On May 3, 4:57*pm, "Dave" wrote:
"Dale Parfitt" wrote in message

...

*Hi Art,
Can you reference a professional journal that confirms this Coriolis (I
believe that is the correct spelling) effect w/ respect to tipped
verticals - or is this something only you have discovered?

thats one of art's discoveries. *though it started out as being because of
the weak force instead of the coriolis effect, i think coriolis is probably
more believable... but do you have to tip them different in the north vs
south hemispheres? *and what happens at the poles and equator, are they
straight up or horizontal??

Yes you are correct David. Coriolis effect is well known where as the
weak force is not
because of resistance to change. The Coriolis effect can be observed
by looking in the toilet bowl in the different parts of our Earth.
Whether the change over effect observations alignes with the equator I
do not know as I am now home in Illinois and have no wish to travel
more today
.. As for reference in professional papers take note of equations for
displacement current as stated by Maxwell which I refer to as "the
weak force" that Einstein spent so much time in looking for without
success. This force is one of the four forces alluded to in The
Standard Model of physics

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
On May 3, 4:57 pm, "Dave" wrote:
As for reference in professional papers take note of equations for
displacement current as stated by Maxwell which I refer to as "the
weak force" that Einstein spent so much time in looking for without
success. This force is one of the four forces alluded to in The
Standard Model of physics

oh, so the displacement 'current' is now the weak 'force'... please explain
how those units match up, and also how the observed range of the weak force
coincides with the wide ranging effects of the displacement current.
..

Art Unwin wrote:

On May 3, 4:57Â*pm, "Dave" wrote:
"Dale Parfitt" wrote in message

...

Hi Art,
Can you reference a professional journal that confirms this Coriolis (I
believe that is the correct spelling) effect w/ respect to tipped
verticals - or is this something only you have discovered?

thats one of art's discoveries. Â*though it started out as being because
of the weak force instead of the coriolis effect, i think coriolis is
probably more believable... but do you have to tip them different in the
north vs south hemispheres? Â*and what happens at the poles and equator,
are they straight up or horizontal??

Yes you are correct David. Coriolis effect is well known where as the
weak force is not
because of resistance to change. The Coriolis effect can be observed
by looking in the toilet bowl in the different parts of our Earth.
Whether the change over effect observations alignes with the equator I
do not know as I am now home in Illinois and have no wish to travel
more today

Here is further documentation on the Coriolis effect.
http://www.snopes.com/science/coriolis.asp


. As for reference in professional papers take note of equations for
displacement current as stated by Maxwell which I refer to as "the
weak force" that Einstein spent so much time in looking for without
success. This force is one of the four forces alluded to in The
Standard Model of physics

"Dave" wrote in message
...

"Dale Parfitt" wrote in message
...
Hi Art,
Can you reference a professional journal that confirms this Coriolis (I
believe that is the correct spelling) effect w/ respect to tipped
verticals - or is this something only you have discovered?

thats one of art's discoveries. though it started out as being because of
the weak force instead of the coriolis effect, i think coriolis is
probably
more believable... but do you have to tip them different in the north vs
south hemispheres? and what happens at the poles and equator, are they
straight up or horizontal??


Maybe this gets to Faraday Rotation? The Coriolis Effect is on particles,
not waves, right? EM waves have no mass.

"Sal M. Onella" wrote in message
...

"Dave" wrote in message
...

"Dale Parfitt" wrote in message
...
Hi Art,
Can you reference a professional journal that confirms this Coriolis (I
believe that is the correct spelling) effect w/ respect to tipped
verticals - or is this something only you have discovered?

thats one of art's discoveries. though it started out as being because
of
the weak force instead of the coriolis effect, i think coriolis is
probably
more believable... but do you have to tip them different in the north vs
south hemispheres? and what happens at the poles and equator, are they
straight up or horizontal??


Maybe this gets to Faraday Rotation? The Coriolis Effect is on particles,
not waves, right? EM waves have no mass.


not art's waves, they are made up of magical levitating diamagnetic
neutrinos that jump off antennas when you pass a current through them.

On May 3, 5:36*pm, "Dave" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...
On May 3, 4:57 pm, "Dave" wrote:

As for reference in professional papers take note of equations for
displacement current as stated by Maxwell which I refer to as "the
weak force" that Einstein spent so much time in looking for without
success. This force is one of the four forces alluded to in The
Standard Model of physics

oh, so the displacement 'current' is now the weak 'force'... please explain
how those units match up, and also how the observed range of the weak force
coincides with the wide ranging effects of the displacement current.
.

You really enjoy playing the simple person. You don't find the weak
force as believable but do find Coriolis effect believable so I gave
you what you desire,
something to believe in. The basic level of time in physics is based
on the speed for a capaciter to release all its energy which is then
replaced by a magnetic field. In other words time refers to the time a
magnetic field is formed by one of the standard models
forces. When a you have a tank circuit a symbol of resonance, the
energy created by the magnetic field is really the effect of that
energy called displacement current which flow in a circular motion at
and below the maximum diameter of the radiator.
This force provides an elevating force to unbound particles at rest on
a diamagnetic surface which meets the definition of a accellerated
charge. The speed of this particle is the energy applied on impact
during the formation of the magnetic field or energy release from a
capacitor. As the unbound electron constitutes the unbound particle
the energy is enough to project the particle with spin where gravity
does not have a measured effect on it's trajectory. Gravity is the
weakest force known despite it's name and the unbound electron is
considered the physical smallest mass that exists in the Universe.
So David you have the answer as to what the "weak force" is and what
energy it contains in measurable terms that it imparts to a particle.
This IS included in Maxwell's laws where there is the reference to
time. Physics is physics.
David, I am getting very close to plonking you as you show no
indication of benefit from the answers you demand of me and others.
Art

On May 3, 6:07*pm, "Sal M. Onella"
wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message

...



"Dale Parfitt" wrote in message
.. .
*Hi Art,
Can you reference a professional journal that confirms this Coriolis (I
believe that is the correct spelling) effect w/ respect to tipped
verticals - or is this something only you have discovered?

thats one of art's discoveries. *though it started out as being because of
the weak force instead of the coriolis effect, i think coriolis is
probably
more believable... but do you have to tip them different in the north vs
south hemispheres? *and what happens at the poles and equator, are they
straight up or horizontal??

Maybe this gets to Faraday Rotation? *The Coriolis Effect is on particles,
not waves, right? *EM waves have no mass.

There is nothing without mass. Radiation is created by an
accelleration of charge which is mass. Particles create radiation .
Waves is also mass that is soluble acting under the influences of the
Universe.Thus a wave is a adjective that describes the applied
actions upon mass ie a noun. If a particle sits on the formation of a
wave then the two part ways.
Art

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Art Unwin wrote:
Lumped loads are not included in the laws of Maxwell only distributed
loads

A 75m Texas Bugcatcher loading coil certainly
qualifies as a distributed load being about
1/8WL long.
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com



A 75m Texas Bugcatcher loading coil is about 30 feet long?

John KD5YI wrote:
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
A 75m Texas Bugcatcher loading coil certainly
qualifies as a distributed load being about
1/8WL long.

A 75m Texas Bugcatcher loading coil is about 30 feet long?

*Electrically*, yes. Its velocity factor calculates
out to be about 0.02 at 4 MHz and it is physically
0.563 feet long. 0.563'/0.02 = ~28 feet.

At 4 MHz, a 75m Texas Bugcatcher coil replaces ~28 feet
of wire in the antenna. That is ~41 degrees at 4 MHz.
(Note there is about 44 feet of wire in a 75m Texas
Bugcatcher loading coil.)

Equation 32 in the following IEEE paper is what I used
to calculate the velocity factor of the loading coil.

http://www.ttr.com/TELSIKS2001-MASTER-1.pdf
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com

On May 4, 6:45*am, Cecil Moore wrote:
John KD5YI wrote:
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
A 75m Texas Bugcatcher loading coil certainly
qualifies as a distributed load being about
1/8WL long.

A 75m Texas Bugcatcher loading coil is about 30 feet long?

*Electrically*, yes. Its velocity factor calculates
out to be about 0.02 at 4 MHz and it is physically
0.563 feet long. 0.563'/0.02 = ~28 feet.

At 4 MHz, a 75m Texas Bugcatcher coil replaces ~28 feet
of wire in the antenna. That is ~41 degrees at 4 MHz.
(Note there is about 44 feet of wire in a 75m Texas
Bugcatcher loading coil.)

Equation 32 in the following IEEE paper is what I used
to calculate the velocity factor of the loading coil.

http://www.ttr.com/TELSIKS2001-MASTER-1.pdf
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, *http://www.w5dxp.com

In part II of the said Corum paper it clearly states that there is no
rigourous solution to helicals supplied by Maxwells laws. If this is
the case I suspect that Corum made some approximations. This is the
point that I am making with respect to Maxwell's law's and lumped
loads.