Baluns?
 

John Smith wrote:


What wasted verbiage, in response to wasted verbiage! My gawd man,
let's just toss some words back and forth ... yawn

Regards,
JS


Codswallop :0)

--
M0WYM
www.radiowymsey.org

Sign today!
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/SaveShortwave/

Baluns?
 

John Smith wrote:


Something will finally gain some idiots attention ...

Regards,
JS

Lighten up OM, it was a light-hearted response.
And I see someone did respond!

--
M0WYM
www.radiowymsey.org

Sign today!
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/SaveShortwave/

Baluns?
 

John Smith wrote:

So, no one made any of these elements, they "just happened?"
Where is your proof, what law is behind your logic. Doesn't the
scientific method demand proof in repeatable experiments?

We can repeatedly and consistently experience the effects of
hydrogen - it does not take an act of faith or a delusion. We
cannot carry out the similar experiments with any of the so-called
deities - we can only believe.

But, like I said if it gets people through the night that's fine and
it may well be better than taking drugs.


--
M0WYM
www.radiowymsey.org

Sign today!
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/SaveShortwave/

Baluns?
 

wrote:
Upon doing independent research, it turns out my theory is exactly the
same as your's but my terminology was reversed.

As proven a week ago by my definition quotations from
"The IEEE Dictionary".

But I still shy away from matching impedances with a "choke".
I would match impedances with a balun or RF transformer.

Jerry Sevick, W2FMI, says a *balun IS a choke* plus
a transmission line. He wrote in "Building and Using
Baluns and Ununs":

"If the writers had accepted the correct model for
these devices (given to us by Guanella and Ruthroff),
which shows that *they are really chokes* (lumped
elements) and configurations of transmission lines
(distributed elements), ..." (emphasis mine)
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Baluns?
 

M0WYM wrote:
John Smith wrote:

So, no one made any of these elements, they "just happened?"
Where is your proof, what law is behind your logic. Doesn't the
scientific method demand proof in repeatable experiments?

We can repeatedly and consistently experience the effects of
hydrogen - it does not take an act of faith or a delusion. We
cannot carry out the similar experiments with any of the so-called
deities - we can only believe.

But, like I said if it gets people through the night that's fine and
it may well be better than taking drugs.

As I have pointed out ... a "leap of faith" is a leap of faith ...
whether being made in an attempt to "look intellectual" (evolution) or
being "intuited of spirit" (God) ... and, an argument for evolution is
only a circular "back door" argument for the possible existence of God
.... it is simple logic.

What is perplexing is how some can carry on these arguments without
realization on what final point the argument(s) really argue! This is
supposed to look "intellectual?"

Regards,
JS

--
It is like a nightmare where the public servants are the people which
the police are supposed to protect us from!

Baluns?
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Michael Coslo wrote:
You got it. He won't tell you when you lock your keys in the car - even
when he already knows you're going to do it!

Even before He told Pharaoh to let His people go,
He already knew Pharaoh was predestined to say no.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

But Moses was one of his people, and he negotiated with God over and over
again. Of course he ****ed off God several times too.

Baluns?
 

JB wrote:
But Moses was one of his people, and he negotiated with God over and over
again. Of course he ****ed off God several times too.

God just toyed with Moses, like a cat with a mouse, and that
"negotiation" wasn't for real. Moses didn't know it, but God
already knew the outcome so any other outcome was impossible.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Baluns?
 

Cecil Moore wrote:

...
God just toyed with Moses, like a cat with a mouse, and that
"negotiation" wasn't for real. Moses didn't know it, but God
already knew the outcome so any other outcome was impossible.

To feed my sick sense of humor, and boredom. When in college brushing
up, I would scan and print $20 bills, just one side, wrinkle them up a
bit, and drop/plant then about. Observing from a distance, I kind of
felt like God--I knew what the "outcome" would be every time some
unsuspecting victim found one! grin

Regards,
JS

--
It is like a nightmare where the public servants are the people which
the police are supposed to protect us from!

Baluns?
 

On Sep 5, 11:06*pm, John Smith wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:

* ...

As soon as he completes his "reversal", he will be back at the
beginning, where his error(s) in thinking first began ... let's take a
nap and let him accomplish his work ... grin

Regards,
JS

Yes John, go swallow an ambien and take your nap. Those Alzheimers-
raddled brain cells could use some rest so they will be stronger for
you to conduct future random senility eruptions.

Baluns?
 

On Sep 6, 9:46*am, Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:
Upon doing independent research, it turns out my theory is exactly the
same as your's but my terminology was reversed.

As proven a week ago by my definition quotations from
"The IEEE Dictionary".

I shall not try to pop the bubble of your glory in the triumph of
knowing the correct terminology.


But I still shy away from matching impedances with a "choke".
I would match impedances with a balun or RF transformer.

Jerry Sevick, W2FMI, says a *balun IS a choke* plus
a transmission line. He wrote in "Building and Using
Baluns and Ununs":

"If the writers had accepted the correct model for
these devices (given to us by Guanella and Ruthroff),
which shows that *they are really chokes* (lumped
elements) and configurations of transmission lines
(distributed elements), ..." (emphasis mine)
--
73, Cecil *http://www.w5dxp.com

The lumped element equivalent of the transmission line itself is a
repetitive pattern of inductors and capacitors. If all inductors are
chokes, then the transmission line itself is composed of chokes.