a resonant random length
wire
as a gaussian element. is there any other essential characteristic
besides
resonance? How does 'equilibrium' fit into the description?- Hide
quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

First of all we are talking about arrays and not just a
single element . Now one must consider where to put the
next element. If we are space concious it would seem that
putting both elements close to each other but not as close
as the wire dia compared to the spacing. This element has the
same confines as the first element so one must attain
resonance of both elements at the same time while in
the proximetry of each other which allows for a descision
loater as to which element/s is going to be driven.
Ofcourse you will notice that major differences occurs
to the norm because of the close proximetry of the elements.
Since I suggested that we use 1/2 wave elements it would
also be advisable at this time all elements straight
but at different heights and angles to each other
so that multishaped elements,which can be used, do not
complicate the theme of what I am describing.

( The following side note goes beyond what the question
is but I am sure it will help the further you travel down the road.)

What we are now simulating is a Gaussian field with
its normal pill box. Normally one only sees static
particles in equilibrium but I have taken the liberty
of adding the array elements upon which the static
particles are resting upon and inside the arbitary border.

whoa! too fast! lets talk about the minimum antenna, the 1/2 wave (or
there abouts) resonant element. You said that was all i needed to make a
gaussian antenna. So it doesn't have to be a classic dipole or any other
specific shape, as long as it is resonant. But is resonance alone enough
to
classify it as a gaussian antenna?

Yes, if it is in place where it is determined to be
resonant because that takes consideration of it's surroundings.
If one takes the surroundings into account one is taking
into account equilibrium
I say this because this interrogation could then
decide to move it and still call it a Gaussian antenna
and say they have a gottcha!
Please excuse me if I am a bit wary of how the questions
are placed and for what reasons. But I don't want
to be part of a word game where things can be misconstrued.
Civility must be kept without being underhand if your
intent is to be pure.
Art KB9MZ....XG


equilibrium between what?

20 gaussian questions for art
 

Dave wrote:
equilibrium between what?

Equilibrium between an antenna element, of course.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

20 gaussian questions for art
 

On 25 Jun, 13:10, "Dave" wrote:
Ok, lets try it this way... step by step, inch by inch, we may yet figure
out what this antenna is.

First question:
What is the least number of wires needed to build a gaussian antenna?

Posting check
Art

20 gaussian questions for art
 

On 29 Jun, 07:02, art wrote:
On 25 Jun, 13:10, "Dave" wrote:

Ok, lets try it this way... step by step, inch by inch, we may yet figure
out what this antenna is.

First question:
What is the least number of wires needed to build a gaussian antenna?

Posting check
Art

Isaac Newton like scientist before him observed the World and the
Universe
for clues about what it was all about. He determined that each
particle, each object,
each planet all had their own gravitational centers. And where each
minute particle
was made of atoms etc all orbiting around each other in a state where
these orbiting
partcles were able to move in isolation with respect to other
particles in orbit
because all forces became balanced with respect to each other. This
theory was
based on observations on the make up of the universe around us. This
balancing of
parts and particles is called being in a state of equilibrium. If an
exterior
force was applied the Universe has a whole would rearrange itself to
retain
equilibrium by accomodation
Thus we can see an element as something held together by equilibrium
and where
its constituent parts is a densily packed swarm of particles shaped
in longitudinal
physical form and where the surface of this entity has its surface
completely covered
by errant particles called electrons. This collection of particles are
so densly packed
that it appears to be a solid and where the make up of its constituent
particls and atoms
provide a distingtive appearance which allows identification with
respect to other combinations
of densly packed swarms of particles and atoms via weight, reflective
qualities e.t c
I have stated the above in a very generalistic way purely to give an
understanding of the
meaning of the word "equilibrium" which in a generalistic way can be
seen as a somewhat stable
existance of parts in concert with other parts in a three dimensional
existance where its "stable"
existance is created because of the totalility of all forces involved
equals the sum of ZERO.
Art Unwin KB9MZ....XG

20 gaussian questions for art
 

Art invoked the name of Issac Newton to support Art`s claim of
equlibrium defining a Gaussian antenna.

OK, Newton`s apple was in equilibrium until its support released the
apple to the force of the earth`s gravity (more properly the mutual
attraction between the apple and the earth but due to inertia the
earth`s motion was insignificant). The apple fell at an acceleration of
32 feet per second per second if my recollection is correct.

Gravitational force and electrical attraction force are different
phenomena with vastly differing strengths so I don`t see a necessary
correlation between the mass of an antenna and its electrical properties
and performance.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI