On Jul 1, 4:37 pm, John Smith wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:

...

I have no knoweledge of that but I would like to follow up. Can you
give me some pointers on the subject so I may obtain some further
knowledge

What part the ether being acknowledged by Einstein? Colleges, papers,
physicists exploring the existence/properties of the ether? What? You
can't read? You can't use Google? You missed my posts quoting
Einsteins last mention of the ether? Help me out here ...

For my part everything that I have stated can be proven and known to
exist

I would even accept the arrls' material is what "really exists" (this
material will only need to be revised if and when the existence of the
ether can be known for certain and its' properties exploited though new
designs--mostly.) And, is in line with all presently accepted
theory--up to the point where the discussions begin of whether light
(and therefore rf) is composed of waves and/or particles or some
phenomenon which exhibits both of these characteristics but is separate
in existence, in some way. AND, whether rf/light "shoots" across a true
"nothing" or "strikes the chords of the ether" and transverses a media
which we can not see and know its properties, yet?"

What? You are introducing a "third theory" which does not deal with
shooting photons and nothing (well, you can shoot light waves through
gases and glass, obviously!), or waves and a media?

It would seem to me your "equilibrium" must either deal with a "nothing"
or an ether ...

In my mind, all antenna theory revolves around a few simple truths:

1) The antennas ELECTRICAL length relates DIRECTLY to what frequencies
it is efficient at.

2) Antennas are subject to laws of ac resistance.

3) Antennas are subject to knows laws of inductance.

4) Antennas are subject to know laws of capacitance.

5) All of the above, in one form or another, contribute to and define an
antenna impedance.

Some of us just wonder if the ether exists, and whether knowing its'
properties, if so, might give one a break through into antenna designs
not yet even though of ...

It is the hands of most hams who are interest in antenna programs to
follow
the trail that I point to with respect to arrays in equilibrium for
which the programs
are made from, instead of direction to planar arrays which I suspect
that Maxwell
and others new nothing about

Except for a few hams, most notable Cecil, Richard Clark, Walter
Maxwell, etc., most are the "appliance users" and/or "brass pounders of
yesteryear." What remains is ill suited to find anything other than a
rare contact on contest/field-day, or perhaps a new keying device
capable of creating one more character per minute ...

You will forgive me if I examine your motives, if pure of heart, I am
sure they will stand as fitting ...

No Art, I think you are confused and using an "equilibrium" to keep from
coming to terms with that, or you are "obsfucating us, with intent!"

But then, I could just be confused myself ...

Regards,
JS

John if you have no comprehension of equilibrium you will never be
able to define aether
Equilibrium is the essence of the universe confined to an arbitary
boundary where all forces about a point equals zero.
If they were not equal zero then the boundary breaks and we break from
equilibrium untill all forces equal zero
This is what Newton means when he made the statement Every action has
an equal and opposite reaction.
Before you can even think of the so called aether then the confining
boundary of all boundaries must be determined which is where some say
GOD sits. The sun sits in its own arbitary boundary where heat
byproducts exist with the sun itself. When the position of the sun
shifts within its boundary then equilibrium is lost and equilibrium is
only then retained by removal of excess forces that detract from
equilibrium. It is commonly understood that it is nuclear byproduct
that upset equilibrium until the p-roduct is removed from within the
arbitary boundary. These are known as Neutrinos which are displaced
particles with nuclear content such that they have not fully decayed.
These particles when released from the arbitary border have next to
zero orbital spin such that their exit is of scattered form
but their numbers are in the billions per square metre. But they do
have an affinity to diamagnetic materials which appears to be the most
common mass of our universe. since as a substance it does not absorb
free electons to rotate with said mass i.e. it rests upon the
surfaces.It is these very same particles illustrated in Gaussian law
of statics where the arbitary field is in equilibrium..
See. you cannot escape from the term equilibrium while in our universe
but you can ignore it until equilibrium is broken and where your
future is unknown. Hopefully the earths pole will move back from
Siberia so that all do not have to worry.We have no people skilled in
physics so there will be no debate other than the use of free speech
without content
Regards
Art
Art