wrote in message
...
On Jan 3, 9:49 am, Dave wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:

Has anyone ever measured a difference between aluminum
tubing and a solid aluminum rod at the end of an antenna?

The rod is heavier.

Yes, yes, the rod is heavier. Very funny, but could someone answer
the original question.

-Dave, K3WQ

The current is close to zero- why would it make any difference?
W4OP

On Jan 3, 9:33*am, "Dale Parfitt" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Jan 3, 9:49 am, Dave wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:

Has anyone ever measured a difference between aluminum
tubing and a solid aluminum rod at the end of an antenna?

The rod is heavier.

Yes, yes, the rod is heavier. *Very funny, but could someone answer
the original question.

-Dave, K3WQ

The current is close to zero- why would it make any difference?
W4OP

Wrong.!
The primary current is still flowing at the center. Particles occupy
the surface of the inside
and with the inter rejection of like particles produce a hoop stress
between them which
cannot be broken by a eddy current field, if present Thus the
particles cannot be ejected even tho there
is the primary ,current flow in the center ofr the tube. Remember.
the presence of particles is cast in stone
via the extension of the Gaussian law of statics. The presumption that
the current is near zero
is false until proven otherwise.. There is absolutely NO evidence that
reflection occurs in any shape or form at the
material ends of a radiator and all that pertains to such. PERIOD
Art Unwin KB9MZ.........xg

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...

Wrong.!

I told you so!

The primary current is still flowing at the center. Particles occupy
the surface of the inside
and with the inter rejection of like particles produce a hoop stress

'hoop stress' now there's a good term for particle interaction!

between them which
cannot be broken by a eddy current field, if present Thus the
particles cannot be ejected even tho there
is the primary ,current flow in the center ofr the tube. Remember.
the presence of particles is cast in stone

the stone in this case is art's brain.

via the extension of the Gaussian law of statics. The presumption that
the current is near zero
is false until proven otherwise.. There is absolutely NO evidence that
reflection occurs in any shape or form at the
material ends of a radiator and all that pertains to such. PERIOD

nah, just because i can measure it with my simple tdr here doesn't mean it
happens... its all the magical mystery levitating neutrinos that cause all
the fun.

On Jan 3, 11:00*am, "Dave" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...

Wrong.!

I told you so!

The primary current is still flowing at the center. Particles occupy
the surface of the inside
and with the inter rejection of like particles produce a hoop stress

'hoop stress' *now there's a good term for particle interaction!

between them which
cannot be broken by a *eddy current field, if present *Thus the
particles cannot be ejected even tho there
is the primary ,current flow in the center ofr the tube. Remember.
the presence of particles is cast in stone

the stone in this case is art's brain.

via the extension of the Gaussian law of statics. The presumption that
the current is near zero
is false until proven otherwise.. There is absolutely NO evidence that
reflection occurs in any shape or form at the
material ends of a radiator and all that pertains to such. * *PERIOD

nah, just because i can measure it with my simple tdr here doesn't mean it
happens... its all the magical mystery levitating neutrinos that cause all
the fun.

David
You should know better.
Years ago I pointed out that the extension of the Gaussian law of
static results in Maxwells laws
with extension via mathematics. Before then I am sure that you were
aware of magnostatic fields
so it should not come as a surprize that the mathemetics is well
proven. When the mathematics were presented
before your very eyes you came up with reasons that defy the
imagination and totally absurd
You have the "field and waves" book by Ramo and Co so read it from end
to end with a smidgeon of understanding
so you may follow it from first principles. All the answers you seek
are
written in that book and they agree perfectly with mine. Nowhere does
it confirm what you state that Statics have zero connection
with magnetics which thus prevents mathematical connections. As for
hoop stress that is another derivitation of Newtons laws of action and
reaction and Newtons laws apply to the Universe including
electromagnetics via the Standard Model which, by the way ,includes
the Weak force that you also deny the presence of as well as the
chemical critera.
Your engineering ability is forcing your personal credability into the
ground.
Art

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...

You should know better.

i do know better than you.

Years ago I pointed out that the extension of the Gaussian law of
static results in Maxwells laws
with extension via mathematics.

absolutely worthless since guass's law was already a part of maxwell's
equations, your 'addition' was worthless.

All the answers you seek are
written in that book and they agree perfectly with mine.

nowhere does it include the weak farce in the maxwell's equations, nor does
it ever mention your magical levitating diamagnetic neutrinos.

On Jan 3, 11:40*am, "Dave" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...

You should know better.

i do know better than you.

Years ago I pointed out that the extension of the Gaussian law of
static results in Maxwells laws
with extension via mathematics.

absolutely worthless since guass's law was already a part of maxwell's
equations, your 'addition' was worthless.

Oh My! The Gaussian law included was NOT the law of statics
What sort of school did you attend?





All the answers you seek are
written in that book and they agree perfectly with mine.


nowhere does it include the weak farce in the maxwell's equations, nor does
it ever mention your magical levitating diamagnetic neutrinos.

That is only because it is not fully up to date just like many other
technical
books including Terman

The World has spent millions of dollars on the C.E.R.N. project in
Switzerland
to investigate neutrious, the weak force and the Higgs field.
They have a home page on the net why not take a moment to read it so
that you will become up to date?
Art

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
Oh My! The Gaussian law included was NOT the law of statics
What sort of school did you attend?

there is only one gauss's law that is included in maxwell's equations,
please state your equation so i may poke more holes in it.

On Jan 3, 10:37*am, Art Unwin wrote:
There is absolutely NO evidence that
reflection occurs in any shape or form at the
material ends of a radiator and all that pertains
to such. * *PERIOD.
____________

Art, the link below leads to empirical proof that such reflections
exist.

H. Gihring and G. Brown of RCA measured the relative current
distribution parallel to the axis of monopole radiators of several
lengths and widths, using an r-f current probe driving a thermal
meter.

The current distribution measured for the three radiator lengths
plotted all show the presence of reflections from the top of the
vertical wire, and in all three cases, current falls to zero at the
end of the radiator.

These are all fractional wavelength radiators not meeting your
definition of an antenna in "equilibrium."

This demonstrates that r-f current does not travel on the outside of a
wire on the way to the open end, and return from the open end along a
non-radiating path down the center of that conductor, as you believe.

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

RF

"Richard Fry" wrote in message
...
On Jan 3, 10:37 am, Art Unwin wrote:
There is absolutely NO evidence that
reflection occurs in any shape or form at the
material ends of a radiator and all that pertains
to such. PERIOD.
Art, the link below leads to empirical proof that such reflections
exist.

don't confuse him with facts, especially facts out of books... they are all
out of date since they don't have his latest theories included in them.

On Jan 7, 4:21*pm, "Dave" wrote:
"Richard Fry" wrote in message

...
On Jan 3, 10:37 am, Art Unwin *wrote:

There is absolutely NO evidence that
reflection occurs in any shape or form at the
material ends of a radiator and all that pertains
to such. PERIOD.
Art, the link below leads to empirical proof that such reflections
exist.

don't confuse him with facts, especially facts out of books... they are all
out of date since they don't have his latest theories included in them.


If graphs of current flow is to be generated it must provide a graph
of the lead edge of the current to compare with the trailing edge at
an instant of time, because it is a time varing current.

For a fractional wave antenna skin depth or resistance on the surface
does not disappear until the trailing edge of the RF pulse reaches the
antenna top. In the mean time current rises at the top as the fields
collapse which means that the lead current is prevented from turning
around because skin resistance is still being maintained Thus it has
no other choice to pursue a closed circuit other than travel on the
inside of the radiator and being shielded by the surface eddy currents
produced by the trailing current end.
If by some phenoma the current was able to flow down the outside of
the radiator it must also produce eddy current which thus allows for
radiation from what originaly was a puise to a duallity of current
flow, each of which creating radiation without frequency remaining
constant.
There is no reasonable reason to depart from the closed circuit ideals
to manufacture an incomplete sequence of events not supported by
science but printed in books. Otherwise there will be no progress in
the understanding of radiation until the actions of eddy current or
the weak force is fully understood with its ejection of particles from
diamagnetic materials.
I will not add to this thread as it is surround by closed minds of the
aged.
Have a great day
Art Unwin......KB9MZ.....xg