On 18 Jan, 12:33, Cecil Moore wrote:
art wrote:
To understand that alone
in the face of thousand postings is a very difficult task indeed.Even
more so for a mechanical engineer

When I drive across a long bridge, I am trusting that
most mechanical engineers don't have a problem with
vectors. :-)
--
73, Cecil *http://www.w5dxp.com

No Cedcil I don't have a problem with vectors but apparently those
that follow the sciences of electricity do. From time memorial
electrical engineers have used iron filings to determine
the field lines of an inductor. Yet at the same time we do NOT use a
ferrous material for antennas.Thus when using E and H in radiation
calculations one must determine the the phases of both that are
applicable to the material used. Where the books of old place the EH
vector at the pont of radiation as 90 degrees to each other this can
only be seen as representitive of a ferrous field, where as, a
diamagnetic field vector is exactly the phase of the electric field
vector, putting aside for the moment the "curl" vector. When
considering a radiative circuit one must fully understand that the
current creating the field
is the instant expiration of a capacitor. When a inductance accepts
such energy to generate its field one must determine the material used
to ascertain the true shape of the field. It is no coincidence that a
diamagnetic field is noted for its levitation properties that a
ferrous material cannot supply.So instead of accepting formulae where
a magnetic field is assumed to be consistant the same for all
materials for all materials one must understand that this assumption
is not correct even tho it has consumed the sciences of today which
has forced the generation of the new sciences of the day. It is time
the books were redwritten to reflect the true workings of nature
around which Newtons laws still stands.
My two penny worth from a mechanical engineer.
Best regards as always
Art Unwin KB9MZ....XG( uk)