Three short simple questions about antennas.
 

Hi Art

it is my experience that people with the greatest mastery of
the queen's english use it with great effect to deflect questions and
to avoid giving straight answers,and to change the subject without you
realising that they have done so. Politicians and Richards 1and 2
being good examples. What i have witnessed going on in your last
couple of threads has not led me to change my opinion.

Your tenacity and conviction in the face of the opposition on
this group is admirable. Stick to your guns, for what it is worth my
money is on you.

Jaro.

On 10 Mar 2004 06:04:26 -0800, (jaroslav lipka)
wrote:
Your tenacity and conviction in the face of the opposition on
this group is admirable. Stick to your guns, for what it is worth my
money is on you.

Jaro.

Ah Jaro!

It takes more than two munchkins to populate the Land of Oz.

Knowing this will irritate both of you, but please the majority who
actually enjoy the addition of new information (this time in the field
of literature) I shall diverge to "The Life of Johnson."

"Even fools received his personal attention.

Said one: 'But I don't understand you, Sir.'

'Sir, I have found you an argument. I am not obliged to find you
an understanding.'

'Sir, you are irascible,' said Boswell;
'you have no patience with folly or absurdity.'"

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

nm5k@w
t.net (Mark Keith) wrote in message

Mark, I cannot stand by while the pack readies itself to attack this
gut
purely because he does not conform with the general group
I will bare myself to the group and then open another thread where you
can renue the assaults on me.
I was a child in England on Sept3 1939,scooling was not an issue, when
war swirles around you the public is rallied to stories of old glories
where England has fought many battles in its history and how in the
corner of any battle fields there lies a mound that contains a piece
of England. When things go wrong then we are reminded of how things
can go wrong in the story of how the king fled from a battle field on
a fiery horse and from which the poetry spills about how for the sake
of a nail a shoe was lost.
After the war I embarked on schooling at night even tho I was also
working but at that time they had raised the school leaving age to 15
so in a way I was lucky. More than a decade later I finally passed all
the examinations required of a professional enginner and was invited
to the U.S. to partake in the good life.
As with all people there is an aging process and you are prone to
things happening that never occured before, mine was a heart attack,
lots of people have those, but in my case a projectile somehow got
loose in my brain severing all the communication wires that had taken
half a century to grow. This phenomina forced me back to near
childhood where one starts the learning proces by toutching and
watching and seeing. Sounds simple but taking that course allowed me
to get of the bed and pursue things. In my case it was to first get my
memory going so I could read ( no I did not make such a logical choice
this is inbuilt human instincts. Eventualy I turned to antennas as it
allowed me to go out on the land and piddle with antennas even tho I
was so, so at evrything
but I was not being judges. To move on quicker, the idea that Brown
had with a loop to detune errant transmissions and over a few years
was rewarded when I read the Moxon book. Here he showed a combination
loop dipole that could be used
for at least three bands. What was important to me was the impotance
of coupling
which brings up the issue that no where does it say that all antennas
must be based around wavelength and the accompanying series circuit.
Moxon didn't have the benefit of a computor and his work was all done
long hand where I had fuel to follow my instincts. Recognising that
Moxon had not gone into the intricacies
of how important the distributed loads on the radiating members I
honed that design together with the addition of a motor such that the
tree band s he had chosen were connected in SWR form ( unfortunately
he opted for a resonant feed point approach) After a few more years I
was confident enough to share what I had found and instead of spending
a large amount of money I wrote up a patent for my self knowing that
even if I could write reasonably well which I couldn't
QST would never print such a thing anymore. So yes I got a patent and
even followed it with another on and then another one which I withdrew
because of a hail of critisicm. One of the reasons was because of
irregular learning to say the least I was not privy to the use of
regular terms that one would obtain with a formal education. My former
education was lost tho I like to think that some is returning. On
reflection if I can use that term it is normal for experts to attack
even experts and even trash them if possible.
Thus when I shared my experiences probably in an unclear way or what
ever I the man became the focus and not the story that I wanted to
impart. Eventually
somebody pointed out that I had no integrty and the technical side was
lost.
Now it was a fight against the man, an englishman in the US that one
can join with experts to maul. Yes I could have left like others that
had been trashed in the past many of which were just people you were
willing to search for a way to stretch the envelope . However for me
the 'corner in every battlefield' rang in my ears consistantly and
perhaps I became a child again and decided I would only leave on my
own terms and not those of a shabby mob, a very hurtfull and painful
journey to be sure. Now I see the formation for another attack, not on
me but somebody who came out and posted something that alluded to me
and that I feel is so,so wrong. Iwill start another thread which goes
back to my first entrance on this group here possible some of the
newer members will focus on the technical side by looking at the
picture that I hold and not on the man holding it. I will do this to
lure you all from what you are now readying to do
and you can then determine if indeed I am a man ready for the rubber
room because of insanity. To the initial poster, thanks but no thanks,
you have a life to live, remove youself and enjoy the good life.

Regards
Art Unwin...KB9MZ........XG and so, so proud of it.

nm5k@w
t.net (Mark Keith) wrote in message

Mark, I cannot stand by while the pack readies itself to attack this
gut
purely because he does not conform with the general group
I will bare myself to the group and then open another thread where you
can renue the assaults on me.
I was a child in England on Sept3 1939,scooling was not an issue, when
war swirles around you the public is rallied to stories of old glories
where England has fought many battles in its history and how in the
corner of any battle fields there lies a mound that contains a piece
of England. When things go wrong then we are reminded of how things
can go wrong in the story of how the king fled from a battle field on
a fiery horse and from which the poetry spills about how for the sake
of a nail a shoe was lost.
After the war I embarked on schooling at night even tho I was also
working but at that time they had raised the school leaving age to 15
so in a way I was lucky. More than a decade later I finally passed all
the examinations required of a professional enginner and was invited
to the U.S. to partake in the good life.
As with all people there is an aging process and you are prone to
things happening that never occured before, mine was a heart attack,
lots of people have those, but in my case a projectile somehow got
loose in my brain severing all the communication wires that had taken
half a century to grow. This phenomina forced me back to near
childhood where one starts the learning proces by toutching and
watching and seeing. Sounds simple but taking that course allowed me
to get of the bed and pursue things. In my case it was to first get my
memory going so I could read ( no I did not make such a logical choice
this is inbuilt human instincts. Eventualy I turned to antennas as it
allowed me to go out on the land and piddle with antennas even tho I
was so, so at evrything
but I was not being judges. To move on quicker, the idea that Brown
had with a loop to detune errant transmissions and over a few years
was rewarded when I read the Moxon book. Here he showed a combination
loop dipole that could be used
for at least three bands. What was important to me was the impotance
of coupling
which brings up the issue that no where does it say that all antennas
must be based around wavelength and the accompanying series circuit.
Moxon didn't have the benefit of a computor and his work was all done
long hand where I had fuel to follow my instincts. Recognising that
Moxon had not gone into the intricacies
of how important the distributed loads on the radiating members I
honed that design together with the addition of a motor such that the
tree band s he had chosen were connected in SWR form ( unfortunately
he opted for a resonant feed point approach) After a few more years I
was confident enough to share what I had found and instead of spending
a large amount of money I wrote up a patent for my self knowing that
even if I could write reasonably well which I couldn't
QST would never print such a thing anymore. So yes I got a patent and
even followed it with another on and then another one which I withdrew
because of a hail of critisicm. One of the reasons was because of
irregular learning to say the least I was not privy to the use of
regular terms that one would obtain with a formal education. My former
education was lost tho I like to think that some is returning. On
reflection if I can use that term it is normal for experts to attack
even experts and even trash them if possible.
Thus when I shared my experiences probably in an unclear way or what
ever I the man became the focus and not the story that I wanted to
impart. Eventually
somebody pointed out that I had no integrty and the technical side was
lost.
Now it was a fight against the man, an englishman in the US that one
can join with experts to maul. Yes I could have left like others that
had been trashed in the past many of which were just people you were
willing to search for a way to stretch the envelope . However for me
the 'corner in every battlefield' rang in my ears consistantly and
perhaps I became a child again and decided I would only leave on my
own terms and not those of a shabby mob, a very hurtfull and painful
journey to be sure. Now I see the formation for another attack, not on
me but somebody who came out and posted something that alluded to me
and that I feel is so,so wrong. Iwill start another thread which goes
back to my first entrance on this group here possible some of the
newer members will focus on the technical side by looking at the
picture that I hold and not on the man holding it. I will do this to
lure you all from what you are now readying to do
and you can then determine if indeed I am a man ready for the rubber
room because of insanity. To the initial poster, thanks but no thanks,
you have a life to live, remove youself and enjoy the good life.

Regards
Art Unwin...KB9MZ........XG and so, so proud of it.

Art Unwin KB9MZ wrote:
I will do this to
lure you all from what you are now readying to do
and you can then determine if indeed I am a man ready for the rubber
room because of insanity.

Art, I don't know if you know it or not, but some of the greatest
minds in the history of mankind were bipolar. I suspect the manic
phase plus a high IQ cannot be beaten for original creative thought.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
....
'Sir, you are irascible,' said Boswell;
'you have no patience with folly or absurdity.'"

Was that before, or after, he poked Rousseau's wife?
__
Steve
KI5YG
..

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 05:39:13 GMT, " Stephen Cowell"
wrote:


"Richard Clark" wrote in message
.. .
...
'Sir, you are irascible,' said Boswell;
'you have no patience with folly or absurdity.'"

Was that before, or after, he poked Rousseau's wife?
__
Steve
KI5YG

Hi Steve,

There's couple things wrong with that, Who are you referring to and
in what context? Boswell, or Johnson, and certainly not discussed in
"The Life of Johnson" as Boswell was the more, um, adventurous and
more so stated in his "London Journal."

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Art Unwin KB9MZ wrote:



life story clipped to save 300K server room...

Just one comment....Define coupling.


Iwill start another thread which goes
back to my first entrance on this group here possible some of the
newer members will focus on the technical side by looking at the
picture that I hold and not on the man holding it.

That shouldn't be too hard as long as you don't forget to wear your
skivvies when the picture is taken.

I will do this to
lure you all from what you are now readying to do

I'm fixing to go to the bank. I doubt you will be able to lure me away
from that mission.
Money talks, bull#%@ walks...

and you can then determine if indeed I am a man ready for the rubber
room because of insanity.

You will know when that moment arrives. You'll go to the store to buy
donuts and fretzels and teenagers will come up to you and ask "Hey' Are
you Howard Hughes?" "Man! them nine inch nails are the cats ass!"
"Old man, you smell!" "Are you related to Billy Gibbons?" etc, etc ...


To the initial poster, thanks but no thanks,
you have a life to live, remove youself and enjoy the good life.

Will he get a free boat and motor with this limited one time offer? I
know some people who can teach him how to barefoot ski. Some are world
class experts in that field.


--
http://web.wt.net/~nm5k

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 05:39:13 GMT, " Stephen Cowell"
wrote:


"Richard Clark" wrote in message
.. .
...
'Sir, you are irascible,' said Boswell;
'you have no patience with folly or absurdity.'"

Was that before, or after, he poked Rousseau's wife?
__
Steve
KI5YG

Hi Steve,

There's couple things wrong with that, Who are you referring to and
in what context? Boswell, or Johnson, and certainly not discussed in
"The Life of Johnson" as Boswell was the more, um, adventurous and
more so stated in his "London Journal."

Of course, Boswell... he ran with the Rousseaus, as well
as everyone else. Hump anything on two legs.
__
Steve
KI5YG
..

(jaroslav lipka) wrote in message
g'day Keith

When it comes to modeling what you leave out is just as
important as what you put in, some times more so.
My money is still on Art.
Jaro.

To do what?
As far as modeling, I modeled exactly what he told me to. He ok'ed the
diagram of the antenna. As a matter of fact I still have it on my
server.
http://web.wt.net/~nm5k/loopole.jpg
MK

Mark you should have no room for complaints. I offered you unhindered access
to my work including the computor programing system which I would purchase
at my own expense together with the programing I used to substantiated my
findings. You refused that offer prefering to stay with the pack and
ridicule all. You have had access to the patent write ups many times as they
have been brought forward many times by members to serve at a ridicule
point and all you had to do was to click on what was supplied. They also
found a very old page that I had describing the loop/dipole antenna together
with the drawings and you are still complaining. I have personally informed
you that EZNEC was not a suitable vehicle for this work but you proceded on
the point that you were proficient in any sort of computor programing,
and you are still complaining ,and now you bring up a drawing that you say
you put before me even tho you had the option of looking at the many
drawings available. I just looked at the drawing that you proffer and I defy
anybody to look at that and know what it represents. Time and time again I
tried to make peace with you but you chose to tag along with those who have
attacked many contributors in the past since they have a long winning record
in ousting many others. You decided on your nest a long time ago
so you really have no reason to complain as you still have your cohorts
around you that tend to belittle all. Your crying now falls on deaf ears.
Nuff said
'Good day' I think he said
Art


"Mark Keith" wrote in message
om...
(jaroslav lipka) wrote in message
g'day Keith

When it comes to modeling what you leave out is just as
important as what you put in, some times more so.
My money is still on Art.
Jaro.

To do what?
As far as modeling, I modeled exactly what he told me to. He ok'ed the
diagram of the antenna. As a matter of fact I still have it on my
server.
http://web.wt.net/~nm5k/loopole.jpg
MK

"aunwin" wrote in message news:RE66c.33727$po.297044@attbi_s52...
Mark you should have no room for complaints.

Who's complaining? I could really give a rats ass about you or your
antenna....

I offered you unhindered access
to my work including the computor programing system which I would purchase
at my own expense together with the programing I used to substantiated my
findings.

Why do I need yours? I have many programs. They all pretty much do the
same thing.

You refused that offer prefering to stay with the pack and
ridicule all.

I only ridicule horsecrap Art. I asked the guy a simple frigging
question..
WTF are you going to do, that his money is on? So far, he hasn't
answered. I don't think he knows. If that is ridicule,that just too
damn bad isn't it...What a whiny ass old fart you are, Art.

You have had access to the patent write ups many times as they
have been brought forward many times by members to serve at a ridicule
point and all you had to do was to click on what was supplied.

Are you talking about the rube goldberg looking thing? I've seen it...
They also
found a very old page that I had describing the loop/dipole antenna together
with the drawings and you are still complaining.

Complaining my ass.

I have personally informed
you that EZNEC was not a suitable vehicle for this work

Bull****, Art. Plain and simple.

but you proceded on
the point that you were proficient in any sort of computor programing,

They pretty much all use the same basic engines...

and you are still complaining ,

Again, bite me Art. Complaining my ass. You just wait till I'm REALLY
complaining you frigging fool. Don't screw with me. You **** me off,
and I WILL be your worst frigging nightmare. I'll stick to you like
dried turd particles on a baby's ass. Everything you say that is BS, I
will comment on. Is that what you really want? As is it, I only
comment on about 50% of it...

and now you bring up a drawing that you say
you put before me even tho you had the option of looking at the many
drawings available.

Art, you frigging fool, that is the picture from the modeling program
itself. I sent it to you. You looked at it, and ok'ed it.
I just looked at the drawing that you proffer and I defy
anybody to look at that and know what it represents.

Jeeze...What a frigging idiot you are, Art.

Time and time again I
tried to make peace with you but you chose to tag along with those who have
attacked many contributors in the past since they have a long winning record
in ousting many others.

No Art. I won't kiss your ass. Tag along? Tag along with whom? WTF are
you talking about?

You decided on your nest a long time ago

My nest? Crap....
so you really have no reason to complain as you still have your cohorts
around you that tend to belittle all.

Bite me Art. I could give a flying #$%^ what the others say or think.
That includes you, you old fart.

Your crying now falls on deaf ears.

You'll think crying...
Nuff said

Yea, I think so....
'Good day' I think he said
Art

Yea, later Art. MK

"aunwin" wrote in message I have personally informed
you that EZNEC was not a suitable vehicle for this work but you proceded on
the point that you were proficient in any sort of computor programing,

BTW, since your memory is suspect, and seems to be failing...I did NOT
use EZNEC. I only have the eznec demo, and the demo did not have
enough segments to be able to model that with reliable results. "I
think it would have been good enough for gov work though." As far as
programming, what does that have to do with anything? I "program"
flight sim software. Not antenna modeling software. What does my
programming abilities have to do with your antenna, or the modeling of
it? Thats easy...None. MK

(Mark Keith) wrote in message . com...

On reflection, I guess I got a little testy with Art. But he provoked
me...
But I do apologize for the somewhat nasty comments.. But, I do not
suffer fools well.
Anyone can look in google, and read the threads themselves. When I
modeled that antenna, I nearly had to jump through hoops to get an
accurate description, but I finally got his ok, as all can read. I
modeled the thing exactly as he described, eventually, and the results
did not agree with his ideas. What was his only comment to the whole
ordeal and modeling exercise?

"quote"
"Good for you Mark! You have done a lot of good work on it' and you
got
so close.
So we put you down for " it won't work as stated,"Your opinion is as
good as any and you are not beating around the bush or hedging
Have a great week end
Art"

Unquote...

Note the "you came so close"....ONLY if I had results that agreed with
his, whole the results have been final. The results of the modeling
did not suit him, so he had no further comment. I see no claim above
that I "butchered" the model or diagram of the 20m dipole involved.
Only in the beginning, when I doubled the size to 40m. This was before
his thread "a tutorial", so I had no way of knowing what band he
wanted.

The links to the threads involved can be read at these URLS. They link
to my search, but will read the whole threads.

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...Db%26a s_mind
3D12%26as_minm%3D7%26as_miny%3D2002%26as_maxd%3D18 %26as_maxm%3D9%26as_maxy%3D2002%26safe%3Dimages

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...Db%26a s_mind
3D12%26as_minm%3D7%26as_miny%3D2002%26as_maxd%3D18 %26as_maxm%3D9%26as_maxy%3D2002%26safe%3Dimages

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...Db%26a s_mind
3D12%26as_minm%3D7%26as_miny%3D2002%26as_maxd%3D18 %26as_maxm%3D9%26as_maxy%3D2002%26safe%3Dimages

Art, if two years later, you don't like the model, do it yourself,
and post the results for inspection. Just quit all this whining.
Whine, whine, whine...Thats what gets my goat...And this whining
involved me....MK

On 18 Mar 2004 08:29:07 -0800, (Mark Keith) wrote:

Art, if two years later, you don't like the model, do it yourself,
and post the results for inspection.

Hi Mark,

What a novel concept! ...but then that would be the end of it and we
could roll the rock back over the sepulcher.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Art, KB9MZ wrote:
"Here he (Moxon) showed a combination loop dipole that could be used for
at least three bands. What was important to me was the importance of
coupling which brings up the issue that no where does it say that all
antennas must be based around wavelength and the accompanying series
circuit."

Just as surely, Moxon does not say that his loop and dipole antenna is
aperiodic.

Every piece of wire has a frequency of first resonance where its
distributed inductance and distributed capacitance have equal reactance
magnitudes. At this frequency, these reactances of opposite types
exactly cancel leaving only resistance to oppose antenna current.

Either side of resonance, antenna impedance rises sharply due to
reactance. Radiation resistance causes the Q to be low as compared to an
unloaded LC tuned circuit. An antenna may have a Q in the teens while an
unloaded LC circuit can have a Q in the hundreds.

Moxon may have assumed his readers understood such antennas as his were
resonant and sensitive to frequency (wavelength).

I don`t have Moxon`s diagram but from Art`s description of long ago, his
version conjoins loop and center-fed dipole rod. The feedline connects
directly to the loop or through a variable capacitor. In either case,
coupling seems complete to me.

I guess Moxon didn`t motorize the capacitance in his T / gamma matching
system, so Art patented it.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

On 20 Mar 2004 20:39:18 -0800, (jaroslav lipka)
wrote:

and is confident that when the time comes he can prove it

Hi Jaro,

I presume by this you haven't any idea how it could be proven
yourself?

You obviously don't know when that "time" will be either.

I hear one of the biggest off track betting houses in Britain has
closed its books on taking bets about "is there life on Mars?" The
interviewer asked them about bets laid in the late 60's at a 1000:1
that may offer a return soon - if the bettor hadn't passed on in the
mean "time" that is. Take a lesson from this and if you have your
money riding on Art, be sure to save the betting slip where your
inheritors don't mistake it for a worn shopping list tucked into the
bottom of the pocket in your cardigan.

I would quote something about Time's Wingéd Chariot drawing near, but
that would ruffle the feathers of those who hate English Culture. Art
likens it to fractured English (?) - such ambivalence.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote

Hi Jaro,

I presume by this you haven't any idea how it could be proven
yourself?


G'day Richard

Why am i not surprised you jumped in. As i have
stated before i know very little about Antenna's, but i do consider
myself a reasonable judge of people.
I first came across this group about two years ago and what caught
my attention then was a post you made where you were attempting to
ridicule where Art had sugested putting a feed on an Antenna (i
believe it was a Moxon)and in a later post Ian White confirmed it was
the correct position.
Since then i have seen you and one or two others miss no
opportunity to attack and denigrate his posts and him personaly.
Over the same period i have seen Art gaining more and more
confidence with every post he made culminating in his last post to
this thread combined with his posts to the Q thread where he was
saying in my opinion, He knows what he has got and he knows what it
can do and what is more he can prove it,so he does not need to take
any more crap from you.
You ask for facts and figures,why should he supply them when
judging from your previous posts you have already decided whatever he
claims he is wrong.

The temperature here is 40c and is forecast to stay the same for
another three days,is it possible all this hot air is eminating from
your direction across the Pacific.

Jaro.

On 21 Mar 2004 06:13:13 -0800, (jaroslav lipka)
wrote:

Richard Clark wrote

Hi Jaro,

I presume by this you haven't any idea how it could be proven
yourself?


G'day Richard

Why am i not surprised you jumped in.
Nor I you. Thanx for that moment of irony. :-)
As i have stated before i know very little about Antenna's, but i do consider
myself a reasonable judge of people.

Hi Jaro,

That is a presumption not supported by any evidence much less
observable in your correspondence. You respond as a social critic
often, and to take me to task for that same office exposes your having
little talent for it.

As a social critic, you should examine the quality of your education
closer. For instance, English is one of the few, if not only,
languages that distinguishes and capitalizes the first person pronoun
- I. To a social examiner, the persistent usage of the lower case i
would suggest problems of either self perception, or over exposure to
the works of e.e. cummings. However, I am descending into technical
issues and diverging from your agenda of entertainment:

I first came across this group about two years ago and what caught
my attention then was a post you made where you were attempting to
ridicule where Art had sugested putting a feed on an Antenna (i
believe it was a Moxon)and in a later post Ian White confirmed it was
the correct position.

I've noted in that same span of time that, yes, you know very little
about antennas and have contributed nothing technical. We often
encounter correspondents slumming through our group in seek of
entertainment and pressing on for more discussion of personalities to
the abandonment of the theoretical (this post of yours is eminent in
that regard). Your support of Art certainly serves to relieve your
boredom - one of those decadent Old World problems of ennui?

You ask for facts and figures,why should he supply them when
judging from your previous posts you have already decided whatever he
claims he is wrong.

Why indeed, when it interferes with this decided preference for the
buffoonery of a soap opera. Facts and figures too quickly snuff the
ambiguity of martyrdom.

Jaro, please don't let this dissuade you from more entries here, their
quality heightens the contrast to real participation. This returns me
to the original observation you have not responded to:
I presume by this you haven't any idea how it could be proven
yourself?
Let's just say your prejudice has the same weight as Art's proofs you
fail to comprehend - could we say Ætherial?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote in message




Hi Jaro,

That is a presumption not supported by any evidence much less
observable in your correspondence. You respond as a social critic
often, and to take me to task for that same office exposes your having
little talent for it.

I must admit it does not come naturaly, I do tend to struggle a bit.

As a social critic, you should examine the quality of your education
closer. For instance, English is one of the few, if not only,
languages that distinguishes and capitalizes the first person pronoun
- I.
Fair dinkum!

To a social examiner, the persistent usage of the lower case i
would suggest problems of either self perception, or over exposure to
the works of e.e. cummings.

None of the above, just put it down to a basic education and a lack
of observation when reading other posts, but I thank you for "your"
observation and I assure you I will get it right in future. Have
checked out e.e. cummings but I'm not one for poetry thanks.


Your support of Art certainly serves to relieve your
boredom - one of those decadent Old World problems of ennui?

You are right again, boredom is a killer,


Jaro, please don't let this dissuade you from more entries here, their
quality heightens the contrast to real participation.

Thank you for your invitation, I am happy to continue to post but
as I pointed out it does not come naturaly, so I will have to ration
them out. Is that ok with you?.

Let's just say your prejudice has the same weight as Art's proofs
you
fail to comprehend - could we say Ætherial

Oh dear! thats the second time I have had to check my dictionary in
this post. My interpretation of that is a bit "Airy Fairy"

G'Day Richard
I limit myself to learning one new word a day, so if
you decide to reply please don't over do it, thanks.

Jaro.

Mark, NM5K wrote:
"What FIRST got me to model his "loopole" was his claim that you could
get collinear gain with his device."

Art`s unexplained claims amazed me so I jotted them down.

1) More gain than other antennas
2) Useable SWR`s also
3) Rotatable with under 200 ft turning space
4) No heavier than the lightest antennas on the market
5) Can be made wide banded
6) Can be made narrow banded
7) Can be made variable frequency operative
8) Can be automated for maximum gain
9) Can be automated for best SWR

As I recall, all those claims come from one posting but the list may be
incomplete.

I responded that the posting seemed an advert.

Art seems to ignore in his "loopole" that tight coupling means
resonances in the loop and pole are interactive, not independent.

Art should produce some numbers to back gain and SWR superiority claims.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

On 22 Mar 2004 06:29:36 -0800, (jaroslav lipka)
wrote:
Have checked out e.e. cummings but I'm not one for poetry thanks.

That is too bad. e.e. cummings is one of our great populist poets who
would have had a rap sheet a mile long in the current administration's
Office of Homeland Scrutiny. Read "i sing of Olaf glad and big"; or
do a search of the archives here for my complete quote of it and to
observe I also offer equally profound technical leads in that same
post. I will admit that both paths are very dense. For instance,
note that e.e. cummings uses the lower case quite deliberately as a
stylistic slap in the face of convention. This is an inversion of the
low self esteem one would analyze, and instead is very aggressive and
dominates the material.

Thank you for your invitation, I am happy to continue to post but
as I pointed out it does not come naturaly, so I will have to ration
them out. Is that ok with you?.

Do as you wish. EVERY post made is a deliberate choice of topic and
concern by any poster. When the technical content about a technical
topic drops to zero, I too find relief from the consequent boredom by
then analyzing style. Any frequent correspondent who lacks
proficiency in both technical expertise and writing style is bound to
be disappointed by my attention.

... could we say Ætherial

Oh dear! thats the second time I have had to check my dictionary in
this post. My interpretation of that is a bit "Airy Fairy"

Well, perhaps that interpretation is a bit stretched, but it is fair
to say you had to go as far to match my own reach. The spelling I
used is archaic (for purposes of stylistic variation) but ultimately
it infers something that has so little substance as to be very light.

G'Day Richard
I limit myself to learning one new word a day, so if
you decide to reply please don't over do it, thanks.

Jaro.

Hi Jaro,

When writing for fun (such as for this forum), over doing it is my
specialty, be it in the technical arena, or the critical dialectic.
Otherwise (as in my professional writing) I can be quite terse. The
quality is the same. I am both a trained engineer through a dozen
technical schools (at which I have also taught) and hold degrees in
languages and the arts. For Art, this translates into "fractured
English" which in reality he should perhaps substitute the word
pompous or didactic. ;-)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC