Sun Spots
 

"Dave" wrote
...

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
...

"Dave" wrote
...

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
...
In the Hertz apparatus the charges (electrons) have at the centre the
max velocity and the acceleration equal zero.
At ends the situation is opposite. So your answer should be: "the ends
radiate of course".

of course you are wrong. there is a smooth transition between the
center and the ends, that whole length radiates. you can't just look at
the boundry conditions, you have to consider the whole length.

Yes. But the radiation is not uniform. What radiate stronger: the centre
or the ends?

both. when the current is high in the center it is creating a stronger
magnetic field, and when that current reaches the end it creates the
highest voltage so makes more electric field... both are part of the
electro-magnetic wave.

It is not Maxwell model. In it current create magnetic field and THIS field
create the electric field. AND SO ON.


It is very funny that engineers use electrons and do not know that in
the "Maxwell's equations" no electrons, There is incompressible
massless fluid.
You here do not use the "Maxwell's equations". The teachers use them to
teach math.
Engineers use the empirical equations following the rule "accelerating
charges create radiation".

Gauss's law is about charged particles, the one art so much likes to
distort.. and don't forget that the 'i' term is also about charged
particles moving... if they can move they are not imcompressible, and
since the force on them can be measured and accelerations are not
infinite they are not massless.

We all know now that the electrons are "not imcompressible, and since
the force on them can be measured and accelerations are not infinite
they are not massless."
But do you know what the electricity was like in the Maxwell theory from
1865?

sure, its the same as today. since his equations still work the
electricity hasn't changed.

"1864 - Maxwell reads a memoir before the Royal Society in which the
mechanical model is stripped away and just the equations remain. He also
discusses the vector and scalar potentials, using the Coulomb gauge. He
attributes physical significance to both of these potentials. He wants to
present the predictions of his theory on the subjects of reflection and
refraction, but the requirements of his mechanical model keep him from
finding the correct boundary conditions, so he never does this calculation"

Your (engineering people) model is O.K. but it is quite different from the
Maxwell model. This is the reason that Art can wrote: " "For your
information you have never built an antenna that conforms in its
entirety to Maxwell';s laws thus you cannot possibly understand
radiation as presented by Maxwell."
S*

Sun Spots
 

Art Unwin wrote:
Does that mean that a radiator reduces mass with use
because the electrons orbiting around the atom are losing mass?

Since mass and energy are equivalent, I suppose the mass
of the radiator increases with increasing power input.
The increase in mass can be calculated but the average
ham has no way of measuring the increase. No need to
worry about the tower falling down due to additional
mass from energized electrons. :-)

The antenna is charged up to a certain energy level
during the key-down transient state. Since the energy
content of the antenna cannot increase forever, it must lose
energy as photonic radiation and/or as heat during steady-state.

Free electrons in a conductor travel at much less than the
speed of light. Photons are emitted from the electrons at
the speed of light. A quote from:

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?SpeedOfElectrons

"For example, for a copper wire of radius 1 mm carrying
a steady current of 10 Amps, the drift velocity is only
about 0.024 cm/sec!" i.e. about 0.01 inch/second. Ignoring
random movements, the electrons at our RF transmitter never
reach the antenna. At 10 MHz, the electrons move less than
0.000000001 inch during a 100 nS cycle involving a 100 watt
transmitter, i.e. they mostly oscillate in place.

However, other electrons, traveling at a large percentage
of the speed of light, are quite massive as observed in
particle accelerators and radioactive decay.
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com

Sun Spots
 

On Jun 1, 2:39*am, Szczepan Bia³ek wrote:
*"Richard Clark" om...



On Sun, 31 May 2009 21:08:22 +0200, Szczepan Bia?ek
wrote:

But do you know what the electricity was like in the
Maxwell theory from 1865?

It employed 20 equations *with 20 unknowns. *Can you name THREE?

Let's skip that, because you can not, of course.

It was recast as quaternions - I won't ask the impossible from you to
state TWO.

You have yet to manage how long it took for ONE electron to travel
end-to-end on Hertz's first loop.

So answering your questions is like sending Cuisinart to Darfur. *Do
you know what electricity is like there? *Any year?

"1861 *- *Maxwell publishes a mechanical model of the electromagnetic field.
Magnetic fields correspond to rotating vortices with idle wheels between
them and electric fields correspond to elastic displacements, hence
displacement currents. The equation for *now becomes , where *is the total
current, conduction plus displacement, and is conserved: . This addition
completes Maxwell's equations and it is now easy for him to derive the wave
equation exactly as done in our textbooks on electromagnetism and to note
that the speed of wave propagation was close to the measured speed of light.
Maxwell writes, ``We can scarcely avoid the inference that light in the
transverse undulations of the same medium which is the cause of electric and
magnetic phenomena.'' Thomson, on the other hand, says of the displacement
current, ``(it is a) curious and ingenious, but not wholly tenable
hypothesis.''

"1864 *- *Maxwell reads a memoir before the Royal Society in which the
mechanical model is stripped away and just the equations remain. He also
discusses the vector and scalar potentials, using the Coulomb gauge. He
attributes physical significance to both of these potentials. He wants to
present the predictions of his theory on the subjects of reflection and
refraction, but the requirements of his mechanical model keep him from
finding the correct boundary conditions, so he never does this calculation."
From:http://maxwell.byu.edu/~spencerr/phys442/node4.html

Try understand: "the mechanical model is stripped away and just the
equations remain."

*Now engineers are using model with compressible, massive electrons. The
equations are used by teacher to teach the math.

According to Maxwell model the radio waves are transversal. Are such in your
radio reality?

S*

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC



*img82.gif
1KViewDownload

*img91.gif
1KViewDownload

*img92.gif
1KViewDow
*img93.gif
1KViewDownload

Hi S,
Interesting to read what you say as there are many similarities to my
antenna work.
A small addition with respect to light formation. Displacement current
is the action required of three dimensional equilibrium which is why I
often point to the helicopter as an example,
same thing goes for a gyroscope or the Sedgway scooter. It is this
circular motion that holds to the understanding of light since this
provides the spin of a particle such that it has straight line
trajectory. The frequency of circular motion is what changes when the
particle
enters a medium that is resistive where the spin increases to maintain
the straight line projection. The energy for this increase in spin is
the latent energy that is removed from
the particles potential energy similar to latent heat with liquids.
Thus energy is conserved
by the increase in spin which is analogous to change in frequency!
This change in frequency brings the particle into the area of color ,
light and X rays ie higher frequencies and the latent energy shows up
as light until there is no more energy left and the particle has
vaporized such that light progresses to invisiblity. This being
similar to the effects shown of a meteorite as it comes into contact
with the resistive environment of Earth.
With respect to radiation from the ends of a radiator. This can only
happen when the radiator is a fraction of a wavelength when the law of
equilibrium is violated. The accellaration of charge at the end is
without spin applied and tho there is radiation it becomes non
directional and unable to overcome the gravitational force and falls
within a short distance.
Regards
Art

Sun Spots
 

On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 09:57:22 +0200, Szczepan Bia?ek
wrote:

I hope that my
"enlightening questions" make that you (engineering people) start to press
on teachers to stop teaching about Maxwell model (transverse waves).

The starving rice bowl monk at its best. Before your dreams come
true, little grasshoppa', you must first perform pennance at the gates
of the great Khan.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Sun Spots
 

On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 09:39:30 +0200, Szczepan Bia?ek
wrote:

Are such in your radio reality?

Actually, grasshoppa', you have confused radio reality with the white
glare of the Xerox you stare into during meditation.

Please do not smear your forehead on the glass cover.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Sun Spots
 

On Jun 1, 6:44*am, Cecil Moore wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
Does that mean that a radiator reduces mass with use
because the electrons orbiting around the atom are losing mass?

Since mass and energy are equivalent, I suppose the mass
of the radiator increases with increasing power input.
The increase in mass can be calculated but the average
ham has no way of measuring the increase. No need to
worry about the tower falling down due to additional
mass from energized electrons. :-)

The antenna is charged up to a certain energy level
during the key-down transient state. Since the energy
content of the antenna cannot increase forever, it must lose
energy as photonic radiation and/or as heat during steady-state.

Free electrons in a conductor travel at much less than the
speed of light. Photons are emitted from the electrons at
the speed of light. A quote from:

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?SpeedOfElectrons

"For example, for a copper wire of radius 1 mm carrying
a steady current of 10 Amps, the drift velocity is only
about 0.024 cm/sec!" i.e. about 0.01 inch/second. Ignoring
random movements, the electrons at our RF transmitter never
reach the antenna. At 10 MHz, the electrons move less than
0.000000001 inch during a 100 nS cycle involving a 100 watt
transmitter, i.e. they mostly oscillate in place.

However, other electrons, traveling at a large percentage
of the speed of light, are quite massive as observed in
particle accelerators and radioactive decay.
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, *http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil
The above is confusing unbound particles with bound particles both of
which can be considered a particle but only one has motion ie both
kinetic and potential energies where as the static partical only has
potential energy where the potential energy of both is equal.
The bound particle is in circular motion around a point source ala the
atom,
this collection of particles are in a state of three dimensional
equilibrium in relation to other similar clusters of particles which
provides a mass that in total is in static equilibrium
within its own boundary. If you supply energy to this mass in
equilibrium the frequency of rotation of particles increases and could
increase to the point of the frequency of light where, if it
continues, could become vaporised such that we now have a new medium
consisting of partial pressures of gasses.
The other particle when in equilibrium is at rest i.e unbound as has
lost a lot of potential energy in its voyage from the Sun ala the sun
spots. Energy is and can be added via electric energy where a
displacement current is formed such that the resting particle receives
the same amount of energy that it lost in its travels thru the
universe. The only difference between the two particles is the
boundaries in which they are seen to be enclosed in equilibrium ie
same potential energy but in different scalar form. ( two dimensional
compared to three dimensional equilibrium). I can only assume that
what you refer as a photon is the separation of latent energy with
respect to potential energy ie a separation of the energies associated
with the particle with spin
Regards
Art

Sun Spots
 

Art Unwin wrote:
The other particle when in equilibrium is at rest ...

Although it may be possible for an electron to be
"at rest", that concept violates the uncertainty
principle. Free electrons jump from atom to atom
but they are never in a fixed position until they
are measured in that fixed position in which case,
they give up their velocity/momentum as an unknown.

Whoever first said, "One cannot have one's cake
and eat it too." apparently understood the
uncertainty principle. :-)
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com

Sun Spots
 

On Jun 1, 11:51*am, Cecil Moore wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
The other particle when in equilibrium is at rest ...

Although it may be possible for an electron to be
"at rest", that concept violates the uncertainty
principle. Free electrons jump from atom to atom
but they are never in a fixed position until they
are measured in that fixed position in which case,
they give up their velocity/momentum as an unknown.

Whoever first said, "One cannot have one's cake
and eat it too." apparently understood the
uncertainty principle. :-)
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, *http://www.w5dxp.com

Then I am as uncertain about the uncertainty principle
as I am with the uncertainty Richard is projecting with his posts.
Nuff said
Art

Sun Spots
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote
...
Art Unwin wrote:
Does that mean that a radiator reduces mass with use
because the electrons orbiting around the atom are losing mass?

Since mass and energy are equivalent, I suppose the mass
of the radiator increases with increasing power input.
The increase in mass can be calculated but the average
ham has no way of measuring the increase. No need to
worry about the tower falling down due to additional
mass from energized electrons. :-)

The antenna is charged up to a certain energy level
during the key-down transient state. Since the energy
content of the antenna cannot increase forever, it must lose
energy as photonic radiation and/or as heat during steady-state.

Free electrons in a conductor travel at much less than the
speed of light. Photons are emitted from the electrons at
the speed of light. A quote from:

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?SpeedOfElectrons

"For example, for a copper wire of radius 1 mm carrying
a steady current of 10 Amps, the drift velocity is only
about 0.024 cm/sec!" i.e. about 0.01 inch/second. Ignoring
random movements, the electrons at our RF transmitter never
reach the antenna. At 10 MHz, the electrons move less than
0.000000001 inch during a 100 nS cycle involving a 100 watt
transmitter, i.e. they mostly oscillate in place.

That are speculations only. Everybody know that at the end of an antenna the
high voltage appears. It means that density of electrons change. The
movements must be bigger.

However, other electrons, traveling at a large percentage
of the speed of light, are quite massive as observed in
particle accelerators and radioactive decay.

They escape from metal with the high velocity. Nobody know how velocity is
inside metal.
S*

Sun Spots
 

On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 20:25:06 +0200, Szczepan Bia?ek
wrote:

Nobody know how velocity is inside metal.

If you cannot sustain beyond this stage, your suits will sojourn as
somnolent susurrations such as the statement situated above.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC