On Jul 3, 5:16 pm, Art Unwin wrote:
On Jul 3, 4:58 pm, John Smith wrote:



Dale Parfitt wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
On Jul 3, 12:25 pm, wrote:
On Jul 3, 11:08 am, Art Unwin wrote:

Following the logic of my posting it shows a clear conflict between
normal thinking and mine.

The operative words being "normal thinking and mine (Art's)"

That about sums it up.

Well, yes and no ...

When you consider that the "normal IQ" is between 100-110 for the USA,
as a whole, and depending on the area in question (a survey onboard a
quality campus would blow that out of the water--and an IQ of 120+ used
to automatically qualify you for OTS (other qualifications
pending/applying) ... one could come up with a scenario(s) where
"normal" is not, necessarily, all that desirable ...

Regards,
JS

Correct........ Normal in America is to strive to be a lemming
I can't be normal as it takes me more than one try to discern the
characters in the picture
which is needed before one can post
'
You know John, since America gives the 'right to bear arms' you would
think that the population would understand
that a projectile must have rotation to follow a straight line
trajectory.
Straight line trajectory is also a property of radiation, so we not
only have to eject particles at rest
from a radiator surface but we also have to apply 'twist' to the
ejected particle otherwise the particles will scatter!
Again the foucault or eddy currents come to the fore where their
circulatory action apply torgue to the ejected particle
Why is it so hard for Americans to understand that radiation is a
result of radial ejection of particles via a rejective rotary magnetic
field ?. Especially when particles in equilibrium is part and parcel
of Gaussian law which when extended to the same environment as the
Maxwellian law? Today we have total resistance to this evidence and
instead prefer to act like lemmings rather than face change.
Regards
Art
I haven't purchased a ARRL publication for years but I suspect they
are still talking of radiation as being wave form.

Art,
I think you had better stick to antennas, leave firearms alone,
don't go there. One of your earlier
statements covers all this very well. There's nothing wrong with
being normal, you know.
- 'Doc

(Also, don't run with scissors!)

On Jul 3, 7:19 pm, wrote:
Art,
I think you had better stick to antennas, leave firearms alone,
don't go there. One of your earlier
statements covers all this very well. There's nothing wrong with
being normal, you know.
- 'Doc

(Also, don't run with scissors!)

Great, more free speech which provides more understanding as who and
what you are.
I encourage all to exercise free speech so all can see and understand
what motivates you
and why you spend so much time on the couch! By the way you don't have
a doctorate so you have no
such education for which we should acknowledge or respect!
Speak up, love to hear from you.
Art]

Art Unwin wrote:

'
You know John, since America gives the 'right to bear arms' you would
think that the population would understand
...

Hmmm, got rid of my .357 ... just have an old, but in excellent shape,
..45 ... I am not sure, but I suspect this would stop a "home
invader"--even if you missed and hit him in the hand ...

...
Why is it so hard for Americans to understand that radiation is a
result of radial ejection of particles via a rejective rotary magnetic
field ?. Especially when particles in equilibrium is part and parcel
of Gaussian law which when extended to the same environment as the
Maxwellian law? Today we have total resistance to this evidence and
instead prefer to act like lemmings rather than face change.
Regards
Art
I haven't purchased a ARRL publication for years but I suspect they
are still talking of radiation as being wave form.

Hmmm ... I am still holding out a bit longer before calling the jury in
.... the new developments of being able to take "pictures" of light
waves/particles needs completely explored and given time for the
technology to improve/mature.

But, it certainly looks the absolute proof of what light "is", is a LOT
closer at hand. :-)

Regards,
JS

John Smith wrote:

...
But, it certainly looks the absolute proof of what light "is", is a LOT
closer at hand. :-)

Regards,
JS

Yanno, they have NOT even taken a "picture" of a HIGH POWER RF wave
though an excitable gas (MASER), yet. Let's see that first ...

Regards,
JS

On Jul 3, 7:43 pm, John Smith wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
'
You know John, since America gives the 'right to bear arms' you would
think that the population would understand

...

Hmmm, got rid of my .357 ... just have an old, but in excellent shape,
.45 ... I am not sure, but I suspect this would stop a "home
invader"--even if you missed and hit him in the hand ...

...
Why is it so hard for Americans to understand that radiation is a
result of radial ejection of particles via a rejective rotary magnetic
field ?. Especially when particles in equilibrium is part and parcel
of Gaussian law which when extended to the same environment as the
Maxwellian law? Today we have total resistance to this evidence and
instead prefer to act like lemmings rather than face change.
Regards
Art
I haven't purchased a ARRL publication for years but I suspect they
are still talking of radiation as being wave form.

Hmmm ... I am still holding out a bit longer before calling the jury in
... the new developments of being able to take "pictures" of light
waves/particles needs completely explored and given time for the
technology to improve/mature.

But, it certainly looks the absolute proof of what light "is", is a LOT
closer at hand. :-)

Regards,
JS

John , nothing wrong in having a weapon to protect your home and
rights.
It is when those same weapons are used to threaten and scare the
populace
that things go wrong especially when they suggests such threats to
repell free speech
and for all to read before hand! So a projectile must have rotation to
travel in a straight line
but you must not mention that as it is tyrinical. But he did come in
on time as I anticipated
and applied logic to antennas as he sees it. Soon others will take
their turn since logic
applied is getting closer to the norm
When the President was on a train aproaching my town a porter cried
out "ten minuits to Normal"
with respect to the upcoming rail road station
That is how the book by the presidents adviser from Texas was named
i.e. Ten minuits from Normal
so I am very familiar with Normal people
Regards
Art

Art Unwin wrote:

...
so I am very familiar with Normal people
Regards
Art

OK, enough said; and this final comment of mine ends this "normal"
thread ... at least for myself.

You know as well as I, normal is much over-rated. Normal people are
just not that interesting. While violent nuts are a drag; and, nuts
which live in true "La La Land" cannot be tolerated for long periods of
time--the most interesting people lie in between these and "normal" ...

Regards,
JS

Art Unwin wrote:
On Jul 3, 5:16 pm, Art Unwin wrote:

You know John, since America gives the 'right to bear arms' you would
think that the population would understand
that a projectile must have rotation to follow a straight line
trajectory.

Hi Art,

The American Constitution does not "give" rights. It simply attempts
to prevent government from eliminating them.

Under the influence of gravity, sub-orbital ballistic projectiles
generally follow a parabolic trajectory. Isssac Newton's laws of
motion apply without caveat.

ac6xg

Jim Kelley wrote:

...
Hi Art,

The American Constitution does not "give" rights. It simply attempts to
prevent government from eliminating them.

Under the influence of gravity, sub-orbital ballistic projectiles
generally follow a parabolic trajectory. Isssac Newton's laws of motion
apply without caveat.

ac6xg


No constitution or law can EVER give rights ...

You are born with all the rights possible. Unless you are under a
constitution or law(s) which remove some (or all) of your rights--you
have every damn one of them! And unless there is a clear majority of a
govt's citizens which support that constitution/laws, you are witness to
an unjust constitution/law(s) ...

As our constitution notes, these are God given rights--no man may ever
take them away--you CAN agree to a contract NOT to exercise some of your
rights to the betterment of all.

Men get together and form govt's and agree to create laws which limit
their rights--FOR THE GOOD OF ALL. When that no longer is happening, it
is time to reform, re-elect or even go as far as a revolution to restore
just rights ... our constitution makes that a duty for Americans, and
requires us to remain ever vigilant in the protection of our rights.

If you believe laws give or protect your rights--you already have lost
them to a guy on the street playing craps ...

Regards,
JS

On Jul 7, 3:22 pm, Jim Kelley wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
On Jul 3, 5:16 pm, Art Unwin wrote:
You know John, since America gives the 'right to bear arms' you would
think that the population would understand
that a projectile must have rotation to follow a straight line
trajectory.

Hi Art,

The American Constitution does not "give" rights. It simply attempts
to prevent government from eliminating them.

Under the influence of gravity, sub-orbital ballistic projectiles
generally follow a parabolic trajectory. Isssac Newton's laws of
motion apply without caveat.

ac6xg

It followsa straight line trajectory in two dimensions out of three
The weak force othewise known as the magnetic field of the eddy
current
overcpmes or neutralises gravity while applying spin such gravitation
has little or no
effect on the trajectory as it is projected with spin. This can be
seen with
elevation experiments