LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #3   Report Post  
Old September 23rd 07, 06:54 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 797
Default Maxwells laws

back again art?? still stuck on 'equilibrium'??? 'equilibrium' is a nice
catch word. and yes, many 'masters' heartily believed that everything had
to be in 'equilibrium' with something or another. but we have come a long
way since then. there can be no energy flow between things in equilibrium,
and we all know there is energy flowing in antenna elements. if there
wasn't they wouldn't radiate. and we can directly measure it with current
and voltage probes. so while maybe the static case of coulomb's law may be
said to represent 'equilibrium', none of the others needs that... in fact
none of the others would exist if everything was in 'equilibrium'. the
current, curl, and d/dt parts of the equations are all a representation of
non-equilibrium conditions that must exist for those equations to be of any
use. so get out of the 19th century and into the 21st and join the rest of
us in the understanding of the dynamic world around us!

"art" wrote in message
ups.com...
For full understanding of how Maxwells laws were generated one has to
check if eny proviso's were written in.
Ffor instance I suspect that there was a proviso for equilibrium in
every law thar Maxwell used for his summation ofr laws there was an
exceptance by all the masters that without equilibrium the who univere
would fall apart.
Some where along the line somebody deviated from this proviso and made
the assumption that at every point on a radiator can be seen as a sino
soidal current that causes radiation because the assumption was needed
to conform with Maxwells laws while ignoring the dictae of the masters
that the laws of the universe is bound by
by equilibrium so the assumption was conncocted to "solve" the 1/2
wave problem. Can anybody versed in the art point to one of the many
laws at his time were not based on equilibrium. In other words did any
of the work he used specifically addres things that were NOT in
equilibrium to justify its use for items not in equilibrium to
substantiate the use of Maxwells laws to derive its function. Being a
mechanical engineer I am not well informed
of all the doings of the masters
TIA
Art KB9MZ



 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Another act of Republican "these laws are for everyone but us": Telamon Shortwave 0 August 27th 04 04:40 AM
SCANNER EAVESDROPPING LAWS ergo Swap 2 February 7th 04 01:59 AM
Scanning laws around the world? victoria patel Scanner 19 February 3rd 04 08:48 PM
Scanner Laws Timothy Scanner 4 October 22nd 03 07:28 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:51 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017