| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Universal laws of the sciences
All the laws of the universe are directly a reflection of the action
that Newtons laws pertain to. All Newtons laws pertain to relative movement of mass which is comprised of time, mass and relative distance to form a state of equilibrium. We all know how mechanical laws are conneted to Newton but how is electricity essentially the same? We all know that magnetism is a reflection of the smallest dipole relative angle at any point in time. We also know that this dipole can also turn during a period of time such that the magnetic field of force at any point in time is reflected by the angle that the dipole takes. This dipole in electrical terms is a microsom of the large mechanical forces in relative movement. For electricity the dipole takes up an alignment that reflect the current flow at any point and place in time. Thus with a dc current all the dipoles aligne with each other with respect to the current flow in a two dimensional form. When applying an alternating current we are also really applying a DC current but with a rotational or three degrees of freedom such that at any point in time all dipole alignment reflect the torque angle at that particular point which is NOT the same as any other dipole point alignment. Thus when current is not applied the molecular dipole arrangement fall back to the directions it had prior to the onset of current to provide a stated of equilibrium. In the case of a DC current supplied the microscopic dipoles ALL have the same alignement and when the current ceases to be applied the dipoles still stay in alignment with each other. So in effect ,the movement of the micro dipole in electricity is exactly the same as a mechanical element where all the forces of the electrical dipoles are summated. There are difference with mechanical elements which can be determined by its mass and structural make up such as how they perform in a magnetic field. Earlier we expressed the strength of a magnetic field is measured in part by the angular position of its resident dipoles.For a true magnet formed with a ferrous material the atmosphere can permeate all of the material as it changing its composition, but in the initial state the total mass is a reflection of the number of inherrent dipoles which in summation is a measure of the potential energy contained. With a current carrying element such as aluminum when it is exposed to the atmoshere it immediately forms a barrier to prevent the ongoing penetration of oxidtion. Thus when a current is applied it can only affect the dipoles in the protective skin depth of the pattina and not affect the internal unoxidizes material where it can oxidize and decay as with a ferrous material. Thus the pattina can only hold a smaller number of dipoles which reflects a smaller potential energy for generating a magnetic field. Thus both electrical and mechanical formats surround the facts of potential energy and kinetic energy when in a state of equilibrium as espoused by Newtons laws. Have a happy day Best regards Art Unwin KB9MZ.......XG (uk) |
Universal laws of the sciences
On 17 Jan, 18:42, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"art" wrote in message ... All the laws of the universe are directly a reflection of the action that Newtons laws pertain to. All Newtons laws pertain to relative movement of mass which is comprised of time, mass and relative distance to form a state of equilibrium. We all know how mechanical laws are conneted to Newton but how is electricity essentially the same? We all know that magnetism is a reflection of the smallest dipole relative angle at any point in time. We also know that this dipole can also turn during a period of time such that the magnetic field of force at any point in time is reflected by the angle that the dipole takes. This dipole in electrical terms is a microsom of the large mechanical forces in relative movement. For electricity the dipole takes up an alignment that reflect the current flow at any point and place in time. Thus with a dc current all the dipoles aligne with each other with respect to the current flow in a two dimensional form. When applying an alternating current we are also really applying a DC current but with a rotational or three degrees of freedom such that at any point in time all dipole alignment reflect the torque angle at that particular point which is NOT the same as any other dipole point alignment. Thus when current is not applied the molecular dipole arrangement fall back to the directions it had prior to the onset of current to provide a stated of equilibrium. In the case of a DC current supplied the microscopic dipoles ALL have the same alignement and when the current ceases to be applied the dipoles still stay in alignment with each other. So in effect ,the movement of the micro dipole in electricity is exactly the same as a mechanical element where all the forces of the electrical dipoles are summated. There are difference with mechanical elements which can be determined by its mass and structural make up such as how they perform in a magnetic field. Earlier we expressed the strength of a magnetic field *is measured in part by the angular position of its resident dipoles.For a true magnet formed with a ferrous material the atmosphere can permeate all of the material as it *changing its composition, but in the initial state the total mass is a reflection of the number of inherrent dipoles which in summation is a measure of the potential energy contained. With a current carrying element such as aluminum when it is exposed to the atmoshere it immediately forms a barrier to prevent the ongoing penetration of oxidtion. Thus when a current is applied it can only affect the dipoles in the protective skin depth of the pattina and not affect the internal unoxidizes material where it can oxidize and decay as with a ferrous material. Thus the pattina can only hold a smaller number of dipoles which reflects a smaller potential energy for generating a magnetic field. Thus both electrical and mechanical formats surround the facts of potential energy and kinetic energy when in a state of equilibrium as espoused by Newtons laws. Have a happy day Best regards Art Unwin KB9MZ.......XG (uk) The casual reader of the ng should realize that this insane posting is not representative of the technical background of ham radio operators.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You know. that statement was made a decade ago by W7EL and he started up a storm of auguements on this newsgroup which pushed off so many knoweledgable engineers/ radio hams. Problem was that W7EL choose hismelf as the adjudicator as what is right and what was wrong! Knoweledgable did not always agree with W7EL but with the diatribes thrown they choose to leave. Now you also have chosen to be the adjudicator in conjunction with W7EL! Give me a break. Art Unwin KB9MZ...xg (uk) |
Universal laws of the sciences
AI4QJ wrote:
"art" wrote in message ... All the laws of the universe are directly a reflection of the action that Newtons laws pertain to. All Newtons laws pertain to relative movement of mass which is comprised of time, mass and relative distance to form a state of equilibrium. We all know how mechanical laws are conneted to Newton but how is electricity essentially the same? We all know that magnetism is a reflection of the smallest dipole relative angle at any point in time. We also know that this dipole can also turn during a period of time such that the magnetic field of force at any point in time is reflected by the angle that the dipole takes. This dipole in electrical terms is a microsom of the large mechanical forces in relative movement. For electricity the dipole takes up an alignment that reflect the current flow at any point and place in time. Thus with a dc current all the dipoles aligne with each other with respect to the current flow in a two dimensional form. When applying an alternating current we are also really applying a DC current but with a rotational or three degrees of freedom such that at any point in time all dipole alignment reflect the torque angle at that particular point which is NOT the same as any other dipole point alignment. Thus when current is not applied the molecular dipole arrangement fall back to the directions it had prior to the onset of current to provide a stated of equilibrium. In the case of a DC current supplied the microscopic dipoles ALL have the same alignement and when the current ceases to be applied the dipoles still stay in alignment with each other. So in effect ,the movement of the micro dipole in electricity is exactly the same as a mechanical element where all the forces of the electrical dipoles are summated. There are difference with mechanical elements which can be determined by its mass and structural make up such as how they perform in a magnetic field. Earlier we expressed the strength of a magnetic field is measured in part by the angular position of its resident dipoles.For a true magnet formed with a ferrous material the atmosphere can permeate all of the material as it changing its composition, but in the initial state the total mass is a reflection of the number of inherrent dipoles which in summation is a measure of the potential energy contained. With a current carrying element such as aluminum when it is exposed to the atmoshere it immediately forms a barrier to prevent the ongoing penetration of oxidtion. Thus when a current is applied it can only affect the dipoles in the protective skin depth of the pattina and not affect the internal unoxidizes material where it can oxidize and decay as with a ferrous material. Thus the pattina can only hold a smaller number of dipoles which reflects a smaller potential energy for generating a magnetic field. Thus both electrical and mechanical formats surround the facts of potential energy and kinetic energy when in a state of equilibrium as espoused by Newtons laws. Have a happy day Best regards Art Unwin KB9MZ.......XG (uk) The casual reader of the ng should realize that this insane posting is not representative of the technical background of ham radio operators. Art is entitled to his opinions which are no more crazy than, say, Christian dominionism, or "creation science." They may be wrong and hard to make sense of, but at least they're honest and original. 73, Tom Donaly, KA6RUH |
Universal laws of the sciences
"Tom Donaly" wrote in
: Art is entitled to his opinions which are no more crazy than, say, Christian dominionism, or "creation science." They may be wrong and hard to make sense of, but at least they're honest and original. Art's ideas are no more crazy than those you compared them to, but those ideas are a whole lot crazier than Art's! - 73 d eMike N3LI - |
Universal laws of the sciences
Tom Donaly wrote:
AI4QJ wrote: "art" wrote in message Thus the pattina can only hold a smaller number of dipoles which reflects a smaller potential energy for generating a magnetic field. Thus both electrical and mechanical formats surround the facts of potential energy and kinetic energy when in a state of equilibrium as espoused by Newtons laws. Have a happy day Best regards Art Unwin KB9MZ.......XG (uk) The casual reader of the ng should realize that this insane posting is not representative of the technical background of ham radio operators. Art is entitled to his opinions which are no more crazy than, say, Christian dominionism, or "creation science." They may be wrong and hard to make sense of, but at least they're honest and original. If they are wrong, they aren't honest. They're simply bad science and not worthy of our time. One of Art's biggest problems is that he writes in kooky generalities and never ever provides specifics. I've asked him three times for information on his 18 foot 160m antenna. All I've gotten in response is a bad tap dance. I have no choice but to put him down as a lonely old eccentric, a few degrees off level. Dave K8MN |
Universal laws of the sciences
Mike Coslo wrote:
"Tom Donaly" wrote in : Art is entitled to his opinions which are no more crazy than, say, Christian dominionism, or "creation science." They may be wrong and hard to make sense of, but at least they're honest and original. Art's ideas are no more crazy than those you compared them to, but those ideas are a whole lot crazier than Art's! - 73 d eMike N3LI - Oh yeah, the premise(s) you state are self evident! Rocks turning into biological organisms. Krist, mundane really--for the "wackos way of thinking." Everyone else realizes it take a mind to "create/make something." You damn bizarre idiot! ROFLOL Gawd, and you think it would be easy for someone to follow logic ... JS |
Universal laws of the sciences
John Smith wrote:
... Gawd, and you think it would be easy for someone to follow logic ... JS And then, these damn kooks have the sheer gall to poke fun at Art? Geesh, they must not have mirrors to look in! JS |
Universal laws of the sciences
"Dave Heil" wrote in message (snip) I have no choice but to put him down as a lonely old eccentric, a few degrees off level. Dave K8MN ------------- "Judge not lest ye be judged" I come here to learn and converse with others of similar interests. Unfortunately, the atmosphere here is very hostile and uninviting. Who the hell wants to argue all of the time? Not me. Many of you are far more educated than I, but many of you demonstrate precisely why I chose not to be brainwashed with a formal education. Many cannot see past the end of their noses, yet they insist upon laying down the law regarding what is acceptable science and what is not. As though anyone actually knows anything at all. Each and every day there are new announcements that reshape our scientific paradigm. Who can keep up? It was while I was trying to keep up that I finally realized that the more we learn, the more we should realize that nothing is certain. Yet the same young/old coots are in here argueing day after day that what they learned in the 1940's and 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's and now the 20's, is the Gospel Truth. I wish you could see just how silly you appear to others. I'm not pointing the finger at anyone in particular. Let's not forget that one's educational level has nothing to do with native IQ. Ed, NM2K |
Universal laws of the sciences
On Jan 18, 3:36 am, "Ed Cregger" wrote:
Yet the same young/old coots are in here argueing day after day that what they learned in the 1940's and 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's and now the 20's, is the Gospel Truth. I wish you could see just how silly you appear to others. I'm not pointing the finger at anyone in particular. But on the other hand many of those theories have been tested over and over again in all those years. If they pass the continued test of time, I trust them more than I do bafflegab that usually breaks these fairly well proven theories with no prior testing done of the new theories. I have nothing against trying new ideas, but they should at least be tested and proven in the real world before they are unleashed as "fact", or that I need to "recognize" something that is obviously not the case, already proven through years of repeated testing. I've told Art many times... If you build it and it works, they will come. He refuses. When a person proclaims that they have a new theory which will likely break the laws of older proven theory, it's that persons obligation to prove his case, not the other way around. And to do that requires getting off ones rear to build and test the real deal, in the real world and letting the chips fall where they may. Art claims to have an 18 ft antenna for 160m on his tower, but on the other hand he says he does not operate. So how is he going to test it? And if it's going to be a fair test, he needs a reference antenna. If I claimed to have a small antenna that was equal in efficiency to a full size antenna, I would A/B compare it to a full size antenna. If the chips fell in an undesirable manner, I would scrap the thing, and move on to something else. It's not like it would be the end of the world. Art never gets this far. So due to a lack of actual testing, it's like a dog chasing it's tail, while barking at the moon at the same time. I'm all for new ideas, and I surely know that in the history of the world, people will likely see things much differently 200 years from now, than they do today. That's a given.. All I'm saying is... Don't feed me a turd and call it steak, without tasting it first. I can smell the difference in most cases just from my own prior experiences. If I thought a 18 ft element could equal a full size element on 160m, you can bet I would already have one in the air. But I know just from prior testing with just half size dipoles using efficient Hi-Q loading coils at optimum locations, that even they couldn't quite match up. I had to go to a "Z" dipole to get close to full size efficiency. So when I hear stories of small radiators wound with thin 22 gauge wire in a "to me" perverted contra wound method, and this is supposed to be the answer to all our prayers, please excuse me if I don't rush out to nominate Art for the Nobel prize in physics without a little real world demonstration. Using a real full size antenna to compare it with would be nice. I would expect no less from even an alien if he promised a free lunch deal like that. Or myself for that matter. MK |
Universal laws of the sciences
On Jan 18, 3:36 am, "Ed Cregger" wrote:
snip Many of you are far more educated than I, but many of you demonstrate precisely why I chose not to be brainwashed with a formal education. Many cannot see past the end of their noses, yet they insist upon laying down the law regarding what is acceptable science and what is not. As though anyone actually knows anything at all. snip Let's not forget that one's educational level has nothing to do with native IQ. Ed, NM2K You are correct to say that education has nothing to do with IQ. Faraday had little formal training, yet his arduous work is now exalted by naming one of the basic electromagnetic laws after him. But I take issue with the idea that you can't actually know anything at all. For instance, electrodynamic theory was developed 150 years ago, and the KNOWN successful results of that are numerous. Newtonian mechanics held up well for hundreds of years. A whole industrial revolution was built on it. Yet some pesky observations by Michelson and Morley regarding the invariant speed of light found it wanting. Relativistic mechanics subsumed Newtonian mechanics, but Einstein didn't invalidate Newton. I believe the mathematical term "embedding" applies. I am currently re-studying the original theory of Maxwell, et. al., with the intent of finding some chink in the armor. Tesla reported longitudinal electromagnetic wave phenomena, which contradicts the now- standard theory that EM waves can ONLY be transversal. Using Maxwell's original quaternion equations, before Heviside simplified them into the now-standard vector form, one can derive longitudinal wave components. If those exist, does that prove you don't know how to operate a ham radio? No, it just means you're radiating something in addition to what you expect. You CAN know something and apply it. You just need to realize that what you know isn't complete, and never can be. |
Universal laws of the sciences
|
Universal laws of the sciences
On 18 Jan, 08:38, wrote:
On Jan 18, 3:36 am, "Ed Cregger" wrote: snip Many of you are far more educated than I, but many of you demonstrate precisely why I chose not to be brainwashed with a formal education. Many cannot see past the end of their noses, yet they insist upon laying down the law regarding what is acceptable science and what is not. As though anyone actually knows anything at all. snip Let's not forget that one's educational level has nothing to do with native IQ. Ed, NM2K You are correct to say that education has nothing to do with IQ. Faraday had little formal training, yet his arduous work is now exalted by naming one of the basic electromagnetic laws after him. But I take issue with the idea that you can't actually know anything at all. For instance, electrodynamic theory was developed 150 years ago, and the KNOWN successful results of that are numerous. Newtonian mechanics held up well for hundreds of years. A whole industrial revolution was built on it. Yet some pesky observations by Michelson and Morley regarding the invariant speed of light found it wanting. Relativistic mechanics subsumed Newtonian mechanics, but Einstein didn't invalidate Newton. I believe the mathematical term "embedding" applies. I am currently re-studying the original theory of Maxwell, et. al., with the intent of finding some chink in the armor. Tesla reported longitudinal electromagnetic wave phenomena, which contradicts the now- standard theory that EM waves can ONLY be transversal. Using Maxwell's original quaternion equations, before Heviside simplified them into the now-standard vector form, one can derive longitudinal wave components. If those exist, does that prove you don't know how to operate a ham radio? No, it just means you're radiating something in addition to what you expect. You CAN know something and apply it. You just need to realize that what you know isn't complete, and never can be. The chink is provided by Gauss.Adding a time varient to his law of statics brings you to Maxwells law Holding on to the equilibrium underpinnings you may then insert a radiator that also is in equilibrium i.e. a full wave length. Now you are equipped to insert same into a antenna program to determine shape ,size,elevation e.t.c for maximum horizontal gain. Maxwells law will then show that to meet this requirement is for the radiator to not be parallel to the ground surface but tipped to an angle. This angle is the summation of the curl vector and others that are entailed.Gauss following from the Newtonian aproach of equilibrium provides a pasaage of knoweledge that was not available in the blank statements of Maxwell. All this provides a picture which equals a thousand words and a sound basis to build upon. The understanding of this aproach has been stalled with this newsgroup on the basis of transformation of static field to a dynamic field is illegal, regardless of the math proving otherwise! Facts are stranger than the fiction of this group. Have fun with your studies. Art Unwin KB9MZ...xg (uk) |
Universal laws of the sciences
On 18 Jan, 09:17, Mike Monett wrote:
* wrote: * I am *currently *re-studying the original theory *of *Maxwell, et. * al., with *the *intent of finding some chink in *the *armor. Tesla * reported *longitudinal * electromagnetic * wave * phenomena, which * contradicts the *now-standard *theory that EM *waves *can *ONLY be * transversal. Using Maxwell's original quaternion equations, before * Heviside simplified *them into the now-standard *vector *form, one * can derive longitudinal wave components. If those exist, does that * prove you don't know how to operate a ham radio? No, it just means * you're radiating something in addition to what you expect. * Tesla made a lot of claims to try to get money from investors. There * is no evidence to support his claims of longitudinal electromagnetic * waves. What kind of detector did he use? In the century or *so since * then, why has nobody re-discovered these waves? * You can determine the probability these waves exist with very simple * logic. * The range equations for radar and deep space communication *are very * well established, *and *the radiated energy is *well *understood. In * order to *make progress on discovering longitudinal waves, *you have * to find some anomaly. If you could show some error in *the equations * where power was missing, you might be on to something. But first you * have to show there really is an anomaly. * If these waves exist, where does the power come from and *where does * it go? *What *mechanism determines how the *power *is *split between * normal EM waves and longitudinal waves? * You can measure power very accurately. Signal to noise ratio *is one * of the most crucial parameters in satellite communication. *If there * were any *anomalies *in *the *range *equations, *someone *would have * discovered them long ago. And Roy would have updated his code. * You can bet on that! * Regards, * Mike Monett Roy's program is nothing more than a calculator. It is not equipped with computor analytical skills such as an optimizer where the computor searches for possible changes to the imput to determine maximum required results . As a calculator you insert the math question and the calculator provides the result A computor optimizer does exactly what the title suggests, it works for you in search of a better arrangement that you supplied so you may determine an optimum solution for the inputted request. None tell you that thematerial used must be diamagnetic so just use aluminum or copper and you will be O.K. As far as purchasing a computor program there are choices out there that are not so basic. Art Art |
Universal laws of the sciences
|
Universal laws of the sciences
John Smith wrote:
wrote: ... You are correct to say that education has nothing to do with IQ. Faraday had little formal training, yet his arduous work is now exalted by naming one of the basic electromagnetic laws after him. ... Amen, end of story ... Regards, JS Oh yeah, don't forget Einstein--his "teachers" thought him slow and retarded! Regards, JS |
Universal laws of the sciences
John Smith wrote:
Oh yeah, don't forget Einstein--his "teachers" thought him slow and retarded! My high school algebra teacher accused me of cheating because I could factor third-degree polynomials in my head and she couldn't. :-) -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Universal laws of the sciences
Cecil Moore wrote:
... My high school algebra teacher accused me of cheating because I could factor third-degree polynomials in my head and she couldn't. :-) Cecil: I attempted to avoid this point, where you now have me. Believe me man, you are a "cut above"--and it IS noticeable! But then, you have the br*ss b*lls to stand 'yer ground, something I admire also ... Warmest regards, JS |
Universal laws of the sciences
On Jan 18, 11:17 am, Mike Monett wrote:
You can determine the probability these waves exist with very simple logic. The range equations for radar and deep space communication are very well established, and the radiated energy is well understood. In order to make progress on discovering longitudinal waves, you have to find some anomaly. If you could show some error in the equations where power was missing, you might be on to something. But first you have to show there really is an anomaly. I'll be the first to admit there doesn't appear to be much probability for longitudinal waves, since there seems to be no convincing empirical evidence. But, as with Michelson and Morley, who LOGICALLY thought that light should travel at a slower speed against the aether, maybe we just haven't been doing the right observation. Current theory says longitudinal waves can't happen, so nobody seriously looks for them or thinks to attribute any potential anomaly to them. We might have a case of circular reasoning. Besides, practical antennas are designed for transverse far-fields, so I don't expect they would produce much in the way of longitudinal waves, which may be a near- field phenomena. The quaternion development of EM theory implies that charge divergence is one source of longitudinal waves. That happens along the axis of antenna conductors, but I doubt the efficiency of conversion, assuming there is any, would be very high. Another theoretical source of longitudinal waves come from high rate of change electric fields. Tesla's inventions exhibited both sources. His pancake coils created high current divergence, albeit in a spiral pattern. And his high voltage spark discharge devices created exceedingly high rates of change of voltage. Where would the power come from for longitudinal waves? If I can't use regular electricity, I'm holding out for conversion of zero-point energy or direct mass-energy conversion. Yeah, I know, more crackpot long shots. I'll need something to do in retirement other than the wife's housework. I read that mental challenges help stave off Alzheimer's. You can't beat this for a challenge. Or maybe this falling down this rabbit hole of kookism is the onset of Alzheimer's. Hmm. Hadn't thought of that before. |
Universal laws of the sciences
Ed Cregger wrote:
"Dave Heil" wrote in message (snip) I have no choice but to put him down as a lonely old eccentric, a few degrees off level. Dave K8MN ------------- "Judge not lest ye be judged" I don't mind being judged, Ed, as long as you don't mind being judged. :-) I come here to learn and converse with others of similar interests. Many of us come for the same reason. A number actually are quite expert. Those are the fellows from whom I learn. Unfortunately, the atmosphere here is very hostile and uninviting. Who the hell wants to argue all of the time? Not me. You're right, Ed. A number of those who are hostile are experts. Most are not. Many of you are far more educated than I, but many of you demonstrate precisely why I chose not to be brainwashed with a formal education. If that's your view, I think I can see why you might have had difficulties. Many cannot see past the end of their noses, yet they insist upon laying down the law regarding what is acceptable science and what is not. As though anyone actually knows anything at all. Is it your opinion that no one here knows anything at all? Each and every day there are new announcements that reshape our scientific paradigm. Who can keep up? There's always someone who can keep up, Ed. You'll find a number of them here. It was while I was trying to keep up that I finally realized that the more we learn, the more we should realize that nothing is certain. I might have to take issue with that. I can think of a number of certainties. You don't believe there are any? Yet the same young/old coots are in here argueing day after day that what they learned in the 1940's and 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's and now the 20's, is the Gospel Truth. What's your position, Ed? If nothing regarding antennas is true, we're all wasting our time here. I wish you could see just how silly you appear to others. I'm not pointing the finger at anyone in particular. Though you responded to my comments regarding one who never provides any details of his peculiar theories. Let's not forget that one's educational level has nothing to do with native IQ. ....but a crackpot is generally a crackpot, whatever his IQ or educational level. A great deal of useful information may be found here. It is accompanied by a great deal of misinformation. Do you know how to separate the wheat from the chaff? Dave K8MN Ed, NM2K |
Universal laws of the sciences
Dave Heil wrote:
... ...but a crackpot is generally a crackpot, whatever his IQ or educational level. A great deal of useful information may be found here. It is accompanied by a great deal of misinformation. Do you know how to separate the wheat from the chaff? Dave K8MN Ed, NM2K Yeah, stop dropping chaff in my damn wheat! ROFLOL JS |
Universal laws of the sciences
John Smith wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: ... ...but a crackpot is generally a crackpot, whatever his IQ or educational level. A great deal of useful information may be found here. It is accompanied by a great deal of misinformation. Do you know how to separate the wheat from the chaff? Yeah, stop dropping chaff in my damn wheat! ROFLOL I've yet to advance any claims for an astounding new concept in the field of antennas, "John". I'm always interested in the theoretical. Most of my knowledge of antennas is in the practical. I don't feel as if you are one who could teach me anything I don't already know on the subject. My exposure to you here and elsewhere reveals you to be an anonymous fellow who boasts of 5KW amplifiers and of using high power on the Citizens Band. You claim to be a teacher of some sort, but your English skills are at the high school level and your knowledge of punctuation is minimal. Dave K8MN |
Universal laws of the sciences
Dave Heil wrote:
... I've yet to advance any claims for an astounding new concept in the field of antennas, "John". I'm always interested in the theoretical. Most of my knowledge of antennas is in the practical. I don't feel as if you are one who could teach me anything I don't already know on the subject. My exposure to you here and elsewhere reveals you to be an anonymous fellow who boasts of 5KW amplifiers and of using high power on the Citizens Band. You claim to be a teacher of some sort, but your English skills are at the high school level and your knowledge of punctuation is minimal. Dave K8MN Ahh, Dave, you wear me out ... Regards, JS |
Universal laws of the sciences
wrote in message ... On Jan 18, 3:36 am, "Ed Cregger" wrote: snip Many of you are far more educated than I, but many of you demonstrate precisely why I chose not to be brainwashed with a formal education. Many cannot see past the end of their noses, yet they insist upon laying down the law regarding what is acceptable science and what is not. As though anyone actually knows anything at all. snip Let's not forget that one's educational level has nothing to do with native IQ. Ed, NM2K You are correct to say that education has nothing to do with IQ. Faraday had little formal training, yet his arduous work is now exalted by naming one of the basic electromagnetic laws after him. But I take issue with the idea that you can't actually know anything at all. For instance, electrodynamic theory was developed 150 years ago, and the KNOWN successful results of that are numerous. Newtonian mechanics held up well for hundreds of years. A whole industrial revolution was built on it. Yet some pesky observations by Michelson and Morley regarding the invariant speed of light found it wanting. Relativistic mechanics subsumed Newtonian mechanics, but Einstein didn't invalidate Newton. I believe the mathematical term "embedding" applies. I am currently re-studying the original theory of Maxwell, et. al., with the intent of finding some chink in the armor. Tesla reported longitudinal electromagnetic wave phenomena, which contradicts the now- standard theory that EM waves can ONLY be transversal. Using Maxwell's original quaternion equations, before Heviside simplified them into the now-standard vector form, one can derive longitudinal wave components. If those exist, does that prove you don't know how to operate a ham radio? No, it just means you're radiating something in addition to what you expect. You CAN know something and apply it. You just need to realize that what you know isn't complete, and never can be. ----------- I do not disagree with a thing that you have said. Ed Cregger |
Universal laws of the sciences
On 19 Jan, 10:56, "AI4QJ" wrote:
wrote in message ne http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/le24.htm I have just got around to reading just the intro of the above URL. Later I will digest the rest of the lesson. What struck me was how deftly the author pointed out where pseudo experts have dominated science thru the ages such that it reflects the poles of the many led by the few. It shows time and time again that science is a popularity contest where the so called "in crowd" of of self rightious people have been able to thwat the advances of science of the past centuries. Gallilao comes to mind as does Green of Nottingham and Heavieside of Clapton and ofcourse my favorite Gauss. We are seeing the same thing here on this newsgroup where passed tenents are held on to the death by those addicted to the passed. Naturally I think about my own case. I presented a trail of science where each step can be examined in depth on Googles when reading the achievements of others. There is not one point on the trail that prior science does not repute. It fills a void with respect to radiation where presently there is nothing else presented to fill this gap of knoweledge. Yet we can see how humans react to change with out a morsel of evidence to contradict the new are able to gather a baying crowd similar to that around madame Guillotine to view the death of nobles. Ofcourse at that time academia had not closed its society off from the outside where now they are better equipped against the poll makers such that the only efforts left to derail in science are those generated outside the academic world and also judged by those who are also excluded by the closed society as a unproven value. Vincent was different. He generated his skunk works from the inside of academia who were desperate to include themselves into the closed.science of academia, Where they could supply information that would not and does not pass the time of day in academia. I read a tale once that a man hid from facts by hiding in a garbage can where he suddenly realised he was closed off from all the worries of the world. Where the temperature was warm and food tho spoiled was available for the picking. Ofcourse there was the smell but what did it really matter as nobody else was around that could smell and thus insult him. In this group there is evidence that some of its members have emerged from their former places of confort and thus show that even in speech does the former odour prevail. Humans must get away from this syndrome of resistance to change and regain its inherrant inquisitiveness. Very best regards to all Art Unwin....KB9MZ...XG(uk) |
Universal laws of the sciences
"art" wrote in message ... On 19 Jan, 10:56, "AI4QJ" wrote: wrote in message ne http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/le24.htm I have just got around to reading just the intro of the above URL. Later I will digest the rest of the lesson. What struck me was how deftly the author pointed out where pseudo experts have dominated science thru the ages such that it reflects the poles of the many led by the few. It shows time and time again that science is a popularity contest where the so called "in crowd" of of self rightious people have been able to thwat the advances of science of the past centuries. Gallilao comes to mind as does Green of Nottingham and Heavieside of Clapton and ofcourse my favorite Gauss. We are seeing the same thing here on this newsgroup where passed tenents are held on to the death by those addicted to the passed. Naturally I think about my own case. I presented a trail of science where each step can be examined in depth on Googles when reading the achievements of others. There is not one point on the trail that prior science does not repute. It fills a void with respect to radiation where presently there is nothing else presented to fill this gap of knoweledge. Yet we can see how humans react to change with out a morsel of evidence to contradict the new are able to gather a baying crowd similar to that around madame Guillotine to view the death of nobles. Ofcourse at that time academia had not closed its society off from the outside where now they are better equipped against the poll makers such that the only efforts left to derail in science are those generated outside the academic world and also judged by those who are also excluded by the closed society as a unproven value. Vincent was different. He generated his skunk works from the inside of academia who were desperate to include themselves into the closed.science of academia, Where they could supply information that would not and does not pass the time of day in academia. I read a tale once that a man hid from facts by hiding in a garbage can where he suddenly realised he was closed off from all the worries of the world. Where the temperature was warm and food tho spoiled was available for the picking. Ofcourse there was the smell but what did it really matter as nobody else was around that could smell and thus insult him. In this group there is evidence that some of its members have emerged from their former places of confort and thus show that even in speech does the former odour prevail. Humans must get away from this syndrome of resistance to change and regain its inherrant inquisitiveness. Very best regards to all Art Unwin....KB9MZ...XG(uk) ------------- Do you suppose that red blood cells look down their noses at white blood cells? After all, there are far more red blood cells than white blood cells. Numbers alone would indicate that they are superior. Perhaps the white blood cells feel that they are superior because there are fewer of them. Plus, they have the noblest task of all, that of defending the world/body. Without either type, our bodies would cease to function. So it is with various types of people. We need them all. Each have their function. None are expendable. Ed, NM2K |
Universal laws of the sciences
On 20 Jan, 09:21, "Ed Cregger" wrote:
"art" wrote in message ... On 19 Jan, 10:56, "AI4QJ" wrote: wrote in message ne http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/le24.htm I have just got around to reading just the intro of the above URL. Later I will digest the rest of the lesson. What struck me was how deftly the author pointed out where pseudo experts have dominated science thru the ages such that it reflects the poles of the many led by the few. It shows time and time again that science is a popularity contest where the so called "in crowd" of of self rightious people have been able to thwat the advances of science of the past centuries. Gallilao comes to mind as does Green of Nottingham and Heavieside of Clapton and ofcourse my favorite Gauss. We are seeing the same thing here on this newsgroup where passed tenents are held on to the death by those addicted to the passed. Naturally I think about my own case. I presented a trail of science where each step can be examined in depth on Googles when reading the achievements of others. There is not one point on the trail that prior science does not repute. It fills a void with respect to radiation where presently there is nothing else presented to fill this gap of knoweledge. Yet we can see how humans react to change with out a morsel of evidence to contradict the new are able to gather a baying crowd similar to that around madame Guillotine to view the death of nobles. Ofcourse at that time academia had not closed its society off from the outside where now they are better equipped against the poll makers such that the only efforts left to derail in science are those generated outside the academic world and also judged by those who are also excluded by the closed society as a unproven value. Vincent was different. He generated his skunk works from the inside of academia who were desperate to include themselves into the closed.science of academia, Where they could supply information that would not and does not pass the time of day in academia. I read a tale once that a man hid from facts by hiding in a garbage can where he suddenly realised he was closed off from all the worries of the world. Where the temperature was warm and food tho spoiled was available for the picking. Ofcourse there was the smell but what did it really matter as nobody else was around that could smell and thus insult him. In this group there is evidence that some of its members have emerged from their former places of confort and thus show that even in speech does the former odour prevail. Humans must get away from this syndrome of resistance to change and regain its inherrant inquisitiveness. Very best regards to all Art Unwin....KB9MZ...XG(uk) ------------- Do you suppose that red blood cells look down their noses at white blood cells? After all, there are far more red blood cells than white blood cells. Numbers alone would indicate that they are superior. Perhaps the white blood cells feel that they are superior because there are fewer of them. Plus, they have the noblest task of all, that of defending the world/body. Without either type, our bodies would cease to function. So it is with various types of people. We need them all. Each have their function. None are expendable. Ed, NM2K- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes. But when they over estimate their abilities in areas outside their field of expertise you can expect problems. Both a set of gears as well as a wrench each have superb qualities. Let the wrench place itself between the grinding teeth of gears then all progress comes to a halt Art |
Universal laws of the sciences
On 20 Jan, 09:51, art wrote:
On 20 Jan, 09:21, "Ed Cregger" wrote: "art" wrote in message ... On 19 Jan, 10:56, "AI4QJ" wrote: wrote in message ne http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/le24.htm I have just got around to reading just the intro of the above URL. Later I will digest the rest of the lesson. What struck me was how deftly the author pointed out where pseudo experts have dominated science thru the ages such that it reflects the poles of the many led by the few. It shows time and time again that science is a popularity contest where the so called "in crowd" of of self rightious people have been able to thwat the advances of science of the past centuries. Gallilao comes to mind as does Green of Nottingham and Heavieside of Clapton and ofcourse my favorite Gauss. We are seeing the same thing here on this newsgroup where passed tenents are held on to the death by those addicted to the passed. Naturally I think about my own case. I presented a trail of science where each step can be examined in depth on Googles when reading the achievements of others. There is not one point on the trail that prior science does not repute. It fills a void with respect to radiation where presently there is nothing else presented to fill this gap of knoweledge. Yet we can see how humans react to change with out a morsel of evidence to contradict the new are able to gather a baying crowd similar to that around madame Guillotine to view the death of nobles. Ofcourse at that time academia had not closed its society off from the outside where now they are better equipped against the poll makers such that the only efforts left to derail in science are those generated outside the academic world and also judged by those who are also excluded by the closed society as a unproven value. Vincent was different. He generated his skunk works from the inside of academia who were desperate to include themselves into the closed.science of academia, Where they could supply information that would not and does not pass the time of day in academia. I read a tale once that a man hid from facts by hiding in a garbage can where he suddenly realised he was closed off from all the worries of the world. Where the temperature was warm and food tho spoiled was available for the picking. Ofcourse there was the smell but what did it really matter as nobody else was around that could smell and thus insult him. In this group there is evidence that some of its members have emerged from their former places of confort and thus show that even in speech does the former odour prevail. Humans must get away from this syndrome of resistance to change and regain its inherrant inquisitiveness. Very best regards to all Art Unwin....KB9MZ...XG(uk) ------------- Do you suppose that red blood cells look down their noses at white blood cells? After all, there are far more red blood cells than white blood cells. Numbers alone would indicate that they are superior. Perhaps the white blood cells feel that they are superior because there are fewer of them. Plus, they have the noblest task of all, that of defending the world/body. Without either type, our bodies would cease to function. So it is with various types of people. We need them all. Each have their function. None are expendable. Ed, NM2K- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes. But when they over estimate their abilities in areas outside their field of expertise you can expect problems. Both a set of gears as well as a wrench each have superb qualities. Let the wrench place itself *between the grinding teeth of gears then all progress comes to a halt Art- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I proved myself as a true ham today. I had this new antenna on hand but the temperature was zero F degrees. Undaunted I went outside and disassembled my presenst antenna and took it off the tower and then replaced it with my replacement extra portable 160M antenna. By the time I finished at noon the temperature has reached a balmy 12 degrees F. Warmed myself up and the put the MFJ259 on the line in the shack. The resistance did not go below 20 ohms and climbed to 100 ohms at one end of the band.Swr on the meter showed a max of 3:1 across the whole band. I will have to wait a day or so to check it again to see if a matching effort is required when using the tube output of the amp which is tunable ofcourse. Now to the wifes honey doos for the rest of the day.Again, facts are stranger than fiction when using an antenna that is a tight squash into a lawyers briefcase which is larger than the norm. That defies the long held housewives tail that size is everything even tho aperture is proportional to gain, all ofcourse based on a yagi design which all hams are sure cannot be beaten by a smaller antenna array.Where are the censors of the day? By the way when the WHOLE radiator is 70foot or so away from ground the decrease in noise is tremendous. Regards to all Art Unwin KB9MZ....XG(uk) |
Universal laws of the sciences
On Jan 20, 11:51 am, art wrote:
Yes. But when they over estimate their abilities in areas outside their field of expertise you can expect problems. Pot+Kettle=Black? I proved myself as a true ham today. You tacked your license to the wall above your MFJ259? BTW, any directional gain means little if only a small amount of the applied RF is radiated by the small inefficient antenna. With such a small antenna, "gain" is the last thing you should be worried about. My MW receiving loops have a great f/s ratio. That does not mean I would want to use them as transmitting antennas.. :/ Git my drift Vern? MK |
Universal laws of the sciences
On 20 Jan, 14:22, wrote:
On Jan 20, 11:51 am, art wrote: Yes. But when they over estimate their abilities in areas outside their field of expertise you can expect problems. Pot+Kettle=Black? I proved myself as a true ham today. You tacked your license to the wall above your MFJ259? BTW, any directional gain means little if only a small amount of the applied RF is radiated by the small inefficient antenna. With such a small antenna, "gain" is the last thing you should be worried about. My MW receiving loops have a great f/s ratio. That does not mean I would want to use them as transmitting antennas.. :/ Git my drift Vern? MK This antenna of mine has really got you in a headlock.Your breathing is close to being cut off and there is no blood flowing to your brain such that you are so angry and can't think straight. What on earth does this antenna mean to a red neck who brags of avoiding schooling? Is it regret of some sort? It is not a secret antenna! Sooner or later you will have the opportunity to make one yourself. Probably in time for the peak of the next sunspot cycle. But then, what use will you make of it other than talk? On the other hand I don't remember anytime referring to your antennas either for transmitting or receiving other than hearing you say, in effect, that they cam beat anything on the planet. Having never met a redneck from the mountains I can only assume that such talk is the very nature of a redneck that makes them a subject for comedy. For that you do a terrific job with respect to american humour. |
Universal laws of the sciences
art wrote:
... Having never met a redneck from the mountains I can only assume that such talk is the very nature of a redneck that makes them a subject for comedy. For that you do a terrific job with respect to american humour. Art: Is that a "stab" at placing a knife within a velvet sheath? Chuckle, JS |
Universal laws of the sciences
On Jan 20, 4:55 pm, art wrote:
This antenna of mine has really got you in a headlock. You must be dreaming... :/ Your breathing is close to being cut off and there is no blood flowing to your brain such that you are so angry and can't think straight. Angry? Have you lost your mind? This is comedy to me. On a personal level, I could care less about you or your sub par developments of psuedo science. It does bother me that you pollute the minds of unsuspecting newbies with your bafflegab though. Not a whole lot, but enough to where I feel compelled to tweak your ass every once in a while. Maybe I better quit though, as it seems that when I do this, it cuts off the flow of blood to your brain, and you become very angry, and can't think straight. :/ What on earth does this antenna mean to a red neck who brags of avoiding schooling? Is it regret of some sort? It is not a secret antenna! You got that right. It's not even new for that matter. You think you are the first person to try to invent a small perverted antenna with the performance of a full size version? I'm curious... You and and that EH antenna guy are not joined at the hip are you? Inquiring ponderers relish an answer. Sooner or later you will have the opportunity to make one yourself. Why would I want a sub par antenna when I already have manly full size versions? You need to get out of the sun.. That 12 degrees is frying your brain... Probably in time for the peak of the next sunspot cycle. I don't depend on the sunspot cycles. That's probably why I'm usually on the lower bands. My manly full size antennas don't hurt things either.. Most any sub par design can me made to "work" on the higher HF bands with enough efficiency to fool people who have never tried a full size version. But then, what use will you make of it other than talk? I agree. I already have enough dummy loads as it is. I don't need an air cooled model that is mounted on a tower. On the other hand I don't remember anytime referring to your antennas either for transmitting or receiving other than hearing you say, in effect, that they cam beat anything on the planet. I expect you will be able to find me saying that with a google deja search? I have made no claims as to my antennas being the best on the planet. I do claim to avoid elevated dummy loads though. I admit it. Sue me. Having never met a redneck from the mountains I can only assume that such talk is the very nature of a redneck that makes them a subject for comedy. For that you do a terrific job with respect to american humour. I wasn't born in the mountains, although I think such a peaceful setting would be nice. I was born in the downtown Dallas area. The only mountains there are man made, and most are glistening with lights and blinky things. I have the dubious distinction of being born across the street from where a certain president died a few years later. BTW, here in the United States it's humor, not humour. Git-R-Done Vern! Riches and fame await! You might even end up cover boy of QST! Dang.. I'm already impressed just thinking about it. :) |
Universal laws of the sciences
On 20 Jan, 15:01, John Smith wrote:
art wrote: ... Having never met a redneck from the mountains I can only assume that such talk is the very nature of a redneck that makes them a subject for comedy. For that you do a terrific job with respect to american humour. Art: Is that a "stab" at placing a knife within a velvet sheath? Chuckle, JS I don't understand that John! I do remember a trip thru the mountains when we saw a sign that stated "rest area ahead" but it was a red graffity sort of sign. We kept our eyes open and later came upon it. It was an old mattress placed on the side of the road. We later came across a flea market which we intended to visit but we couldn't. There was only one huge car park that was marked for the handicap only, and it was full! We thought was mighty unfriendly. Other than that it was beautiful country. I heard one guy say I should have gone to the most afluent areas,I told him we did once and they were very friendly and invited us to a house warming. We did not go ofcourse because of the set conditions where guests had to promise to help with removing the wheels! They were not attached to the house as they had fallen off en route and landed up in a marshy area. Regards Art |
Universal laws of the sciences
On 18 Jan, 09:18, art wrote:
On 18 Jan, 08:38, wrote: On Jan 18, 3:36 am, "Ed Cregger" wrote: snip Many of you are far more educated than I, but many of you demonstrate precisely why I chose not to be brainwashed with a formal education. Many cannot see past the end of their noses, yet they insist upon laying down the law regarding what is acceptable science and what is not. As though anyone actually knows anything at all. snip Let's not forget that one's educational level has nothing to do with native IQ. Ed, NM2K You are correct to say that education has nothing to do with IQ. Faraday had little formal training, yet his arduous work is now exalted by naming one of the basic electromagnetic laws after him. But I take issue with the idea that you can't actually know anything at all. For instance, electrodynamic theory was developed 150 years ago, and the KNOWN successful results of that are numerous. Newtonian mechanics held up well for hundreds of years. A whole industrial revolution was built on it. Yet some pesky observations by Michelson and Morley regarding the invariant speed of light found it wanting. Relativistic mechanics subsumed Newtonian mechanics, but Einstein didn't invalidate Newton. I believe the mathematical term "embedding" applies. I am currently re-studying the original theory of Maxwell, et. al., with the intent of finding some chink in the armor. Tesla reported longitudinal electromagnetic wave phenomena, which contradicts the now- standard theory that EM waves can ONLY be transversal. Using Maxwell's original quaternion equations, before Heviside simplified them into the now-standard vector form, one can derive longitudinal wave components. If those exist, does that prove you don't know how to operate a ham radio? No, it just means you're radiating something in addition to what you expect. You CAN know something and apply it. You just need to realize that what you know isn't complete, and never can be. The chink is provided by Gauss.Adding a time varient to his law of statics brings you to Maxwells law Holding on to the equilibrium underpinnings you may then insert a radiator that also is in equilibrium i.e. a full wave length. Now you are equipped to insert same into a antenna program to determine shape ,size,elevation e.t.c for maximum horizontal gain. Maxwells law will then show that to meet this requirement is for the radiator to not be parallel to the ground surface but tipped to an angle. This angle is the summation of the curl vector and others that are entailed.Gauss following from the Newtonian aproach of equilibrium provides a pasaage of knoweledge that was not available in the blank statements of Maxwell. All this provides a picture which equals a thousand words and a sound basis to build upon. The understanding of this aproach has been stalled with this newsgroup on the basis of transformation of static field to a dynamic field is illegal, regardless of the math proving otherwise! Facts are stranger than the fiction of this group. Have fun with your studies. Art Unwin KB9MZ...xg (uk)- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - OOOOps I forgot to state that the house was not actually situated in the afluent area in its intended spot. They made a lightning descision to live in the neigboring county where the wheels came off. The house was close to the road and leaning at an angle but they figures with the gouges made by the axles in the dirt woud save them some costs in drainage and with the windows leaning towards the sky they could sun bathe while sitting in the living room. Brain power they proudly stated while at the same time scratching their rear ends. Oh, and another thing. That graffitty sign I mentioned earlier which was a red spray paint, they sprayed that on the board after the red paint background on the board had dried off. Regards Art |
Universal laws of the sciences
On 20 Jan, 16:00, art wrote:
On 20 Jan, 15:01, John Smith wrote: art wrote: ... Having never met a redneck from the mountains I can only assume that such talk is the very nature of a redneck that makes them a subject for comedy. For that you do a terrific job with respect to american humour. Art: Is that a "stab" at placing a knife within a velvet sheath? Chuckle, JS I don't understand that John! I do remember a trip thru the mountains when we saw a sign that stated "rest area ahead" but it was a red graffity sort of sign. We kept our eyes open and later came upon it. It was an old mattress placed on the side of the road. We later came across a flea market which we intended to visit but we couldn't. There was only one huge car park that was marked for the handicap only, and it was full! We thought was mighty unfriendly. Other than that it was beautiful country. I heard one guy say I should have gone to the most afluent areas,I told him we did once and they were very friendly and invited us to a house warming. We did not go ofcourse because of the set conditions where guests had to promise to help with removing the wheels! They were not attached to the house as they had fallen off en route and landed up in a marshy area. Regards Art John I remember now, I have seen a redneck. We came across a bunch, all looking evil with these huges blunderbuss type weapons. But appearances are deceiving since they were just squirrel hunting. I asked then about the necessity of these large wierd looking rifles but they said they came in handy if they didn't win the race to pick up the road kill. Taking another look at them it all seemed to make sense Art |
Universal laws of the sciences
On 20 Jan, 14:22, wrote:
On Jan 20, 11:51 am, art wrote: Yes. But when they over estimate their abilities in areas outside their field of expertise you can expect problems. Pot+Kettle=Black? I proved myself as a true ham today. You tacked your license to the wall above your MFJ259? BTW, any directional gain means little if only a small amount of the applied RF is radiated by the small inefficient antenna. With such a small antenna, "gain" is the last thing you should be worried about. My MW receiving loops have a great f/s ratio. That does not mean I would want to use them as transmitting antennas.. :/ Git my drift Vern? MK Well thank you for that info. I did not know that Texas was where rednecks came from. How comes Cecil is so smart? |
Universal laws of the sciences
On Jan 20, 6:37 pm, art wrote:
John I remember now, I have seen a redneck. We came across a bunch, all looking evil with these huges blunderbuss type weapons. But appearances are deceiving since they were just squirrel hunting. I asked then about the necessity of these large wierd looking rifles but they said they came in handy if they didn't win the race to pick up the road kill. Taking another look at them it all seemed to make sense Art That was probably back when Clinton was in the White House. With the sunset of the AWB, many rednecks have progressed to more capable tools. Of course, the race for road kill still exists in many areas, as many prefer the grainy texture of an aged animal carcass. If you can find a roadkill old enough to be yellow striped, you can consider yourself a lucky man indeed, as these are considered a delicacy by many. Road striped possums and skunks are a special treat at the dinner table, broiled or fried. These days, many rednecks have switched to Barret .50 cal sniper rifles, AR-15's, TEC 9's, etc. The old antique shotguns have been relegated for A/C use for the mobile homes. IE: they are often used as a doorstop to hold the front door open. For mobile home protection, the favored handgun of the modern progressive redneck is the Desert Eagle .50 cal.. Git-R-Done Vern! MK |
Universal laws of the sciences
On 20 Jan, 12:47, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"art" wrote in message ... On 19 Jan, 10:56, "AI4QJ" wrote: wrote in message ne http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/le24.htm I have just got around to reading just the intro of the above URL. Later I will digest the rest of the lesson. What struck me was how deftly the author pointed out where pseudo experts have dominated science thru the ages such that it reflects the poles of the many led by the few. It shows time and time again that science is a popularity contest where the so called "in crowd" of of self rightious people have been able to thwat the advances of science of the past centuries. Gallilao comes to mind as does Green of Nottingham and Heavieside of Clapton and ofcourse my favorite Gauss. We are seeing the same thing here on this newsgroup Wrong Art, the very purpose that the link was posted in this thread was to encourage alternative concepts to those developed in the 1800's, 1904, 1905 and the 1930's. There may indeed be a case for the Aether; personally, free space is merely a concept of nothingness that only contains those parameters that the scientist tends to use in his model. In electromagnetics, free space has a characteristic impedance of Zo (377 ohms), it has permeability and permittivity which fit well into our mathematical models. How can nothingness have a characteristc impedance of 377 ohms? And today we have a little more information (much more); we have theories of exotic matter and energy that are so new that no one *has really taken a second look at the old concepts and perhaps investigated for possible linkages. There may be new possible explanations for the infinite negative energy of a Dirac sea that didn't make sense in the 30's; there is only a shortage of physicists with the time and money to come up with new theories in a short time. Art, I'm sure your response to these statements will be negative (curiously which, as in the past, actually tended to support your persistence and encourage your new ideas but oppose your lack of scientific method). Finish reading the article and understand the math. Judge for yourself if you see any chinks. But do note thar Dr. Aspden uses math and logic to make his points. He also publishes references in his paper. He leaves himself wide open for peer review. This is the way it is properly done and completely opposite of the faith-based approach you foist upon us.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - No. Now I have read the whole thing I can state that my work resulted from my travels after Gauss which lead me to my personal law that an antenna to be of maximum efficiency must be made from a diamagnetic material which can be any size or shape or elevation as long as it is in a state of equilibrium. I followed thru with this on computor programs which confirmed with my analysis. I have since made antennas of different size,shape and elevation which is contrary to the norm which gives me impetus to pursue the line of thought further. Gaussian law gave me a measure of belief that static particles were at rest on a radiator which when coupled to a diamagnetic inductance gave particles at rest at each and every point of the radiator an ejection at right angles to the radiator. Googling on each and every point of that traeveling gave credence to the parth taken.When seeing that each point of a radiator can be considered a minute electrical circuit it can be deduced that many samples are ejected in pattern form as is the individual impactson the radiator itself thus creating an occillation a phenomina that has been accepted for many a year. To see the mirror image of these impacts on a receiving antenna does seem realistic if all particles follow the same trajectory. The anti gravitational effects of a diamagnetic field gives credence to a straight line trajectory and so on. So the dust can be lihas to be linked in some way to the solar flow of particles pattern of eleven years which matches the turn over of the sun's poles which is known to lead to a heavy increase in solar dust into our atmosphere and where the earth also has additional poles based on the location of various inate elements which tend to congregate. These poles obviously have a connection to the earth's wobbly rotation by movement of these various poles that could account for the curl vector in radiation as it does with a pendulum. So I have invented a plausable account for radiation which for myself I consider more reasonable because of computor results and my antenna building. So far this trail has lead to antennas that are in equilibrium and of various shapes and elevations that matches the conclusions found on the trail.Existing computor programs also verify the trail.When lstening to my small antennas with their wide band coverage and small size I feel that I should be forgiven if I consider the trail of conclusions are correct. But even if this were not so the trail taken on this premise produced a different line of thought on antennas that work exactly as predicted. So now I share my work and thoughts as a layman in this area with other laymen and not to the any society of physics which are closed units. I am doing this to document my work for what it is and by no means put my self on the same pedestal as Einstein, Newton and others. So by sharing and explaining my thoughts with outhers I am taken to task purely because such works are only credibly submitted by those skilled in the arts within a closed circle. So it is considered wrong that I share my experiences with other laymen if it is not previously approved or meet the texts submitted by experts. So hams are now not interested in antennas and I am in errorin explaining trails taken which appear contrary to the teachings given to laymen some 50 years ago. So the options provided by laymen is to not share, to not discuss, to not sway people to rethink that which is 50 years old and to not infer that bigger is not better. If you are a contestor you must keep quiet with respect to your experiences and take them to your grave thus giving science time to stumble across it in the future as we have had enough of the re inventing of the wheel when we discover to our dismay it was written up by somebody who is now deceased. I know that people are resistant to change especially those with experiences that are repeated exactly the same for every consecutive day without change. If this is so why is this newsgroup in existance? To keep old koots in employ? Or to hold dear all the ideals that all hams have spent to survive in their lives and keep the new at bay. Would it not be better to converse and study each points found on the trail so others will see a chink in my logic that can lead to even better ideas. Could we review the trail and separate the good from the bad leaving a new rock on which to build? Or is it our destiny to prevent change to our ideals such when we die we take with us the reasons for this being a hobby?" The hobby cannot survive purely on the basis on the enjoyement of slander and one upmanship. When we have gone there will be no reason for this newsgroup or our hobby since we are destroying the very tenents that allowed us to enjoy and thus prevent those who follow us to have the same rewards. In our younger days science profited from ham radio , but in our older days our intransience is destroying it for future generations.Why because there can be no future if we convince the young that all is known about the radiation field and they should pursue other areas to satisfy their inquisitivenes or in its absence just go with the flow of depression. can be any size ,shape and elevation |
Universal laws of the sciences
Cecil Moore wrote in news:M08kj.36592$JD.1707
@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net: Light does travel at a slower speed against the aether but relativity changes the length of a second when going against the aether so it is undetectable. How does a second go against the aether? - 73 de Mikw N3LI - |
Universal laws of the sciences
Mike Coslo wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote: Light does travel at a slower speed against the aether but relativity changes the length of a second when going against the aether so it is undetectable. How does a second go against the aether? Did I dangle a participle? "Light does travel at a slower speed against the aether but relativity changes the length of a second when the light goes against the aether, so it is undetectable." -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:08 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com