On Aug 31, 3:36 pm, Richard Clark wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 12:20:50 -0700, John Smith

wrote:
What do you think turns those vanes--if it
ain't the "mass" of photons striking the plates?

Hmm, dare anyone ask either of you for a simple computation to support
this notion of "mass?"

If Arthur is so wedded to a Newtonian universe, it should be a walk in
the apple orchard.

A very simple question of rotational kinematics:
How much power is required to accelerate
the 1 gram mass of the vanes
from 0cM/s to 1cM/s in 10s?

Extra credit:
How many photons does it take to do this?

Extra special, super duper credit:
What is the weight of one of those photons?

You can use your calculator to convert mass to slugs in an Earth
environment. Of course, this may be an egregious speculation of
ability if the prior compuations are begged (or whined) off with
extraneous demands (not worth Newton's spit) for parsing F=MA.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Uhhh, gawd, I hate to even get into THIS mess... But, somebody has
gotta do it...

First guys, photons hitting the blades of the radiometer do not turn
it by F=MA... If it did were we so lucky then NASA is wasting a
hell of a lot of money designing the mars rockets when all they have
to do is have the space shuttle throw out a sail and have their heads
snap back as they are accellerated like a half drunk blond hitting the
gas pedal in a red corvette...
Actually, the radiometer blades turn because infrared energy
differentially heats the black surface of the blade as opposed to the
silver surface, causing it to differentially heat the local air
molecules on that side of the blade as opposed to the silver side...
The more energetic bombardment of the black surace by the heated
molecules as opposed to the less energetic bombardment on the silver
surface causes a differential in pressure that pushes the blade on its
way...
(no Virginia, that is not a vacuum inside the radiometer, just high
altitude - and yes there is no Santa Claus - now come over here and
sit on my lap)

denny

On 31 Aug, 17:58, John Smith wrote:
art wrote:

...

Einstein hasbeenproven wrong many many times.
Einstein also did not produce the Gaussian array
since it would prove him wrong once again.
Haven't you got anything to contribute of a technical nature
other than following news from Minninapolis airport stalls ?

Art:

Actually, when I first came into this group, I was on Richards' A55 ...

I changed my mind, he "encrypts" chit into his text which is not a first
apparent ... check it out dude ...

Regards,
JS

John, I don't quite understand what you are saying......."encrypts
chits"
that is completely foreign to me. Are you saying wrapped in a enigma?
I have never really understood him so maybe I am missing something!
And that "A55" comment, don't understand that either.
Regards
Art

art wrote:

...
Come on John Study Gauss and all becomes clear
Art


Clear?

Hmmm. Sure you don't strive to over simplify a bit? But, ok. When I
lay down a bar neodymium magnet, cover it with a sheet of paper and
sprinkle iron powder upon it, to see the lines of force--what are those
lines depicting? Are those photons? Are those waves? Are you
completely sure they are only of static properties--and some type of
movement is not occurring just outside my range of vision and ability to
measure? Are they contained within a media I cannot see and measure?

It is quite easy for me to generate those same lines of force with an
electric energies' flow though a conductor. And, the reverse is also
easy to accomplish, I can cause an electric energy to be generated by
moving a conductor though these lines of force.

I suspect, in the future, it will be easy to switch matter and energies'
states back in forth, with similar ease.

But, at this point, clear? Surely your vision is much better than my
own ...

And, if I am unable to get my mind completely wrapped around this
problem, to be able to claim I understand this with precision--how would
I suddenly be able to make claims about the much more complex?

But, if you have the time, enlighten me, what is gravities relationship
to magnetism? Is there a reason their properties share similar
characteristics/behaviors? Know of any "iron powder tricks" to allow me
to see gravities lines of force?

I think gauss is a link in a chain--not a complete answer in itself, and
a chain which is still missing links ...

Regards,
JS

On 2 Sep, 07:31, John Smith wrote:
art wrote:

...

Come on John Study Gauss and all becomes clear
Art

Clear?

Hmmm. Sure you don't strive to over simplify a bit? But, ok. When I
lay down a bar neodymium magnet, cover it with a sheet of paper and
sprinkle iron powder upon it, to see the lines of force--what are those
lines depicting? Are those photons? Are those waves? Are you
completely sure they are only of static properties--and some type of
movement is not occurring just outside my range of vision and ability to
measure? Are they contained within a media I cannot see and measure?

It is quite easy for me to generate those same lines of force with an
electric energies' flow though a conductor. And, the reverse is also
easy to accomplish, I can cause an electric energy to be generated by
moving a conductor though these lines of force.

I suspect, in the future, it will be easy to switch matter and energies'
states back in forth, with similar ease.

But, at this point, clear? Surely your vision is much better than my
own ...

And, if I am unable to get my mind completely wrapped around this
problem, to be able to claim I understand this with precision--how would
I suddenly be able to make claims about the much more complex?

But, if you have the time, enlighten me, what is gravities relationship
to magnetism? Is there a reason their properties share similar
characteristics/behaviors? Know of any "iron powder tricks" to allow me
to see gravities lines of force?

I think gauss is a link in a chain--not a complete answer in itself, and
a chain which is still missing links ...

Regards,
JS

John,
The moment one introduces equilibrium into the equation it
becomes a whole new ball game. I asked you to do something
with an antenna design, remember. Because therein
lies the clue to all this instead of talking around the houses.
Talking has proved nothing so try my way!
Today I am going to put my 160 meter antenna
onto the top of my tower so that I can try to get the impedance higher
tho it is useable at present on the ground.(Resonated at 20 ohms)
I made one for 80M and it was 60 ohms and the gain was undeniable.
I think only a 160M antenna will get believers so I will use one this
winter
on the bands. Yes I said bands (plural)
Nobody has done this before and I am sharing it with you.
In the next week or so I will attach it to a rotator
to see what the directional pattern is. (Actually I have two styles of
this
new antenna made).
If you did as I asked you may well have that next step that you talk
about.
Seeing is believing so why not take a look for your self.
Send me an Email if you hit a problem. I am sharing it with you purely
to put a lot of these experts in their place so you will have
what they can't have or want. You certainly will be closer to derive
the answer for yourself
Art

art wrote:

...
If you did as I asked you may well have that next step that you talk
about.
Seeing is believing so why not take a look for your self.
...
Art


Art:

Sorry, but that is/would not be easy for me at present. I have moved
into a smaller place. I am getting too old to maintain a large
yard/home, etc.--even my antenna experiments are on a shrinking scale.
Plus, I do more communications via IRC, instant messaging, email, news
posting, video chat, cell phone, etc. than I ever did on amateur bands
.... a sign of the times, perhaps.

I have been focused in a much different direction--small, stealth
antennas are the mode of the day here--I attempt to stay 10-100 watts,
just local traffic with a handful of friends.

Bought a new ford explorer and am not even going to bother moving the
rig to it, besides, I have to bring the antenna in if I park the car on
the street--cell phone is just too easy. Indeed, the XYL is favoring a
3 bedroom modular in a park with gated security--all cement--no yard--I
may end up giving in to her wishes. The new area we have moved into is
not without drug/gang/graffiti/ethnic-diversity problems--my own fault
(graffiti on the car/fence/house, tires slashed and windows smashed if
you leave the car outside at night, stabbing in a park just blocks away,
etc.) ... even the nicer areas of town are five bedrooms with five
different families of unknown ethnic origin occupying them--frequent
marijuana growing busts. :-(

Geesh, I have gotten old and the world has changed--my kingdom for a few
good neighbors ... at least at this location I have high speed DSL!
(was using clearwire at old place and signal was poor, I had to "hack"
the clearwire modem for an external antenna)

I will be looking forward for any information about your endeavors ...

Regards,
JS

On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 08:56:48 -0700, art wrote:

The moment one introduces equilibrium into the equation

Hi Arthur,

Ever wondered how the Latins used the root 'equ' in those two words?

The Latins also introduced the sugar into their sucrose
(and did not introduce nutrition into nutrasweet);
and discovered petrol in our petroleum;
and poured aqua into his aquarium;
and played euchre with the eucharist;
and laughed at the saccharine in this sacrament;
and slipped librium into someone's library....

Language be whack 2 what wrote in ebonics o' tennas.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On 2 Sep, 09:45, John Smith wrote:
art wrote:

...

If you did as I asked you may well have that next step that you talk
about.
Seeing is believing so why not take a look for your self.
...
Art

Art:

Sorry, but that is/would not be easy for me at present. I have moved
into a smaller place. I am getting too old to maintain a large
yard/home, etc.--even my antenna experiments are on a shrinking scale.
Plus, I do more communications via IRC, instant messaging, email, news
posting, video chat, cell phone, etc. than I ever did on amateur bands
... a sign of the times, perhaps.

I have been focused in a much different direction--small, stealth
antennas are the mode of the day here--I attempt to stay 10-100 watts,
just local traffic with a handful of friends.

Bought a new ford explorer and am not even going to bother moving the
rig to it, besides, I have to bring the antenna in if I park the car on
the street--cell phone is just too easy. Indeed, the XYL is favoring a
3 bedroom modular in a park with gated security--all cement--no yard--I
may end up giving in to her wishes. The new area we have moved into is
not without drug/gang/graffiti/ethnic-diversity problems--my own fault
(graffiti on the car/fence/house, tires slashed and windows smashed if
you leave the car outside at night, stabbing in a park just blocks away,
etc.) ... even the nicer areas of town are five bedrooms with five
different families of unknown ethnic origin occupying them--frequent
marijuana growing busts. :-(

Geesh, I have gotten old and the world has changed--my kingdom for a few
good neighbors ... at least at this location I have high speed DSL!
(was using clearwire at old place and signal was poor, I had to "hack"
the clearwire modem for an external antenna)

I will be looking forward for any information about your endeavors ...

Regards,
JS

I'll get it to you
Art

Richard Clark wrote:
and poured aqua into his aquarium;

and performed hysterectomies to avoid hysteria.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

John Smith wrote:
Ok. You might ask me, "Why do you laugh at people discussing antennas
emitting photons?
...
Regards,
JS

Ok. So you pose your arguments why photons are at play ... I listen, we
move to the second level ...

On which, I respond; "Why would the mere length/phasing of elements on
an antenna be able to cause one to act as a mirror (the one longer than
DE) and the other as a director (the one shorter than DE)?

All I can visualize are swarms of these little energy bundles (their
shape is important to some, however, at this exact point, not me)
colliding with those being emitted from the DE--then, swarms of these
little energy bundles being emitted from the director are only leaving
in a forward direction--causing a vacuum and pulling those emitted from
the DE along with 'em, and along with those "repulsed" from the
reflector ... I really am in need of a good explanation here. I mean,
come on now, certainly you can understand my difficulty in following all
this--right?

I mean charges on the grid of a vacuum tube can, apparently, cause
things similar to these with particles/energy-packets; but, an antenna???

Regards,
JS

John Smith wrote:
On which, I respond; "Why would the mere length/phasing of elements on
an antenna be able to cause one to act as a mirror (the one longer than
DE) and the other as a director (the one shorter than DE)?

It has to do with the phasing of the photons and the
spacing of the elements. The phasing+spacing results
in constructive interference in the direction of the
director and destructive interference in the direction
of the reflector referenced to the driven element. The
length of the element affects (and effects) the phase
of the re-radiated signals from the parasitic elements.

Using EZNEC with two identical driven elements, one
can control the direction of maximum radiation simply
by adjusting the phasing of one of the driven elements
referenced to the other. Reversing the phasing reverses
the direction of maximum radiation.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com