Many of us have checked the net for the latest advances in antennas.
Advances are usually arrived at public university research units some
of which are partially funded by outside sources Most, if not all,
the results are presented to the IEEE as a way of getting recognision.
But this information such as advancement in science is not provided to
the public even tho they came from a public institution. Thus you
cannot access it on the net as a member of the public as access is
with held UNLESS
you hand over some money to the IEEE. Why are the universites not
sharing their work with the public?
Is it because academics feel they are part of a special club divorced
from the public? Ofcourse I may be wrong
in taking that view in light of the fact that these study results are
available in libraries but why are they not put on the web for the
good of science and the general public at large?
Art

Art Unwin wrote:
Many of us have checked the net for the latest advances in antennas.
Advances are usually arrived at public university research units some
of which are partially funded by outside sources Most, if not all,
the results are presented to the IEEE as a way of getting recognision.
But this information such as advancement in science is not provided to
the public even tho they came from a public institution. Thus you
cannot access it on the net as a member of the public as access is
with held UNLESS
you hand over some money to the IEEE. Why are the universites not
sharing their work with the public?
Is it because academics feel they are part of a special club divorced
from the public? Ofcourse I may be wrong
in taking that view in light of the fact that these study results are
available in libraries but why are they not put on the web for the
good of science and the general public at large?
Art

This is a complex issue and one of considerable debate within those
universities AND the publishers of the journals.

1) The journals have operating costs (someone has to edit them and do
the typesetting and production).. these must be paid by subscription
fees and page charges from the author. Giving it away for free means
that other means must be developed for funding.

2) Not all the funding for research comes with a "must release to
public" clause. For instance, you might get a grant to defray part of
the cost of some research, and fund the remaining part out of your own
assets. The granting agency gets the data they want (at a lower cost
than paying for all of it), but you retain the rights.


3) Putting stuff on the web isn't free.

However, a LOT of newer research IS being published for free on the web.
PLOS (Public Library of Science), PubMed, arxiv, etc. are all examples.

Remember, too, that this is academia, and they tend to be conservative
and change slowly. To a certain extent, it IS an exclusive club,
because publication leads to promotion, and the publication process is
full of gates and wickets. The term "publish or perish" did not arise
out of thin air.

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
Many of us have checked the net for the latest advances in antennas.
Advances are usually arrived at public university research units some
of which are partially funded by outside sources Most, if not all,
the results are presented to the IEEE as a way of getting recognision.
But this information such as advancement in science is not provided to
the public even tho they came from a public institution. Thus you
cannot access it on the net as a member of the public as access is
with held UNLESS
you hand over some money to the IEEE. Why are the universites not
sharing their work with the public?
Is it because academics feel they are part of a special club divorced
from the public? Ofcourse I may be wrong
in taking that view in light of the fact that these study results are
available in libraries but why are they not put on the web for the
good of science and the general public at large?
Art

Why is it that the general public rejects anything beyond sound bites and
clever slogans?
Why is it that some experts completely reject mainstream thought and even go
so far as to present their own paradigm complete with their own private
semantics and definitions. Not many actually learned the Klingon language,
although many were accustomed to hearing it on TV. Like Psychology and
Philosophy where every major school of thought had it's own paradigm,
language, definitions and required intimate study as if it were a cult unto
itself. The end result was many led astray by loony professors who had
dreamed everything up in their heads and sought to prove it by changing all
the rules. Even Charley Manson still has his followers. Oh to be sure
there had to be some element that rang true - some brain prick of insight to
trigger the euphoria to forge ahead. But nearly all found their theories
held true only for a few specimens they held under their own microscope.

What's your point, Art? Are you looking for a grant to start your own
school of Philosophy?

Why don't you get a web presence where you can put your lab notes, math and
drawings. You can copyright them unless they belong to someone else.

On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 08:51:05 -0800 (PST), Art Unwin
wrote:

Thus you
cannot access it on the net as a member of the public as access is
with held UNLESS
you hand over some money to the IEEE.

Who needs the IEEE? I've found every new design offered - FOR FREE
from the universities! And every one of those "new designs" mentioned
here were worth every penny I spent.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Nov 25, 11:26*am, Jim Lux wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
Many of us have checked the net for the latest advances in antennas.
Advances are usually arrived at public university research units some
of which are partially funded by outside sources *Most, if not all,
the results are presented to the IEEE as a way of getting recognision.
But this information such as advancement in science is not provided to
the public even tho they came from a public institution. Thus you
cannot access it on the net as a member of the public as access is
with held UNLESS
you hand over some money to the IEEE. Why are the universites not
sharing their work with the public?
Is it because academics feel they are part of a special club divorced
from the public? Ofcourse I may be wrong
in taking that view in light of the fact that these study results are
available in libraries but why are they not put on the web for the
good of science and the general public at large?
Art

This is a complex issue and one of considerable debate within those
universities AND the publishers of the journals.

1) The journals have operating costs (someone has to edit them and do
the typesetting and production).. these must be paid by subscription
fees and page charges from the author. *Giving it away for free means
that other means must be developed for funding.

2) Not all the funding for research comes with a "must release to
public" clause. *For instance, you might get a grant to defray part of
the cost of some research, and fund the remaining part out of your own
assets. *The granting agency gets the data they want (at a lower cost
than paying for all of it), but you retain the rights.

3) Putting stuff on the web isn't free.

However, a LOT of newer research IS being published for free on the web.
PLOS (Public Library of Science), PubMed, arxiv, etc. are all examples.

Remember, too, that this is academia, and they tend to be conservative
and change slowly. *To a certain extent, it IS an exclusive club,
because publication leads to promotion, and the publication process is
full of gates and wickets. *The term "publish or perish" did not arise
out of thin air.

Well said !
It pleases me that it is a subject of debate. If the publishing is
part of the business
then ofcourse the market decides whether it is read or not. One would
have thought that public universities would
also publish the benefits of their work for all and thus advertise the
high standards of the university.
From a ham radio point of view we have the ARRL organization but the
do not seem interested in advances in the science
even tho they have the vehicle (QST) to keep its members up to date.
But it is not the private institutions that I point the finger at but
the public institutions
who now take on a mantle of private business by forcing students to
buy high price text books where their is a feed back to them or
increasing tuition costs that doesn';t seem to marry with the present
market but yet are paid for by public funds. I suppose that the
present state of affairs will continue if academia doesn't peruse the
web or publish their thesis even tho they actually belong to the
institution. In the mean time I am happy to make a over 100 mile round
trip to a suitable library to spend a day reading on the premises as I
am not allowed to visit Roswell.
Thanks for your input
Regards
Art

Art Unwin wrote:
Why are the universites not
sharing their work with the public?

Because socialism has not completely taken over?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

It sure hasn't taken long for the ability of some people to find
information to contract to the single source of the Internet.

But other sources still exist as they have for a very long time. And
IEEE publications are and always have been available to the public.

A lot of university libraries have IEEE publications which are available
for free viewing. And I have yet to see a library that lacks a way of
copying an article.

Even my humble local library, which lacks even a single decent EE text,
is happy to get any article I specify via an "interlibrary loan". Not
only can I get anything the IEEE has published, but papers from the most
obscure journals as well.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 10:51:06 -0800 (PST), Art Unwin
wrote:

From a ham radio point of view we have the ARRL organization but the
do not seem interested in advances in the science
even tho they have the vehicle (QST) to keep its members up to date.

You might want to look at QEX magazine. It's the ARRL technical
publication for experimenters:
http://www.arrl.org/qex/

Also, publication, free or otherwise, constitutes disclosure, which
has signifigant effects on the patent process. Premature public
disclosure can easily invalidate a patent. It must be done carefully,
with due consideration for the implications of publication. Here's a
short summary of the situation:
http://uwadmnweb.uwyo.edu/rpc/InventionDisclosure.asp

The ARRL's interest in advances in the sciences is intentionally
limited to their applications to amateur radio. While hams may have a
good general interest in scientific advances, the number that apply to
amateur radio is rather limited. I have specific opinions about some
of these advances, such as the ARRL's discovery of Wi-Fi:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_speed_multimedia
but I don't have the time or strength for yet another endless debate.

In my never humble opinion, the ARRL's support and publication of ham
inspired new technology has been usually late, limited, and sometimes
wrong. (NBFM using commercial radios, FM repeaters, packet radio,
packet networks, computahs, etc)[1]. Fortunately, this has not always
been the case, as PSK31, bizarre antennas, satellite, and SDR have
been well supported and published. Personally, I would be quite happy
if the ARRL concentrates on what nobody else is doing, which is acting
as a lobbyist for amateur radio with the FCC and the government.


[1] I still recall articles in QST in the late 1960's and early 1970's
on how to convert commercial FM radios into AM radios. I often
wondered what the ARRL was thinking.

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

On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 10:11:38 -0800, Richard Clark
wrote:

On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 08:51:05 -0800 (PST), Art Unwin
wrote:

Thus you
cannot access it on the net as a member of the public as access is
with held UNLESS
you hand over some money to the IEEE.

Who needs the IEEE? I've found every new design offered - FOR FREE
from the universities! And every one of those "new designs" mentioned
here were worth every penny I spent.

Out of curiosity, does that include the IEEE Transactions on Antennas
and Propagation and the IEEE Antenna and Propagation Magazine? I'm
currently debating the merits of re-joining the IEEE mostly to obtain
these publications. In the past, they were literally gold mines of
interesting ideas on antennas. However, like all gold mines, I had to
dig through a considerable amound of rubble and useless garbage to
find the gold. I've seen little of this stuff on university web
piles, except after publication by the IEEE. I drag myself up to UCSC
and borrow a few issues, but I prefer to have them online
(downloadable and searchable) which costs money.

Do I spend the money, or do I seach for your secret horde of free
university publications on antenna design?



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

On Nov 25, 1:53*pm, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 10:51:06 -0800 (PST), Art Unwin

wrote:
From a ham radio point of view we have the ARRL organization but the
do not seem interested in advances in the science
even tho they have the vehicle (QST) to keep its members up to date.

You might want to look at QEX magazine. *It's the ARRL technical
publication for experimenters:
http://www.arrl.org/qex/

Also, publication, free or otherwise, constitutes disclosure, which
has signifigant effects on the patent process. *Premature public
disclosure can easily invalidate a patent. *It must be done carefully,
with due consideration for the implications of publication. *Here's a
short summary of the situation:
http://uwadmnweb.uwyo.edu/rpc/InventionDisclosure.asp

The ARRL's interest in advances in the sciences is intentionally
limited to their applications to amateur radio. *While hams may have a
good general interest in scientific advances, the number that apply to
amateur radio is rather limited. *I have specific opinions about some
of these advances, such as the ARRL's discovery of Wi-Fi:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_speed_multimedia
but I don't have the time or strength for yet another endless debate.

In my never humble opinion, the ARRL's support and publication of ham
inspired new technology has been usually late, limited, and sometimes
wrong. *(NBFM using commercial radios, FM repeaters, packet radio,
packet networks, computahs, etc)[1]. *Fortunately, this has not always
been the case, as PSK31, bizarre antennas, satellite, and SDR have
been well supported and published. *Personally, I would be quite happy
if the ARRL concentrates on what nobody else is doing, which is acting
as a lobbyist for amateur radio with the FCC and the government.

[1] I still recall articles in QST in the late 1960's and early 1970's
on how to convert commercial FM radios into AM radios. *I often
wondered what the ARRL was thinking.

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

Hmm that is interesting. Seems like the popular thinking is to resist
change as everything is O.K.
EXCEPT fior the ARRL and CQ magazine. Can't really fault that tho I
suspect that many would be better of saving their money
and use it to set up a personal business instead of spending it at
university. Seems like the financial advantages of old with respect to
return
has floated away in the wind. Why go to university if the older books
like Termans and Jackson has everything that anybody wants to know and
at a reasonable price compared to the price of books that Universities
foist on their students?. Does the world really need advances in
science and for whome?
Regards
Art