No I can't remember ever putting a finger/s up at anybody.
But I have this feeling that this thread is now long enough and has included
so many subjects of discussion that we have the beginnings of a full scale
augument again. However if it means that this is the time a certain person
leaves the group in discussed
then no harm done. Forget antennas and impedance and the subject change you
are advocating, let the row start now, say something,
anything so we get a repeat of the last one. Can't you say balonney or
bull**** at the next guru and tell something different to another guru and
blame it on the first guru? Throw a fishing pole with a carrot on it!
Art
Art

Art
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
aunwin wrote:
Can't we assume that a antenna is a closed series
circuit containing only passive items ?

A passive antenna, when it is receiving a signal, is a pretty good
approximation to a Thevenin Equivalent circuit. The received
signal is the generator. The generator impedance is the radiation
resistance (and the lossy R's). We've got a transmission line and
usually a 50 ohm load in the receiver.

If you have in mind that we must we consider an antena as a Class
something or other amplifier when determining its impedance then I am
hopelessly lost in a thread that can only end up nasty like some others
did

Why not, for the purposes of limiting the discussion, consider only
a Thevenin Equivalent 50 ohm source for the transmitter? That way,
the entire system will be linear and easy to discuss.

I am not pointing the finger at you Cecil, ...

If you were, which one would it be? :-)
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP