On 11 Nov, 01:54, Roy Lewallen wrote:
Stefan Wolfe wrote:
"Roy Lewallen" wrote in message
...
Stefan Wolfe wrote:

In a resonant circuit containing R, L, and C, there most definitely is a
time constant. Related to Q, it describes the time taken for the circuit
to respond to a transient. The higher the Q, the longer the time constant,
and the longer it takes the circuit to come to equilibrium after a step or
sinusoid is applied, and to decay after it's removed. Failure to
understand this has resulted in some very poorly designed audio filters
for CW, among other things.

But Roy, I must first clear up that we are talking about apples and oranges.
I was referencing a sinusoidal source of a frequency that is resonant to the
circuit. You are talking about a transient can be treated as the sum of
sinusoids which will not be resonant at the same curcuit. I was also
referring to the antenna as a L-C-R circuit that does have time constants
along its lengths (but I was asking 'where' along the length) but as a
whole system the time contant of the antenna, when fed by a signal at
resonant frequency is zero.
. . .

You've lost me. What is the meaning of a "time constant" in steady
state? What effect does it have? With a single frequency of constant
amplitude, how could you tell whether a circuit, resonant or not, has a
"time constant"? How could you measure it?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Is this a prelude to your normal comment when you walk away?
This I don't understand is a cop out but I will answer you anyway.
The meaning of time constant. You are aware that the addition of
other things that was not part of Maxwells laws such as the assumption
of
a sino soidal current at every point taken for the calculation
produced errors.
As one who sells the NEC work you must know that.
If it produces errors then the assumption is in correct yet Maxwells
laws are based
on radiation from the time varient phenomina. Thus it behooves all to
impose the correct or alternative time varient.An alternative time
varient is exposed
when one adds a time varient to the law of statics which is shown to
equal
or be the same as Maxwells laws( see the math in the archives.
Using Gauss's method of analysis which is based around flux and an
arbitary field
shows radiation is formed in pulses during times that equilibrium is
broken
and the arbitary borders fracture momentarily. The only way therefore
is the
circuit is one of a tank circuit. The tank circuit mby use of the
radiators constituent
capacitance and inductance revolves the time constant associated with
a sino soidal
property and with the syncroness of energy release according to the
time constant
of the energy storage imposes a time varient. Now the math is there so
next we
allow a computor program with unknown viability to compare with
Gauss's law
extension that I imposed.
What does this show?
Using the optimiser version it allways migrates to a non planar form
and not the planar form
which scientists have mimiced from the yagi. Doing this it supplies
the angle for a helix
that is mathematically supplied by Maxwell where prior to this it was
emperically found.
One can overcheck this by placing a non planar form into any passive
antenna program
and it verifies the results of a Gaussian apoproach. Since using the
time varience
associated with a sino soidal produces errors and the time constant
of heat storage release
does not produce errors to Maxwells laws it behooves all to review the
significance of what I did
which is to add a time variable to the same proven situation that
Gauss applied for statics.
a proven method which does not violate Maxwells laws.
.. For your part you can examine the mathematical aproach taken for
error since it is at the core
of what I present. If you wish to modify it so it conforms with the
books I will give
it a fair hearing without defaulting to the "all is known" syndrome.I
cannot agree to adding
any assumptions to Maxwells laws since that delegitamises any law as
we know it.
Science demands impartial examination without imposing pre supposed
conditions or the
involvement of personal feelings since it is continually found that
what is unlikely to happen
does actually happen!
Questions to ask yourself.
How is it that Maxwell defined the angle for a helix that matches
thatfound by Kraus empirically
by not using the time varient assumptions that we presently used
associated with the sino soidal
wave?
Art Unwin KB9MZ....XG

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 05:22:21 -0800, art wrote:

Is this a prelude to your normal comment when you walk away?

Arthur, such an amusing criticism coming from you considering the
longstanding, and simple question offered to your own comment:

On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 10:56:13 -0800, art wrote:
Distributed resistance is easy, it changes the energy to heat,
stores it and releases it according to its time constant

What is the time constant of 50 Ohms?

Longwinded explanations are not sought, just a simple number (you
don't even have to show your math).

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On 11 Nov, 08:16, Richard Clark wrote:
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 05:22:21 -0800, art wrote:
Is this a prelude to your normal comment when you walk away?

Arthur, such an amusing criticism coming from you considering the
longstanding, and simple question offered to your own comment:

On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 10:56:13 -0800, art wrote:
Distributed resistance is easy, it changes the energy to heat,
stores it and releases it according to its time constant

What is the time constant of 50 Ohms?

Longwinded explanations are not sought, just a simple number (you
don't even have to show your math).

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

It just goes to show that I don't have an answer to every question
that you have in your efforts to supply a platform for your jeering.
I do know that a resistor stores energy applied while it changes to
heat.
I also known that the temperature change is not instantaneous thus
time
must be a factor depending on the environment. But you present
questions
that do not deal directly with the subject posed in your attempts to
jeer.
Look at your many exchanges with Dr John E Davis, you never did
provide an
instance where the subject in hand was incorrect or otherwise. Yet
your
exchanges with him were long and so disagreeable and disrespectfull
that after several attempts while remaining polite did not line up
with
an arguement that you often want he was forced to leave.The thread has
been provided again such that other can determine whether Dr Davis was
treated with respect by you
Actually nobody including you accepted his mathematics in any way
which he proffered in an effort to show that I was correct. The only
interest of this group was to treat him the same way that they treat
outhers
on this newsgroup. I will not respond to any more of your efforts
that
defray from the discussion at hand so that you can jeer.
Art

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 08:38:38 -0800, art wrote:
What is the time constant of 50 Ohms?

Longwinded explanations are not sought, just a simple number (you
don't even have to show your math).

It just goes to show that I don't have an answer

It took you quite a while to come to same conclusion everyone else
has.

I do know that a resistor stores energy applied while it changes to
heat.

How much energy does 50 Ohms store?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC