Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:49:04 +0000, Dave wrote: Why don't you two get a room? This bull**** has nothing to do with ham radio. However, maybe if we ionized your hot air we could bounce some 70 cm off the cloud. I've always suspected that some hams hated math and other technical subjects. While it is conceivable that you could build a ham antenna without using math, I don't think the results would be optimal. There are also those that advocate converting ham radio from a technical hobby, to a sport, where the technical aspects are diminished to the point of extinction, and the operational exercises of contesting, DX, CW, and rag chewing are predominant. No math required. Perhaps the FCC could balkanize the ham bands into technical and non-technical sub-bands, where the clueless and those that still design, calculate, and build their own equipment can be seperated for their own safety. What equipment do you build for the amateur bands? Where does one employ that much theoretical physics? I have software and analyzers to help me; I don't need to throw general theory around on a bulletin board that is over the head of 95% of the people whose curiosity might be piqued by the name of the group. Perhaps if you applied your quantoid lunacy to making a suitcase quadrifilar helix for HF or something, I'd be less hurt. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Equilibrium in free space | Antenna | |||
Equilibrium | Antenna | |||
Gaussian equilibrium | Antenna |