On Sep 18, 2:25*pm, Jim Kelley wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
For instance, equilibrium demands that charges do not move laterally
along an antenna when in equilibrium
Without equilibrium charges do move along the surface of a radiator
and Newtons law of parity demands
that charges are moving thru the *CENTER of the radiator thus
encoundering just copper losses.

Hi Art,

Which one was Newton's Law of Parity again? *I'm drawing a blank.

Google had this:

Your search - "Newton's law of parity" - did not match any documents.

73, ac6xg

I have been accused often in the using of the wrong term
In the case of Newtons law as action creates reaction or similar.
Then somebody mentioned the law of parity which I considered as being
on par with what Newton said
Now another poster mentioned that parity described a farming practice
which also featured the pursuit of balance and parity
with respect to prices. Thus when the term parity was used I thought
that was a regrinding of the english language which I am now exposed
to.
I now remove the association of parity in the Laws as stated by Newton
who lived in the UK and not in the USA.
Best regards
Art Unwin KB9MZ.......xg

On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:55:59 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin
wrote:

I now remove the association of parity in the Laws as stated by Newton
who lived in the UK and not in the USA.

Yep. Newton's Laws of Motion are different on this side of the pond.

1. A particle will stay at rest or continue at a constant velocity
unless acted upon by revisionist politics, traffic laws, zoning
restrictions, local ordinances, or erroneous navigation information.

2. The net force on anything is equal to size of the politically
motivated masses multiplied by the sum total their campaign
contributions.

3. Every action has an equally reactionary opposition.

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