The pursuit of the all band antenna
 

On 20 Dec, 13:41, Dave Heil wrote:
art wrote:
On 20 Dec, 12:29, Richard Clark wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:03:23 -0800 (PST), art
wrote:

For those that feel that mechanical laws of Newton cannot be used with
respech to electrical subjects( ala Roy) here is a chance for you to
prove your point.
Hi Arthur,

Newton's law:
F = M · A
these FMA terms a
F is force in Newton;
M is mass in kilogram;
A is acceleration in meter / second / second.

We can compute the force on a 10 meter long, 10 kilogram antenna
accelerated by earth's gravity field:
F = 10 kilogram · 9.8 · meter / second / second
or (reduced):
98 kilogram · meter / second / second

When we add 100 Watts of power (for however long), it is clear that
Mass doesn't change. Or perhaps you can tell us how much.

When we add 100 Watts of power (for however long), it is clear that
Acceleration due to gravity doesn't change. Or perhaps you can tell
us how much.

There are only two variables to find Force in Newton's laws. How much
does 100 Watts change Mass or Gravity? I really don't expect you can
answer that because it is too simple: one or both numbers provided
above will be different, that is all. Can you give us something as
specific as I have? In other words, for 100 Watts applied to a 10
meter long, 10 kilogram antenna, will its Mass change to
11 kilogram
or
9 kilogram?
Or will gravity change to
9 · meter / second / second
or
8 · meter / second / second?

Only one or two very specific numbers have to shift here. Can you
tell us which or how much? This is, after all, your topic, your math,
your profession, and your chance to prove your point.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

No

...he replied, "I cannot."

Art leaves the leapfrogging in knowledge to future generations.

Dave K8MN- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If you want to get 'by' then by all means read all the technical books
that reflect the times, that makes you a follower.
If you want to go beyond the books then you have to do the research
and
that makes you a leader. If you place your research in front of a
panel
of experts in the field and then get accepted, it then has a place in
future books thus providing a stepping stone for those that follow.
This newsgroup is for followers of present day books.

By the way, "no" does not equate to "cannot" in any language
It only equates for those who wish to jump the Grand Canyon in two
strides.

The pursuit of the all band antenna
 

"Smash" wrote in message
...

All multi-band antennas are a compromise. The only "all band antenna"
that exists is an isotropic radiator.

not worth responding to art... but this statement is incorrect. an
isotropic radiator doesn't have to be 'all band' or even wide banded.
'isotropic' says nothing about frequency dependence at all, only about
directivity.

The pursuit of the all band antenna
 

On 20 Dec, 13:30, Richard Clark wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 12:44:37 -0800 (PST), art
wrote:

I not only THINK that limited band spread applies, I KNOW for sure
that it does
when considering impedance changes with respect to frequency.

Hi Arthur,

Richard's example resonates from over a 10:1 region in the HF (in
other words ALL HF).

They have published their data, they have published their design. You
are not going to do that, are you? I mean like specific frequencies,
specific SWR measurements, specific antenna dimensions, specific
radiation gains. You are not going to offer us that, are you?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

No.
This group is for book followers. I have placed it in front of a
panel of my peers consisting of professors knoweledgable in the field.
You are welcome to follow the descriptions/instructions that I have
provided over the years if you have an ounce of inquisitiveness
but your niche in life is to mock and not enquire.
Go back to the thread of a thousand postings and go around the
circle once more while injecting snakes and ladders that go no where.
Remember, it took you several months to accept that the adition of a
time variable
to Gaussian law results in the same law stated by Maxwell. I haven't
got the time to
provide a thread of a 1000 postings to satisfy anybody that takes that
long to absorb
every step into new territory absent a book.
Art

The pursuit of the all band antenna
 

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:05:54 -0800 (PST), art
wrote:

They have published their data, they have published their design. You
are not going to do that, are you? I mean like specific frequencies,
specific SWR measurements, specific antenna dimensions, specific
radiation gains. You are not going to offer us that, are you?

No.

Hi Arthur,

Then you don't have anything to offer, do you? What a mooch.

**** IRONIC CONTENT FOLLOWS *****

Let's try this theory on for size.

Arthur, I have an antenna the size of a pin head that works 160M with
20 dB gain, when I operatered it from my basement. It uses the
Earth's magnetic lines of force to penetrate soil, rock, and
constructions. By using ultraminiature plates at right angles, the
Poindexter Vectrod takes on a helical twist that steers through
electron orbits to escape the resistorance of nucklei (wich everyone
nose is 100,000 times larger) thus reducing gain by 5 or 3 divisions.
It is provened by Faradsay laws which came before Gus the mangetic
plumber patended the north and south poles.

If you cannot prove this, then goe and warshipyour old dead gods and
put bernt oferings at there feeet because nonething isreally none but
low so eventhough fo' you to go say you no it, it no so - whoa! so
woe, how po'.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

The pursuit of the all band antenna
 

art wrote:
On 20 Dec, 13:41, Dave Heil wrote:
art wrote:
On 20 Dec, 12:29, Richard Clark wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:03:23 -0800 (PST), art
wrote:
For those that feel that mechanical laws of Newton cannot be used with
respech to electrical subjects( ala Roy) here is a chance for you to
prove your point.
Hi Arthur,
Newton's law:
F = M · A
these FMA terms a
F is force in Newton;
M is mass in kilogram;
A is acceleration in meter / second / second.
We can compute the force on a 10 meter long, 10 kilogram antenna
accelerated by earth's gravity field:
F = 10 kilogram · 9.8 · meter / second / second
or (reduced):
98 kilogram · meter / second / second
When we add 100 Watts of power (for however long), it is clear that
Mass doesn't change. Or perhaps you can tell us how much.
When we add 100 Watts of power (for however long), it is clear that
Acceleration due to gravity doesn't change. Or perhaps you can tell
us how much.
There are only two variables to find Force in Newton's laws. How much
does 100 Watts change Mass or Gravity? I really don't expect you can
answer that because it is too simple: one or both numbers provided
above will be different, that is all. Can you give us something as
specific as I have? In other words, for 100 Watts applied to a 10
meter long, 10 kilogram antenna, will its Mass change to
11 kilogram
or
9 kilogram?
Or will gravity change to
9 · meter / second / second
or
8 · meter / second / second?
Only one or two very specific numbers have to shift here. Can you
tell us which or how much? This is, after all, your topic, your math,
your profession, and your chance to prove your point.
73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC
No
...he replied, "I cannot."

Art leaves the leapfrogging in knowledge to future generations.

Dave K8MN- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If you want to get 'by' then by all means read all the technical books
that reflect the times, that makes you a follower.
If you want to go beyond the books then you have to do the research
and
that makes you a leader.

So, here's your chance to lead, Art. You've been offered a precious
opportunity to enlighten those reading this newsgroup. You've declined.

If you place your research in front of a
panel
of experts in the field and then get accepted, it then has a place in
future books thus providing a stepping stone for those that follow.

What "panel of experts" has accepted your research, Art?

This newsgroup is for followers of present day books.

Then, pray tell, what is a superior being such as yourself doing here
among the followers?

By the way, "no" does not equate to "cannot" in any language
It only equates for those who wish to jump the Grand Canyon in two
strides.

I didn't write anything about the word equating. I added words to it.

Dave K8MN

The pursuit of the all band antenna
 

art wrote:
Art Unwin, a limey no less

Should have said "******" instead of "limey".

The pursuit of the all band antenna
 

Dave wrote:
"Smash" wrote in message
...
All multi-band antennas are a compromise. The only "all band antenna"
that exists is an isotropic radiator.

not worth responding to art... but this statement is incorrect. an
isotropic radiator doesn't have to be 'all band' or even wide banded.
'isotropic' says nothing about frequency dependence at all, only about
directivity.

Kinda my point, actually... :-/

The pursuit of the all band antenna
 

Dave Heil wrote:
art wrote:
On 20 Dec, 13:41, Dave Heil wrote:
art wrote:
On 20 Dec, 12:29, Richard Clark wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:03:23 -0800 (PST), art
wrote:
For those that feel that mechanical laws of Newton cannot be used
with
respech to electrical subjects( ala Roy) here is a chance for you to
prove your point.
Hi Arthur,
Newton's law:
F = M · A
these FMA terms a
F is force in Newton;
M is mass in kilogram;
A is acceleration in meter / second / second.
We can compute the force on a 10 meter long, 10 kilogram antenna
accelerated by earth's gravity field:
F = 10 kilogram · 9.8 · meter / second / second
or (reduced):
98 kilogram · meter / second / second
When we add 100 Watts of power (for however long), it is clear that
Mass doesn't change. Or perhaps you can tell us how much.
When we add 100 Watts of power (for however long), it is clear that
Acceleration due to gravity doesn't change. Or perhaps you can tell
us how much.
There are only two variables to find Force in Newton's laws. How much
does 100 Watts change Mass or Gravity? I really don't expect you can
answer that because it is too simple: one or both numbers provided
above will be different, that is all. Can you give us something as
specific as I have? In other words, for 100 Watts applied to a 10
meter long, 10 kilogram antenna, will its Mass change to
11 kilogram
or
9 kilogram? Or will gravity change to
9 · meter / second / second
or
8 · meter / second / second?
Only one or two very specific numbers have to shift here. Can you
tell us which or how much? This is, after all, your topic, your math,
your profession, and your chance to prove your point.
73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC
No
...he replied, "I cannot."

Art leaves the leapfrogging in knowledge to future generations.

Dave K8MN- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If you want to get 'by' then by all means read all the technical books
that reflect the times, that makes you a follower.
If you want to go beyond the books then you have to do the research
and
that makes you a leader.

So, here's your chance to lead, Art. You've been offered a precious
opportunity to enlighten those reading this newsgroup. You've declined.

If you place your research in front of a
panel
of experts in the field and then get accepted, it then has a place in
future books thus providing a stepping stone for those that follow.

What "panel of experts" has accepted your research, Art?

This newsgroup is for followers of present day books.

Then, pray tell, what is a superior being such as yourself doing here
among the followers?

By the way, "no" does not equate to "cannot" in any language
It only equates for those who wish to jump the Grand Canyon in two
strides.

I didn't write anything about the word equating. I added words to it.

Dave K8MN

In the past, I've tried to buy books published in the future, but
they're not being printed any more.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

The pursuit of the all band antenna
 

On Dec 21, 2:31 pm, Smash wrote:


Should have said "******" instead of "limey".

Ahh so thats what your doing with your other hand, nothing quite
like multi-tasking is there

The pursuit of the all band antenna
 

On Dec 20, 2:44 pm, art wrote:

Your education in radiation tho limited is commensurate with your
age and
experience,certainly not up to par for the future generation but
enough to
satisfy your particular life expectancy segment.

I don't recall reading anything about your level of education
in things RF. I seem to recall you are a retired mechanical
engineer dabbling with things RF in your spare time.
It seems fairly obvious to me that your education in radiation
can't even deal with the present tense, much less the future.
I would strongly consider this before braying like a jackass
to every person you talk to that *does* have an education in
things RF.
But it is possible that if you do that, you will lose much of
the entertainment value that you provide. :/
So go ahead.. Make our day with even more RF bafflegab.
Like I once said, you make the EH antenna guy look fairly
sane by comparison. :/
MK