On Sep 17, 12:30*am, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 17:38:29 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin

wrote:
Truth is stranger than fiction and what I am saying is the truth or
factual.

Assertion does not constitute proof. *Speaking strictly for myself, I
really don't care what you think, advocate, imply, or suggest. *What I
do care is the reasoning behind your thinking, your advocacy, etc.
Simply stating that something is right, wrong, or works in some manner
is insufficient. *Unless you're an established authority on the topic
of antenna design, I have no intention of accepting your rants at face
value.

In all the years that I have been on this group nobody has proved me
wrong
with respect to radiation.

That's easy to understand. *You haven't said anything. *There's no
substance to your "explanations". *I can't argue against an
insubstantial fog or cloud, and neither can anyone else. *No models,
no measurements, no tests, no numbers, no nothing. *Besides, it's not
my position to prove that you are wrong. *It's your job to convince us
that you're correct. *We pass judgement on your ideas, you do not. *Of
course, you're always welcome to pass judgements on my qualifications
to make such a judgement.

If they had I would have apologized for the
record.

I should hope so. *I've been wrong a few times. *It happens.
http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=en&enc_user=bLQuYRAAAACBvd...
http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=en&enc_user=tWGMphwAAAAGTj...
Hmmm.... 24,000 postings. *Maybe I should find something more
productive to do.

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.

Wow. *I'm not retired yet, but I'm not worried. *You would have no
trouble running me out of town with your expertise on antennas. *I'm
still learning and probably will never be an expert. *I read the NEC
mailing list. *I dabble with EzNEC and 4NEC2. *I designm model, and
build some rather odd microwave antennas. *I have two antenna related
products to my name from about 20 years ago. *Not quite an expert but
sufficiently functional to hold my own:
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/antennas/
Note: I did *NOT* design the commercial antennas shown.

Find an expert for yourself and ask him the same questions that you
ask of me.

I only asked one question. *What do you mean by equalibrium and what
is being balanced against what else. *No expert or beginner could
answer that. *Only you can.

My statements are nothing special and nor am I

Actually, your statements initially appeared quite special to me. *I
was serious when I asked what program you used to generate your rant.
I couldn't believe that anyone intentionally wrote such a word salad.
I suspected there was some software behind it. *I even attempted to
duplicate the feat by hand (and failed). *Your statements are special
to me for no better reason than I failed to mimick the style.

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

Jeff
Let us straighten out a few things about me that most know
I am nowhere as clever or versatile in all the subjects that you
mentioned.
Frankly my present knoweledge is very limited.
I had a heart attack, 5 bypasses plus a loss in memory.So that I could
continue to live I chose radiation as a niche
study for recovery. Ofcourse I will never recover fully. So basically
I have tunnel vision built around the niche of radiation and antennas
where I went back to first principles and started with Newton
This process has lasted for several years, very slow progress but I
have got to a point that my thoughts on antennas and radiation is so
different from the books that I have to go back to the beginning with
respect tp Newton and re evaluate with my peers. Yes I am seen as an
idiot, very understandable but I am persistent in talking and
discussing the initial point in radiation .From Newtons laws I deduce
that current flow on a fractional wavelength antenna includes current
flow thru the centre of a radiator. I am going right back to my new
beginnings but the books do not say that! Soi I can't participate in
the many diversions from the niche I have taken and thus ask for a
similar focus from others. No sympathy or crying desired as I am
comfortable and living a good life but even with tunnel vision I am
determined to continue and participate in the route I have chosen as
there is no alternative.
Sooooo after more than a thousand posts based on the initial radiator
and equilibrium I have been unable to make one step forward in a re
evaluation of my journey. But I will never give up so you will have to
live with that. All of this is old hat to most of the posters who give
me hell and sometimes I respond in kind to new posters in a like
manner which is wrong but it happens. So to sum up I am a simple man
with tunnel vision in a single subject and no where as knoweledgable
as other posters outside my field of choice.
My very best regards
Art Unwin KB9MZ....xg

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 06:43:22 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin
wrote:

Frankly my present knoweledge is very limited.

Then learn. Antenna design and modeling is not easy. Just
understanding Maxwell's Equations is enough to keep you busy for a few
months. Antenna modeling (I suggest using 4NEC2) will keep you busy
for another few months. Trying to reconcile theory, models, and
reality will burn a few more months. However, when you're done, you
will understand something about antennas and how they work.
http://home.ict.nl/~arivoors/

Personally, I judge people by their willingness and ability to learn.
That's what distinguished modern technological humans from a inanimate
rock.

I had a heart attack, 5 bypasses plus a loss in memory.

In 2002, I just barely missed having a heart attack. I nearly passed
out during the treadmill test. I celebrated the event with a triple
bypass, which effectively rolled back my biological clock about 10
years. Best thing I ever did. No memory loss except from the
anaesthetics used during surgery. Incidentally, I'm now 60.8 years
old. Kinda sounds like you also had a stroke. You're lucky to be
alive. My father had a stroke in 1986 and did not do very well
afterwards.

So that I could
continue to live I chose radiation as a niche
study for recovery.

Fine, but I question the methods you call "study". It's considered
good form to gather your evidence first, and then supply your
conclusions, not the reverse order.

Of course I will never recover fully.

Neither will I. I'm still collecting medical problems. Man was meant
to live for about 25 years. Anything beyond that is a free ride.

So basically
I have tunnel vision built around the niche of radiation and antennas
where I went back to first principles and started with Newton
This process has lasted for several years, very slow progress but I
have got to a point that my thoughts on antennas and radiation is so
different from the books that I have to go back to the beginning with
respect tp Newton and re evaluate with my peers.

Radio and antennas are built of physics. However, it's not Newtonian
physics, but electrodynamics as in Maxwell's Equations. Have you
studied those? They're quite different from Newton's equations, which
a sometimes called "classical mechanics". (Note: It's not easy. Just
decoding the notation is a major challenge).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell's_equations

Yes I am seen as an
idiot, very understandable but I am persistent in talking and
discussing the initial point in radiation .

You make an attempt at understanding. An idiot doesn't even try.

From Newtons laws I deduce
that current flow on a fractional wavelength antenna includes current
flow thru the centre of a radiator.

Which of Newton's laws? What equations or thought experiment resulted
in this deduction? How do you reconcile your conclusion with the
common assumption that RF current flows on the outside of a conductor?

I am going right back to my new
beginnings but the books do not say that!

For good reason. You're wrong and your unspecified books are correct.

So I can't participate in
the many diversions from the niche I have taken and thus ask for a
similar focus from others.

Yes you can. You can take it one step at a time. No need to jump
directly from Newton to skin effect. Just walk me through your logic.

No sympathy or crying desired as I am
comfortable and living a good life but even with tunnel vision I am
determined to continue and participate in the route I have chosen as
there is no alternative.

By contrast, I'm willing to throw out everything I have learned and
presume to be correct, if any of it can be proven or demonstrated
wrong. I hold absolutely nothing (except my bank balance) as sacred,
and consider everything subject to suspicion and debate. If you are
permanently attached to your pet theory, you effectively refuse to
accept input or criticism. Therefore, you have stopped learning and
are starting to resemble the previously mentioned inanimate rock.

For example, did you know that the direction one counts causes the
final count to vary? A simple example is counting the number of
fingers on both hands. Start from one end counting 1,2,3,4,5,6... and
ending in 10, which appears to be the correct count. Yet counting
fingers downward results in 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, plus 5 more makes 11.
Surprise, you have 11 fingers. Like I said, nothing is sacred.

Sooooo after more than a thousand posts based on the initial radiator
and equilibrium I have been unable to make one step forward in a re
evaluation of my journey. But I will never give up so you will have to
live with that. All of this is old hat to most of the posters who give
me hell and sometimes I respond in kind to new posters in a like
manner which is wrong but it happens. So to sum up I am a simple man
with tunnel vision in a single subject and no where as knoweledgable
as other posters outside my field of choice.

Suit yourself. As you make your bed, so shall you sleep in it.
Repetition of incorrect gibberish only works in politics, not in
science and technology.

My very best regards
Art Unwin KB9MZ....xg

Good luck. Let me know when you produce some logic, equations, or
numbers.

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

On Sep 17, 10:07*pm, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 06:43:22 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin

wrote:
Frankly my present knoweledge is very limited.

Then learn. *Antenna design and modeling is not easy. *Just
understanding Maxwell's Equations is enough to keep you busy for a few
months. *Antenna modeling (I suggest using 4NEC2) will keep you busy
for another few months. *Trying to reconcile theory, models, and
reality will burn a few more months. *However, when you're done, you
will understand something about antennas and how they work.
http://home.ict.nl/~arivoors/

Personally, I judge people by their willingness and ability to learn.
That's what distinguished modern technological humans from a inanimate
rock.

I had a heart attack, 5 bypasses plus a loss in memory.

In 2002, I just barely missed having a heart attack. *I nearly passed
out during the treadmill test. *I celebrated the event with a triple
bypass, which effectively rolled back my biological clock about 10
years. *Best thing I ever did. *No memory loss except from the
anaesthetics used during surgery. *Incidentally, I'm now 60.8 years
old. *Kinda sounds like you also had a stroke. *You're lucky to be
alive. *My father had a stroke in 1986 and did not do very well
afterwards.

So that I could
continue to live I chose radiation as a niche
study for recovery.

Fine, but I question the methods you call "study". *It's considered
good form to gather your evidence first, and then supply your
conclusions, not the reverse order.

Of course I will never recover fully.

Neither will I. *I'm still collecting medical problems. *Man was meant
to live for about 25 years. *Anything beyond that is a free ride. *

So basically
I have tunnel vision built around the niche of radiation and antennas
where I went back to first principles and started with Newton
This process has lasted for several years, very slow progress but I
have got to a point that my thoughts on antennas and radiation is so
different from the books that I have to go back to the beginning with
respect tp Newton and re evaluate with my peers.

Radio and antennas are built of physics. *However, it's not Newtonian
physics, but electrodynamics as in Maxwell's Equations. *Have you
studied those? *They're quite different from Newton's equations, which
a sometimes called "classical mechanics". *(Note: *It's not easy. Just
decoding the notation is a major challenge).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell's_equations

Yes I am seen as an
idiot, very understandable but I am persistent in talking and
discussing the initial point in radiation .

You make an attempt at understanding. *An idiot doesn't even try.

From Newtons laws I deduce
that current flow on a fractional wavelength antenna includes current
flow thru the centre of a radiator.

Which of Newton's laws? *What equations or thought experiment resulted
in this deduction? *How do you reconcile your conclusion with the
common assumption that RF current flows on the outside of a conductor?

I am going right back to my new
beginnings but the books do not say that!

For good reason. *You're wrong and your unspecified books are correct.

So I can't participate in
the many diversions from the niche I have taken and thus ask for a
similar focus from others.

Yes you can. *You can take it one step at a time. *No need to jump
directly from Newton to skin effect. *Just walk me through your logic.

No sympathy or crying desired as I am
comfortable and living a good life but even with tunnel vision I am
determined to continue and participate in the route I have chosen as
there is no alternative.

By contrast, I'm willing to throw out everything I have learned and
presume to be correct, if any of it can be proven or demonstrated
wrong. *I hold absolutely nothing (except my bank balance) as sacred,
and consider everything subject to suspicion and debate. *If you are
permanently attached to your pet theory, you effectively refuse to
accept input or criticism. *Therefore, you have stopped learning and
are starting to resemble the previously mentioned inanimate rock.

For example, did you know that the direction one counts causes the
final count to vary? *A simple example is counting the number of
fingers on both hands. *Start from one end counting 1,2,3,4,5,6... and
ending in 10, which appears to be the correct count. *Yet counting
fingers downward results in 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, plus 5 more makes 11.
Surprise, you have 11 fingers. *Like I said, nothing is sacred.

Sooooo after more than a thousand posts based on the initial radiator
and equilibrium I have been unable to make one step forward in a re
evaluation of my journey. But I will never give up so you will have to
live with that. All of this is old hat to most of the posters who give
me hell and sometimes I respond in kind to new posters in a like
manner which is wrong but it happens. So to sum up I am a simple man
with tunnel vision in a single subject and no where as knoweledgable
as other posters outside my field of choice.

Suit yourself. *As you make your bed, so shall you sleep in it.
Repetition of incorrect gibberish only works in politics, not in
science and technology.

My very best regards
Art Unwin KB9MZ....xg

Good luck. *Let me know when you produce some logic, equations, or
numbers.

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

It has been placedon this newsgroup a couple of times or more over the
years and I will try to find
it. If I can't then I will write it up again the best way I can which
all have difficulty with.
I thank you very very much for your most genourous offer and Frank if
you want a copy we can do that to
Regards
Art

"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
...

Good luck. Let me know when you produce some logic, equations, or
numbers.

don't hold your breath, he hasn't produced anything logical and definitely
no equations for anything he has said.

On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 22:04:25 GMT, "Dave" wrote:

"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
.. .

Good luck. Let me know when you produce some logic, equations, or
numbers.

don't hold your breath, he hasn't produced anything logical and definitely
no equations for anything he has said.

Not a problem. Neither have I.


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

Dave wrote:

...
don't hold your breath, he hasn't produced anything logical and definitely
no equations for anything he has said.

Now let me analyze this and see ...

1) He is dealing with matters/effects/theories/speculations which
universities/physicists/scholars/mathematician/theorists/amateurs/etc.
are working/speculating/experimenting on.

2) Usually actions/effects/affects/phenomenon are observed before it
even occurs to anyone to design an equation or formula about it.

3) Some speculations will, obviously, be incorrect or partially correct
and need rethinking, or scraped and new ones advanced.

4) Etc., etc.

Nope, you are quite correct ... he hasn't. However, to some, the
reason(s) will be quite obvious; for others, it may take a bit longer ...

Regards,
JS

On Sep 18, 5:04*pm, "Dave" wrote:
"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message

...

Good luck. *Let me know when you produce some logic, equations, or
numbers.

don't hold your breath, he hasn't produced anything logical and definitely
no equations for anything he has said.

Oh David emotion has got such a hold on you that you can't think
straight.
In one of the management classes I took they said if an employee can
not be calmed
always protect the path to exit. Medics say that anger or emotion can
shut down the route
to the house of logic in the human brain such that logic cannot come
into being.
Seams like the human brain is subdivided into physical block of
knoweledge
This explains why a baby learnes to walk quicker than a grown man with
experience
and tangled information routes.. You need a 2 by 4 to shake things up
Think about that Dave
Still your friend
Art

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
In one of the management classes I took

Oh, so that is what is wrong with you... sorry I didn't know you had a
serious handicap, I'll go easier on you from now on.