"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
I feel that this debate has now come to an end. Maxwell's laws are not
applicable or valid when a radiator is not in equilibrium. And
resonance does not equate to equilibrium because end effect is not
present and thus not applicable with respect to Maxwell.

so when can we expect the publication of "art's equations" to fill this gap?

On May 8, 7:34*am, "Dave" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...

I feel that this debate has now come to an end. Maxwell's laws are not
applicable or valid when a radiator is not in equilibrium. And
resonance does not equate to equilibrium because *end effect is not
present and thus not applicable with respect to Maxwell.

so when can we expect the publication of "art's equations" to fill this gap?

David
All hams armed with the above fact can now pursue experimentation with
abandon for themselves. It will be decades before science can accept
change. So for those hams willing to accept change and become do'ers,
that is very important to me, the lack of sun spots will not push them
away from the hobby. I am old and not good looking but like Susan
Boyle what I am sharing with all will last a life time.
For the "gurus" the next challenge is to devise an equation that will
account for all forces involved in the production of "end effect" that
will withstand rigourous examination. In other words David, nasty
words with contempt have soured my desire to share for the moment
Regards
Art...,..xg

In the corner of every battle field
there lies a piece of England
But for me life, which is good, goes on

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
In other words David, nasty
words with contempt have soured my desire to share for the moment

I don't know weather to be sad that i'll miss your great words of wisdom, or
happy that your gibberish may be quelled for a while. Spring is here, so i
have my own REAL antenna work to do, so i guess i really don't need your
imaginary stuff anyway.

On May 8, 11:59*am, "Dave" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...

In other words David, nasty
words with contempt have soured my desire to share for the moment

I don't know weather to be sad that i'll miss your great words of wisdom, or
happy that your gibberish may be quelled for a while. *Spring is here, so i
have my own REAL antenna work to do, so i guess i really don't need your
imaginary stuff anyway.

Atta boy,
Keep using that slide rule from your school days, there is absolutely
no reason why you should change and update

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
Atta boy,
Keep using that slide rule from your school days, there is absolutely
no reason why you should change and update

actually, i think i still have one or two of those laying around here
somewhere.

Art Unwin wrote:

Atta boy,
Keep using that slide rule from your school days, there is absolutely
no reason why you should change and update

Art

Your answers are just as wrong with a slide rule, an HP15C, Fortran IV
on a 360/65, C on a 64 bit AMD or anything else you can find.

And denigrating slide rules is silly. Most of the world that surrounds
you was calculated with a slide rule's resolution. When used properly
they give answers that are as accurate as is needed for engineering.

You obviously have no clue as to what it takes to do engineering
calculations.

Richard, if I used terms improperly, I ask forgiveness.

tom
K0TAR

Tom Ring wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:

Atta boy,
Keep using that slide rule from your school days, there is absolutely
no reason why you should change and update

Art

Your answers are just as wrong with a slide rule, an HP15C, Fortran IV
on a 360/65, C on a 64 bit AMD or anything else you can find.

And denigrating slide rules is silly. Most of the world that surrounds
you was calculated with a slide rule's resolution. When used properly
they give answers that are as accurate as is needed for engineering.

You obviously have no clue as to what it takes to do engineering
calculations.

Richard, if I used terms improperly, I ask forgiveness.

tom
K0TAR

There's no point in asking forgiveness from Richard. He's read _Through
the Looking Glass_:

"I don't know what you mean by 'glory,'" Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you
don't - till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knock-down
argument for you!'"
"But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument,'" Alice
objected.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone,
"it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you _can_ make words mean
so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master -- thats
all."

73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Tom Ring wrote:

And denigrating slide rules is silly. Most of the world that surrounds
you was calculated with a slide rule's resolution. When used properly
they give answers that are as accurate as is needed for engineering.

I was one of the last classes in school to use a slide rule - they went
to calculators the next year.

I have to say that using a slide rule changed my outlook on math in all
it's forms. Took a absolute idiot at math to the dilettante I am today.
8^)

I use calculators all the time now, but I still have a slide rule that I
use in the garage....

- 73 de Mike N3LI -