On Sep 16, 7:38*pm, Art Unwin wrote:
On Sep 16, 6:53*pm, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:43:56 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin

wrote:
... and Newtons law of parity demands
that charges are moving thru the *CENTER of the radiator thus
encoundering just copper losses.

Google fails to find anything under Newton's Law of Parity.
Which one of these is what you're talking about?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_physics_topics_M-Q#P
http://neohumanism.org/p/pa/parity.html

Equilibrium is nothing more than the enforcement of Newtons law of
parity.

It's hard to enforce a law that doesn't exist.

Drivel: *I tried to write a spoof of your postings mimicking your
style of technical word salad. *I built the necessary framework, and
added copious amounts of buzzwords and technobabble. *However, the
result was unimpressive and not even close to the quality of your
pseudo technological rants. *I'm truly impressed at your ability to
fabricate such rubbish and would greatly appreciate some clues as to
how it is done.

Truth is stranger than fiction and what I am saying is the truth or
factual.
In all the years that I have been on this group nobody has proved me
wrong
with respect to radiation. If they had I would have apologized for the
record.
For myself I can run all of these people out of town on antennas as
they are all self perceived experts
bestowing glory on them selves in retirement to supply the recognition
they feel they earned in the past.
Find an expert for yourself and ask him the same questions that you
ask of me.
*My statements are nothing special and nor am I
Art

Hint: *Numbers, formulas, references, URL's, and specifics. *Lacking
those, you would be a philosopher.

Incidentally, equilibrium is implied in the various FCC exams. *If you
lack sufficient equilibrium to take the exams due to intoxication, the
FCC (or VE) will refuse to administer the exam.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558 * * * * *
#http://802.11junk.com** * * * * *
#http://www.LearnByDestroying.com** * * * * * AE6KS

I think I have to take a bash at the term equilibrium since it apears
to be latin this side of the pond.
Equilibrium means balance using a minimumn of words. If there was not
balance then there would be movement.
Scientists revert to an arbitrary field where the outside forces equal
the inside forces as in Gauss's law of statics.
If movement is to be considered then the field will be termed dynamic.
Adding a time varying field and radiators to the static field
it is then the same format as Maxwells laws ie. derivative mathematics
of one is exactly the same as the other i.e. they are the same thing

If you look at a sinosoidal curve you have balance between the stating
point and another point that is repeatable.
With a pendulum it is two swings ,forward and backwards which is then
repeatable. In the case of a radiator the length of one point to a
similar point
that is repeatable is a point of equilibrium. True the curve crosses
zero at the half way point but the areas enclosed either side of the
half way point
are not in repeatable terms unless the curve does not cross the zero
point that is resonant but not in equilibrium. When it gets to the
point of repeatebility
or at the end of a period a term used in frequency then that point is
both in equilibrium and resonant.
As an aside when changing from a static field to a dynamic field the
term equilibrium still holds which leads to the term
A radiator can be any shape, form or elevation as long as it is in
equilibrium. This rules out the idea that a radiator must be straight
and planar.
I think I have said to much Nuf said class dismissed.
Art Unwin KB9MZ....xg
So guys look at the intent of what I am saying without crusifying the
terminology.