On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 20:39:09 -0700, art wrote:

Methinks that I need to study
up a bit more unless there is a physisist on board this news group
that can guide me

Have you invented your own vocabulary to substitute for what is more
commonly known as Pixie Dust? Research that term first to confirm or
deny.

As an aside, what has this got to do with the focus (eg. antennas) of
this forum? Did the moderators kick you out of eHam?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On 8 Jul, 23:24, Richard Clark wrote:
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 20:39:09 -0700, art wrote:
Methinks that I need to study
up a bit more unless there is a physisist on board this news group
that can guide me

Have you invented your own vocabulary to substitute for what is more
commonly known as Pixie Dust? Research that term first to confirm or
deny.

As an aside, what has this got to do with the focus (eg. antennas) of
this forum? Did the moderators kick you out of eHam?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Every thing!
They are static particles that rest on diamagnetic materials
used for antennas. These particular lunar particle coverings was
predicted more than a hundred years ago by the masters which
is before radio was even thought of . I would have thought
that the subject of antennas would fit right in here!

art wrote:
On 8 Jul, 23:24, Richard Clark wrote:
On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 20:39:09 -0700, art wrote:
Methinks that I need to study
up a bit more unless there is a physisist on board this news group
that can guide me

Have you invented your own vocabulary to substitute for what is more
commonly known as Pixie Dust? Research that term first to confirm or
deny.

As an aside, what has this got to do with the focus (eg. antennas) of
this forum? Did the moderators kick you out of eHam?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Every thing!
They are static particles that rest on diamagnetic materials
used for antennas. These particular lunar particle coverings was
predicted more than a hundred years ago by the masters which
is before radio was even thought of . I would have thought
that the subject of antennas would fit right in here!

OK, now we have an English word to work with.

From http://en.wikipedia.org:

"Diamagnetism is a form of magnetism that is only exhibited by a substance
in the presence of an externally applied magnetic field."

"All materials show a diamagnetic response in an applied magnetic field;
however for materials which show some other form of magnetism (such as
ferromagnetism or paramagnetism), the diamagnetism is completely
overpowered. Substances which only, or mostly, display diamagnetic
behaviour are termed diamagnetic materials, or diamagnets. Materials
that are said to be diamagnetic are those which are usually considered
by non-physicists as "non magnetic", and include water, DNA, most organic
compounds such as petroleum and some plastics, and many metals such as
mercury, gold and bismuth."

So would Art's magic pixie dust particles rest on a ferromagnetic
antenna such as one constructed of a ferrous based alloy?

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

snip
Jim Benito

I'm sorry but I will have to let you go. I am like others
prone to spelling errors when using the internet and it is
certainly not my intent to offend others who want to
procrastinate about such things to the exclusion of
every thing else However you do have a history of name
calling and procrastination which is testing my civility
to its limits. I wish you well in your future endeavers
with the expectation that they do not involve me. For myself
I also will avoid involvement with you
Bye Bye
Art

art wrote:
snip
Jim Benito

I'm sorry but I will have to let you go. I am like others
prone to spelling errors when using the internet and it is
certainly not my intent to offend others who want to
procrastinate about such things to the exclusion of
every thing else However you do have a history of name
calling and procrastination which is testing my civility
to its limits. I wish you well in your future endeavers
with the expectation that they do not involve me. For myself
I also will avoid involvement with you
Bye Bye
Art

Do you have the slightest clue what "procrastinate" and "procrastination"
mean?

It doesn't appear so.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 04:38:39 -0700, art wrote:

I would have thought
that the subject of antennas would fit right in here!

So would most, but your topic is Pixie Dust (look at the subject
line).

This is probably why eHam has revoked your privileges.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Osnip.

This is probably why eHam has revoked your privileges.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

You wish

On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 14:14:37 -0700, art wrote:

Osnip.

This is probably why eHam has revoked your privileges.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

You wish

Not at all, Arthur. WELCOME BACK TO THE PIT OF HELL! where you seek
solace from your bruising. The acclaim to your theories at eHam is
about as amusing as they are here. ;-)

I particularly enjoyed Tom's response about clicking Ruby Slippers to
make something come true. I wouldn't wish the hall monitors to snub
your fulminations (although it appears several of your new-found
correspondents wouldn't mind) as I anxiously await your inundating Tom
with a gallon of spit.

Isn't amazing how these academic idylls of civil discourse (populated
by gentlemany of infinite wisdom) crumble into viper's nests when you
arrive? The term correlation comes to mind, but I don't know what
word it would be in your vocabulary so as to make the concept
meaningful to you.

For others who haven't read that comic strip, Arthur has proven
Einstein was wrong! Well, proven in the sense that Arthur proves
anything. Which is to say "he said so." After all, there is nothing
mentioned about anything specific from Einstein (special theory?
general theory? the photon theory? the cosmological constant?). That
is best left to our imagination as Arthur has dismissed it all with a
wave of the hand, whiting out Einstein's name on the Nobel prize to
pencil in Art.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:

Isn't amazing how these academic idylls of civil discourse (populated
by gentlemany of infinite wisdom) crumble into viper's nests when you
arrive? The term correlation comes to mind, but I don't know what
word it would be in your vocabulary so as to make the concept
meaningful to you.

For others who haven't read that comic strip, Arthur has proven
Einstein was wrong! Well, proven in the sense that Arthur proves
anything. Which is to say "he said so." After all, there is nothing
mentioned about anything specific from Einstein (special theory?
general theory? the photon theory? the cosmological constant?). That
is best left to our imagination as Arthur has dismissed it all with a
wave of the hand, whiting out Einstein's name on the Nobel prize to
pencil in Art.


http://www.space.com/adastra/adastra...st_060223.html

Is a nice little understandable and believable bit on moon dust.

Created in a massively electrically charged environment by a constant
rain of micreometeorites.

http://faculty.rmwc.edu/tmichalik/moon8.htm

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9ibyGXe_p...c_truefake.htm

and with shapes that have both microspheres and

Michael Coslo wrote:
Richard Clark wrote:

Isn't amazing how these academic idylls of civil discourse (populated
by gentlemany of infinite wisdom) crumble into viper's nests when you
arrive? The term correlation comes to mind, but I don't know what
word it would be in your vocabulary so as to make the concept
meaningful to you.

For others who haven't read that comic strip, Arthur has proven
Einstein was wrong! Well, proven in the sense that Arthur proves
anything. Which is to say "he said so." After all, there is nothing
mentioned about anything specific from Einstein (special theory?
general theory? the photon theory? the cosmological constant?). That
is best left to our imagination as Arthur has dismissed it all with a
wave of the hand, whiting out Einstein's name on the Nobel prize to
pencil in Art.


http://www.space.com/adastra/adastra...st_060223.html

Is a nice little understandable and believable bit on moon dust.

Created in a massively electrically charged environment by a constant
rain of micreometeorites.

http://faculty.rmwc.edu/tmichalik/moon8.htm

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9......


and with shapes that have both microspheres and


Ack! sorry - I pasted that too long url and accidentally sent the
message instead of undoing what I did. mea maxima culpa!

Point is, that the source and composition of the lunar dust is well
known. We can even duplicate it here on earth.

There isn't anything magic about dust that consists of a combination of
microspheres and hook ended fractured rocks. Put that in a highly
charged environment, and no strange and incomprehensible theories are
needed to explain why it sticks to things.

It's shape, size, and static......



And now for Art.

Art, the dust in not specifically something that is roaming around the
universe in packs. The dust or lunar soil is composed of fractured and
spheroidal minerals mixed in with meteoriodal material from the little
buggers that hit the moon and formed those fragements.

The reason that there is a lot of that stuff on the moon as compared to
the earth is because metoroids hit the moon with regularity, and once
formed, tend to stay there. On earth only the larger meteoroids make it
to the surface (yeah, I know a meteoroid is one that makes it to the
surface) and once there, they become assimilated, and are hard to find.

Occam's razor isn't always correct, but in this case.....

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -