"Art Unwin" wrote
Presumably the nulls between lobes on a radiation pattern
are a result of radiation cancellation. IF this is true then it means
we have not harnessed all the radiation available.
__________

It is true, but that doesn't mean or prove that any of the TOTAL radiation
has been "lost." It has merely been re-directed to produce some maximum
value in one or more directions, and some minimum value in others.

Think of squeezing an inflated balloon. No matter what is its final shape,
the volume of air inside the balloon remains constant.

Below is a link showing this, as applies to an antenna. The area within the
directional pattern is the same as if the pattern was omnidirectional.

http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h8...atternGain.gif

RF

On Sep 24, 5:45*am, "Richard Fry" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote Presumably the nulls between lobes on a radiation pattern
are a result of radiation cancellation. IF this is true then it means
we have not harnessed *all the radiation available.

__________

It is true, but that doesn't mean or prove that any of the TOTAL radiation
has been "lost." * It has merely been re-directed to produce some maximum
value in one or more directions, and some minimum value in others.

Think of squeezing an inflated balloon. *No matter what is its final shape,
the volume of air inside the balloon remains constant.

Below is a link showing this, as applies to an antenna. *The area within the
directional pattern is the same as if the pattern was omnidirectional.

http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h8...atternGain.gif

RF

All quite true ,But my reasoning on harvesting is to provide for
maximum return or use.
For a Yagi the radio amateur is interested in the main lobe and it's
xyz coverage.
All the rest is considered "wasted" or providing unwanted interference
If I did not create the nulls between lobes my time of use is then
doubled instead of wasted.
The beam that I am interested in is one that has a single lobe which
I can control in
terms of elevation and beam depth where I am not knocked out because
of radiation
nulls, which is the case for all planar arrays.
Just another reason to focus on equilibrium for radiation formation.
where one can obtain
gain with a single lobe but with a usable lobe width and depth and
uninterupted propagation..
But then, all is known about antennas and if it were possible as the
experts state or
we would have been using such antennas years ago !!!!!
Or as another person stated we don't need a different
type of beam radiation as we already have one!!!!
So by all means crush any and all ideas of change

Art wrote:
"So by all means crush any an all ideas of change."

In antennas and masers size matters. Diamagnetic materials matter more
in masers than in common antennas.

Keep searching for a highly focused beam from a tiny spot or speck. When
you succeed, patent it and you may become secure in your fame and
fortune.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

On Sep 25, 2:15*pm, (Richard Harrison)
wrote:
Art wrote:

"So by all means crush any an all ideas of change."

In antennas and masers size matters. Diamagnetic materials matter more
in masers than in common antennas.

It was not long ago that we had an antenna design so why should we
need another
No you have come out with an epistle that size matters. Truely the
thoughts of an older woman.
Richard by not learning how to use a computer you are living as much
in the past as McCain.
If you had given a reasion for such a statement you would have my
attention but you give nothing
and so I have nothing to add







Keep searching for a highly focused beam from a tiny spot or speck. When
you succeed, patent it and you may become secure in your fame and
fortune.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Art Unwin wrote:

...
It was not long ago that we had an antenna design so why should we
need another
No you have come out with an epistle that size matters. Truely the
thoughts of an older woman.
...


Actually, I suspect that what you say may hold deeper truths than some
realize, perhaps even than you realize ...

If the ether exists in a form some have imagined, if it is possible to
couple efficiently to this ether, then a one-inch antenna should be on
the same level of effectiveness as a one-hundred foot one.

The "if(s)" is the problem ... and directly relates to that little
problem of proof which has been requested ...

Regards,
JS

On Sep 25, 5:46*pm, John Smith wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
...
It was not long ago that we had an antenna design so why should we
need another
No you have come out with an epistle that size matters. Truely the
thoughts of an older woman.

* ...

Actually, I suspect that what you say may hold deeper truths than some
realize, perhaps even than you realize ...

If the ether exists in a form some have imagined, if it is possible to
couple efficiently to this ether, then a one-inch antenna should be on
the same level of effectiveness as a one-hundred foot one.

The "if(s)" is the problem ... and directly relates to that little
problem of proof which has been requested ...

Regards,
JS

If one is in continual denial why would one want his aproval?
If ones reputation is based on the number of senior moments he has
each day
why would one need his aproval? If one is in continual denial then
truth has no meaning
and thus he is errelavent.

On Sep 24, 3:33*pm, Art Unwin wrote:

*But then, all is known about antennas and if it were possible as the
experts state or
we would have been using such antennas years ago !!!!!

This might even include you if you were to actually try using one.
But, then the parade would come to an end, as you would see
that there is no free lunch.

Or as another person stated we don't need a different
*type of beam radiation as we already have one!!!!
So by all means crush any and all ideas of change

I know you hate yagi antennas, but did it ever occur to you
that the nulls are an advantage to many operators when
receiving. Heck, I bet just as many people use directional
antennas for the receive qualities as they do for any
directional gain. Whacking about 20 db off a west
coast kilowatt can come in mighty handy when you
are trying to hear weak DX in Africa.
Of course, with an equal opportunity dummy load, the
null will be in all directions.
So not only are you screwed as far as directional gain
vs an efficient antenna, you also lack the directional qualities
which many have great use for when receiving.
I suspect your invention using this "new science" will be a
flop at the box office.
Reboot and try again.