Cecil Moore wrote:
Hopefully, you or someone else who understands what I am
saying will contact Roy about his conceptual blunders.

On w8ji's web page: http://www.w8ji.com/agreeing_measurements.htm

Roy Lewallen wrote:
As described in my posting on rraa of November 11,
the inductor "replaces" about 33 electrical degrees
of the antenna.

If "the inductor replaces about 33 electrical degrees
of the antenna", isn't the argument over?
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com

On May 2, 9:52*am, Cecil Moore wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Hopefully, you or someone else who understands what I am
saying will contact Roy about his conceptual blunders.

On w8ji's web page:http://www.w8ji.com/agreeing_measurements.htm

Roy Lewallen wrote:
As described in my posting on rraa of November 11,
the inductor "replaces" about 33 electrical degrees
of the antenna.

If "the inductor replaces about 33 electrical degrees
of the antenna", isn't the argument over?
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, *http://www.w5dxp.com

Now , now, Cecil. you cannot equate a coil with electrical degrees of
an antenna.
Lumped loads are not included in the laws of Maxwell only distributed
loads
Art

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

On May 3, 9:41*am, Cecil Moore wrote:
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

Aw come on Cecil
It is a lumped load which is unbalanced and Maxwell demands
equilibrium ie balanced. Yes, it has distributed loading but formed
into a helix antenna
such that it includes lumped loading. Maxwell in his search for
maximum efficiency he would have added a symbol to his equations for
lumped loads . He then would have to include pitch and the like but he
just did not consider it as a consideration.
This is clearly shown with a WL verticle when for maximum effeiciency
it is tipped from right angles to the Earth ala the Corriolis effect
with which you are tampering with
when current rotates, and its introduction of a slow wave and a
different velocity factor
This is why you cannot equate lumped loads with antenna degrees, only
approximate
I have no which to debate it so I will leave it at that. Soon I will
be heading home.
No offense intended but physics is physics
Art

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
Maxwell in his search for
maximum efficiency he would have added a symbol to his equations for
lumped loads .

lumped loads like capacitors and inductors are indeed included in maxwell's
equations, its just a matter of scale. the problem is that most modeling
programs can't handle the large scale variation needed to go from a large
radiator down to a small coil and still maintain the segments properly. but
indeed the fields from and within the lumped elements do follow maxwell's
equations.

This is clearly shown with a WL verticle when for maximum effeiciency
it is tipped from right angles to the Earth ala the Corriolis effect

art is a bit tipped from vertical also, but i doubt if it is a corriolis
problem.

Dave wrote:

lumped loads like capacitors and inductors are indeed included in
maxwell's equations, its just a matter of scale. the problem is that
most modeling programs can't handle the large scale variation needed to
go from a large radiator down to a small coil and still maintain the
segments properly. . .

I don't quite understand this. Could you elaborate please?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Aw come on Cecil
It is a lumped load which is unbalanced and Maxwell demands
equilibrium ie balanced. Yes, it has distributed loading but formed
into a helix antenna
such that it includes lumped loading. Maxwell in his search for
maximum efficiency he would have added a symbol to his equations for
lumped loads . He then would have to include pitch and the like but he
just did not consider it as a consideration.
This is clearly shown with a WL verticle when for maximum effeiciency
it is tipped from right angles to the Earth ala the Corriolis effect
with which you are tampering with
when current rotates, and its introduction of a slow wave and a
different velocity factor
This is why you cannot equate lumped loads with antenna degrees, only
approximate
I have no which to debate it so I will leave it at that. Soon I will
be heading home.
No offense intended but physics is physics
Art

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?

Dale W4OP

"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??

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

"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.