Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #231   Report Post  
Old September 20th 08, 08:20 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,951
Default Equilibrium and Ham examinations

On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 19:04:47 GMT, "Frank"
wrote:

Heck, I never noticed that reference. Just wanted to show
Art how vectors are used in reality!


Frank - from Hero to Zero with that last sentence's observation.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC
  #232   Report Post  
Old September 25th 08, 10:59 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 757
Default Equilibrium and Ham examinations

On Sep 17, 4:37*pm, Art Unwin wrote:


Could well be but I have no alternative and am going my own way. Why
should this disturb others?


Because you insist what you say is true without any proof given.
Not to mention that you refuse to even define how you apply
equilibrium
to your "new science" antenna theory.
And now you think you should rewrite perfectly good antenna theory as
it has been known for quite a few years. Again, without any real
proof,
or even coherent logic applied.

But even worse, you think you have all the answers, and that everyone
else here is either brain dead, senile, fell off a turnip truck last
night,
or they bark at the moon while chasing spiders across the lawn of the
Glendale assisted living center, which BTW is how I often envision you
after reading about 492 lines of your equilibribric/neutrino theory.
But otherwise, disturb not do you.
  #233   Report Post  
Old September 25th 08, 11:36 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Sep 2006
Posts: 236
Default Equilibrium and Ham examinations


wrote in message
...
On Sep 17, 4:37 pm, Art Unwin wrote:


Could well be but I have no alternative and am going my own way. Why
should this disturb others?


Because you insist what you say is true without any proof given.
Not to mention that you refuse to even define how you apply
equilibrium
to your "new science" antenna theory.
And now you think you should rewrite perfectly good antenna theory as
it has been known for quite a few years. Again, without any real
proof,
or even coherent logic applied.

But even worse, you think you have all the answers, and that everyone
else here is either brain dead, senile, fell off a turnip truck last
night,
or they bark at the moon while chasing spiders across the lawn of the
Glendale assisted living center, which BTW is how I often envision you
after reading about 492 lines of your equilibribric/neutrino theory.
But otherwise, disturb not do you.

-------------

All you have said so far about Art is that he is opinionated and that he has
a personality. G

Ed, NM2K


  #234   Report Post  
Old September 25th 08, 11:42 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 797
Default Equilibrium and Ham examinations


"Ed Cregger" wrote in message
...

All you have said so far about Art is that he is opinionated and that he
has a personality. G


and those are his good traits.


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Equilibrium in free space Art Unwin Antenna 126 September 20th 08 04:16 PM
Equilibrium art Antenna 16 October 17th 07 01:27 AM
Gaussian equilibrium art Antenna 0 February 26th 07 08:54 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:11 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017