On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 12:46:22 -0800 (PST), art
wrote:

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.

No

Then there's your proof that Newton's law doesn't work.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

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

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.

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

art wrote:
It can be seen that a fixed radfiator hasd a primary frequency and
then some harmonic frequencies.
The spacing and the resonant points of an antenna resides in the
amount of resistance in the cuircuit
from zero upto a critical point as with a tank circuit. This
resistance value has the action of bringing the radiator
vibrational amplitude to zero where it then takes of to a diminishing
value compared to other componenents in the circuit to the point that
where the radiator is resonant the contained resistance has negnigable
effect.
Thus one can make a folded dipole with a variable resistance in the
radfiating circuit such that the main resonant point can be determined
as well as the spacing between the harmonic frequencies.
In addition, if the radiator consists of increased induntance designs
such as contra windings then the distance between the resonance point
and the harmonic points begin to decrease.
Thus using the above one can now make a all band antenna where the
resonance points line up with the desired frequencies.
An easy way to accomplish this is to wind wire on a dielectris from
end to end and back again several times
until one has wound at least two wave lengths on the former and then
feeding the arrangement at the beginning and ending wire points. Using
a mfj 259 one can then determine the spacings of the resonant point by
stretching the windins as well as adding the required variable
resister. Note. the resistance absorbs the energy between
resonance points and diminishes in effect as the point of resonance is
aproached. For more understanding of the radiation format of radiators
review the circumstances of voltage overshoot with respect to tank
circuits
The above will provide an alternate discussion thread that will take
away the current tunnel vision aproach
with respect to "black boxes" and bring the newsgroup back to the
advancement of antenna techniques if it is that that peeks one's
interests.

By the way, it is the ELECTROMAGNETIC field that launches the
particles from the radiating surface and it is the MECHANICAL REACTIVE
FORCE that provides the mechanical resonance of the radiator WHICH
JOINS THE THEORIES OF NEWTON AND . MAXWELL that Einstein struggled for
in vain.
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.
Regards
Art Unwin, a limey no less

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

Smash wrote:

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

But the isotropic radiator doesn't exist. It's a theoretical construct.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

On Dec 20, 5:45*pm, Roy Lewallen wrote:
Smash wrote:

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

But the isotropic radiator doesn't exist. It's a theoretical construct.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

The best all band antenna I used was in my novice days... A 100 watt
light bulb on the end of a pair roughly 33 foot wires strung up
through a tree... Worked a dozen states one afternoon on 15 and 40,
then worked the locals on 80 that night... The Knightkit T-100 loaded
up just fine on that all band antenna... I don't think it was
isotropic, but it sure did blink when being keyed.. The neighbors
came over wondering why it was Christmas in September.... That was
cycle 19... What a great time we had...

denny / k8do

"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.

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... :-/

art wrote:
Art Unwin, a limey no less

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