On 27 Nov, 11:01, Cecil Moore wrote:
Richard Fry wrote:
"Cecil Moore"
The Zepp antenna is a 1/2WL monopole with no counterpoise.

Here are some comments by W8JI about the need for some kind of r-f
ground or counterpoise on Zepps and other end-fed ham antennas.

Nobody said the Zepp antenna is free of common-
mode currents. The wire connected to the antenna
obviously carries current while the floating wire
just as obviously carries no current at the open
end. Radiation from the series stub just didn't
matter with the Zeppelin airships.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil
W8JI is a competant engineer and well versed in "traditional"
antenna design but he is not without fault or error since
he is a human being. It is very worthwhile to read what
he has to say but if it doesn't agree on your thoughts
developed from first principles then you can't use the
info until the error is resolved. That is just like
reading a book without exercising discretion with
respect to the source.
Regards
Art

"art" wrote
W8JI is a competant engineer and well versed in "traditional"
antenna design but he is not without fault or error since
he is a human being. It is very worthwhile to read what
he has to say but if it doesn't agree on your thoughts
developed from first principles then you can't use the
info until the error is resolved. That is just like
reading a book without exercising discretion with
respect to the source.
_____________

art,

As presumably you, also, are a human being, then shouldn't we all consider
the peculiar, unproven, and unique beliefs you post here with the same
discretion applying to you as you suggest for the statements of W8JI (and
others)?

And that is being rather charitable, as W8JI is basing his analyses on
proven and repeatable physics, not on the speculations you continue to post,
and which no one else has offered the least bit of provable corroboration.

RF

On 27 Nov, 14:42, "Richard Fry" wrote:
"art" wrote W8JI is a competant engineer and well versed in "traditional"
antenna design but he is not without fault or error since
he is a human being. It is very worthwhile to read what
he has to say but if it doesn't agree on your thoughts
developed from first principles then you can't use the
info until the error is resolved. That is just like
reading a book without exercising discretion with
respect to the source.

_____________

art,

As presumably you, also, are a human being, then shouldn't we all consider
the peculiar, unproven, and unique beliefs you post here with the same
discretion applying to you as you suggest for the statements of W8JI (and
others)?

And that is being rather charitable, as W8JI is basing his analyses on
proven and repeatable physics, not on the speculations you continue to post,
and which no one else has offered the least bit of provable corroboration.

RF

What others think matters not to me. If I can follow thru from first
principles
of that which is stated then I am comfortable with it.
At the same time it is acknoweledged that radiation is still a mystery
to scientists
and I want to get to the bottom of things. If you are comfortable in
what you believe
then why the problem?

"art" wrote
At the same time it is acknoweledged that radiation
is still a mystery to scientists.
__________

Or just a mystery to you, perhaps?

Please quote the provable, scientific source(s) supporting an objective
research result showing that your stated belief that "radiation is still a
mystery" is valid.

RF

On 27 Nov, 17:05, "Richard Fry" wrote:
"art" wrote At the same time it is acknoweledged that radiation
is still a mystery to scientists.

__________

Or just a mystery to you, perhaps?

Please quote the provable, scientific source(s) supporting an objective
research result showing that your stated belief that "radiation is still a
mystery" is valid.

RF

I figured you were from the "All is known about antennas" group.
Why are you bothering with me when all is known?
We have nothing in common so why are you trying to advise me?
Why not educate the masses with respect to waves versus particles,
everybody will be very interested as to what emanates from a
radiator or visa versa when on the receiving end.Is it clones of
yourself that is needed to save the World?
As for you wanting me to quote something per your request,
you can forget all about that! I am not interested in
influencing your thoughts, What you have you can take to your
grave with complete confidence.

On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 20:00:22 -0800 (PST), art
wrote:

Why not educate the masses with respect to waves versus particles,
everybody will be very interested as to what emanates from a
radiator or visa versa when on the receiving end.

How curious, Arthur, that I asked you for EXACTLY the same information
and you showed absolute repugnance towards the topic!

Already bored?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:42:27 -0800 (PST), art
wrote:

If I can follow thru from first
principles

Follow thru indeed.

This isn't rec.golf.clinic, and you can't even bogey the course. ;-)

art wrote:
W8JI is a competant engineer and well versed in "traditional"
antenna design but he is not without fault or error since
he is a human being.

He is absolutely wrong about the phase shift through
a 75m bugcatcher loading coil. Over on QRZ.com, he
tried to prove something using the lumped inductance
in EZNEC. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
art wrote:
W8JI is a competant engineer and well versed in "traditional"
antenna design but he is not without fault or error since
he is a human being.

He is absolutely wrong about the phase shift through
a 75m bugcatcher loading coil. Over on QRZ.com, he
tried to prove something using the lumped inductance
in EZNEC. :-)

People who want to know what W8JI actually believes, as
opposed to what Cecil says he believes, should go to W8JI's
website. And, no, Cecil, your little theory about phase shifts across
loading coils, which you can't substantiate through experiment, or
even through any type of rigorous theory, is nothing more than
an exercise in philosophical fantasy.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Tom Donaly wrote:

People who want to know what W8JI actually believes, as
opposed to what Cecil says he believes, should go to W8JI's
website.

I agree, Tom, and here is the URL:

http://www.w8ji.com/inductor_current_time_delay.htm

W8JI takes a 2" dia, 100 turn, 10 inch long coil, and
claims the actual delay through that coil is 3 nS or
4.5 degrees. (The formula for the velocity factor of
such a coil yields ~0.033 at 4 MHz making the actual
delay ~37 degrees or ~25 nS at 4 MHz.)

W8JI's mistake was using standing wave current to try
to measure that delay. The phase of standing wave current
changes hardly at all and is useless for measuring delay.

If the delay is to be measured by observing phase shifts,
then traveling wave current should be used. That would
require loading the coil with a resistor equal to its
characteristic impedance.

Another way to measure the delay is to set the coil up
as a helical antenna over a ground plane and find the
self-resonant frequency which would mean the phase shift
through the coil is 90 degrees at that self-resonant
frequency. Even though the delay changes with frequency,
it is highly unlikely to drop from 90 degrees to 4.5
degrees in a few MHz.

... your little theory about phase shifts across
loading coils, which you can't substantiate through experiment, or
even through any type of rigorous theory, is nothing more than
an exercise in philosophical fantasy.

Actually, it is an exercise in the physics of reality.
A 3nS delay through a 100 uH coil is the real "exercise
in philosophical fantasy" and obviously impossible. Try
it with a TDR and see what you get. Heck, try it at DC
and see what you get.

At his request, I sent a test setup schematic to one of
the gurus on this newsgroup so he could prove me wrong.
He has gone silent and stopped answering my emails. I
expect to see a paper or magazine article announcing
"his discovery".
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com