art wrote:

...
Then it is not fully efficient as a diamagnetic material.
You will note that the SS retains energy in its magnetic
condition via a hysteresis curve.
Art

This all got me wondering ...

Just walked out to garage, with a neodymium magnet, where I have some 8+
ft whips stuck up overhead. Only one of them had NO attraction to the
magnet at all. I believe it is an old antenna specialists ChickenBand whip!

Apparently, back in the 70's the SS in the whips was better. However, I
think the military ones contain the iron for strength, they are tough.

Regards,
JS

On 21 Jan, 15:10, art wrote:
On 21 Jan, 14:55, John Smith wrote:

art wrote:
...
So you reject the magnetic field shape of a diamagnetic material
being deifferent from its steel counterpart?

I have heavy military 12 ft. SS whips, a magnet will stick to them ...

Regards,
JS

Then it is not fully efficient as a diamagnetic material.
You will note that the SS retains energy in its magnetic
condition via a hysteresis curve.
Art

Let me qualify my remarks a bit more. Diamagnetic materials produce an
oxide on its surface
which controls the magnetic field but without retention of energy.
Stainless steel has chromium and nickel as part of its contents which
also produce an oxide on its surfaces. I would imagine that the
configuration of the magnetic field would be somewhat different and
the iron content would also retain magnetic energy instead of using it
for radiation.
Art

Art wrote:
"So you reject the magnetic field shape of a diamagnetic material as
being different from its steel counterpart?"

Yes. A galvanized tower might just as well be solid zinc due to skin
effect. No one makes any allowance for zinc, steel, copper, or gold
except for resistivity. For that, the adjustment is small indeed.

Further, Maxwell`s equations are ample for all electrical radiation
predictions even though these were made before radio waves had been
discovered. No addenda are needed.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI