On Nov 5, 8:17*am, "Ed Cregger" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...
On Nov 4, 9:48 am, (Richard Harrison) wrote:



Mark Keith wrote:

"Why would I even "need" to do your work?"

Good question.

Art`s full wavelength of wire is rolled up so its individual elements
aren`t strung up to fully reinforce each other`s fields. Resistance loss
of the elements adds even when rolled up.

Art wrote:

"What blows my mind John there is nobody willing to do the math with
respect to my extension of GAUSS."

Who needs it?

Terman`s 1955 opus says on page 864:
"Radio waves represent electrical energy that has escaped into free
space: they are described in detail in Sec. 1-1. Radio waves are
produced to some extent whenever a wire in open space carries a
high-frequency current. The laws governing such radiation are obtained
by using Maxwell`s equations to express the fields associated with the
wi when this is done there is found to be a component, termed the
radiated field, having a strength that varies inversely with distance."

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Well Richard I don't go along with that unless the definition of a
wave is made clear.
Some see a wave likened to a part of a cobwebb m oving in the
atmosphere. Other see a wave as a group of particles
unconnected but moving in unison with other particles thru the
atmosphere. I go with the particle aproach in a counter gravity
flight.
Until. a good definition of a wave comes along and how such is
constituted;
As far as doing all the work for me the work has all been done and
each assertion is backed up by existing modern practices such that no
more proof is required. If people want to ignore science let them
believe that the World is flat but I can't expect the like of Mark to
follow such a trail as he readily admits
to not completing high school or for that matter people who consider
that all education has been completed and thus all is known,.
Fortunately many hams are continueing to experiment in search of the
holy grail where others wish to continue as just talking heads.
Termnans definition quoted above is not definitive with respect to
radiation in any way and it is well recognised that radiation is not
known in all its aspects.
What is known is that there are four fources involved all of which are
accounted for in Maxwell's mathematics but not fully explained in a
scientific account
and that includes the so called definition that Terman put forward in
the absense of fuul knoweledge of radiation.
Regards
Art

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

I appreciate higher education, Art. But not all higher education needs to be
obtained at college or university.

After all, if one reads the same books outside of an organized curriculum
and if one truly loves the pursuit of knowledge, is it not possible for one
to further ones knowledge without completing organized/formal schemes of
formal education? IIRC, some of our most important scientific discoveries
were made by "uneducated" individuals. I feel that too much emphasis is
placed upon having credentials in this world, not that I would not like to
have a degree or two of my own to proudly display on the wall.

Ed, NM2K (for just a short while longer)

Ed, I agree with you 100% but if you are going to debate a subject
then one stands on his knoweledge base
without resorting to slirs. In a debate both positions are put on the
table for debate.
We are long gone from the days that those who challenge old ideas are
pushed aside purely on the volume of jeers
without any evidence what ever. Mark cannot debate the subject on its
technical merits however he can mount an assault
on any messenger based on emotions, he certainly is not equiped to go
thru the higher math of Maxwell and Gauss.
This does not exclude him from any discussion but to mount a personal
assault in the place of knoweledge just gives exposure
to what a person he really is.. On the subject of antennas I have put
thru a theory where a particular antenna is produced.
Antennas produced in the past have been torn apart on its merits thro
out ham radio history but only after study and it is this study that I
am looking for.
As yet nothing that I have put forward has been scientifically
refutted not that I wish for that but I do relish a challenge
Regards
Art