Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old May 30th 09, 04:37 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,339
Default Sun Spots

On May 29, 9:30*pm, tom wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
On May 29, 8:37 pm, tom wrote:
tom wrote:
I for one can design and build, with the help of STANDARD TEXTS
(especially those many decades old!), almost any type of antenna or
antenna array anyone could ever need. *And it will work exactly as
predicted if one takes into account normal environmental variables, such
as buildings, trees and ground conductivity.
Speaking of texts, one of my co-workers gave me a wonderful paperback
textbook last week "The Theory and Design of Circular Antenna Arrays" by
James D. Tillman, Jr., The University of Tennessee Engineering
Experiment Station, 1966.


The design, testing, scope pictures and the wonderful racks of gear they
built makes for a great piece of work.


I have no idea why he had this book or where he got it, but am grateful
to get it.


tom
K0TAR


Did it state that radiation was waves or particles and how he can
prove it ?
Is this in line with your extensive design of antennas?


No comments needed here.

tom
K0TAR


What ever is the matter with you? You seem to want to pick a fight for
some reason.
So you are a qualified antenna engineer and you dislike my aproach to
antennas because I am a mechanical engineer or what. I experiment with
antennas which means I am not totally governed by the books and I
enjoy that. I also study so that my results can be understood
mathematically. Now I am not an antenna engineer but when you and
others
could not relate the mathematics of Gaussian statics to Maxwell I
realised that the so called gurus were not experts after all and this
was confirmed when the term equilibrium flumoxed all of you. Now you
claim efficiencies of some sort, does it show up on a receiver S
metre? I doubt it. And you claim 98% efficiency but supply zero
parameters.Heck, I can get a computer program to give me figures
better than that but it is meaningless
But all of this really doesn't matter on this newsgroup, I am not a
antenna engineer so in no way am I encroaching on the esteem you feel
you posses as a antenna engineer because of your electrical
background. Yes, you know more about antennas that is written in the
books, because you committed it to memory whether it was correct or
not to pass an exam. Feel better now?
Sleep well
Art
  #2   Report Post  
Old May 30th 09, 11:34 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 797
Default Sun Spots


"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
On May 29, 9:30 pm, tom wrote:
Now I am not an antenna engineer but when you and others
could not relate the mathematics of Gaussian statics to Maxwell I
realised that the so called gurus were not experts after all and this


I did, and you still refused to accept that Gauss's law IS part of Maxwell's
equations as they are published in every text book in the last 100 years or
so.

was confirmed when the term equilibrium flumoxed all of you.


because equilibrium has no place in electromagnetic radiation which by
definition is a flow of energy, therefore not in equilibrium... no flow, no
radiation... so your magical equilibrium antennas can't radiate, which is
pretty much what everyone agrees on.

  #3   Report Post  
Old May 30th 09, 02:08 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,339
Default Sun Spots

On May 30, 5:34*am, "Dave" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...
On May 29, 9:30 pm, tom wrote:

Now I am not an antenna engineer but when you and others
could not relate the mathematics of Gaussian statics to Maxwell I
realised that the so called gurus were not experts after all and this


I did, and you still refused to accept that Gauss's law IS part of Maxwell's
equations as they are published in every text book in the last 100 years or
so.

was confirmed when the term equilibrium flumoxed all of you.


because equilibrium has no place in electromagnetic radiation which by
definition is a flow of energy, therefore not in equilibrium... no flow, no
radiation... so your magical equilibrium antennas can't radiate, which is
pretty much what everyone agrees on.



Gauss's law of Statics is the subject law.
Waves have no part in that picture can'tyou get that into your head.
The Moon creats waves The Sun does not
Again "statics" which is the subject of particles is what I was
talking about.
  #4   Report Post  
Old May 30th 09, 02:35 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 797
Default Sun Spots


"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...

Gauss's law of Statics is the subject law.


Ok, you capitalize that as if it were a specific law... provide a reference,
other than your own posts, for "Gauss's law of Statics". If you can't do
that, provide the specific equation you are refering to.

  #5   Report Post  
Old May 30th 09, 03:50 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 625
Default Sun Spots

On May 30, 9:35*am, "Dave" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...

Gauss's law of Statics is the subject law.


Ok, you capitalize that as if it were a specific law... provide a reference,
other than your own posts, for "Gauss's law of Statics". *If you can't do
that, provide the specific equation you are refering to.


I always thought Art had confused statics with statistics.


  #6   Report Post  
Old May 31st 09, 12:40 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 797
Default Sun Spots


"Dave" wrote in message
...

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...

Gauss's law of Statics is the subject law.


Ok, you capitalize that as if it were a specific law... provide a
reference, other than your own posts, for "Gauss's law of Statics". If
you can't do that, provide the specific equation you are refering to.


come on art, cite the specific reference for "Gauss's law of Statics".

  #7   Report Post  
Old May 31st 09, 11:50 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 797
Default Sun Spots


"Dave" wrote in message
...

"Dave" wrote in message
...

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...

Gauss's law of Statics is the subject law.


Ok, you capitalize that as if it were a specific law... provide a
reference, other than your own posts, for "Gauss's law of Statics". If
you can't do that, provide the specific equation you are refering to.


come on art, cite the specific reference for "Gauss's law of Statics".


can't answer a specific simple question art?? you much prefer to handwave
and berate others, i ask a simple direct question that is at the core of all
your ranting and you can't even answer it. without that answer the rest of
your posts are just empty shells. give us this magical "Gauss's law of
Statics" that you base everything on!

  #8   Report Post  
Old May 31st 09, 09:56 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 797
Default Sun Spots


"Dave" wrote in message
...

"Dave" wrote in message
...

"Dave" wrote in message
...

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...

Gauss's law of Statics is the subject law.

Ok, you capitalize that as if it were a specific law... provide a
reference, other than your own posts, for "Gauss's law of Statics". If
you can't do that, provide the specific equation you are refering to.


come on art, cite the specific reference for "Gauss's law of Statics".


can't answer a specific simple question art?? you much prefer to handwave
and berate others, i ask a simple direct question that is at the core of
all your ranting and you can't even answer it. without that answer the
rest of your posts are just empty shells. give us this magical "Gauss's
law of Statics" that you base everything on!


come on art, one specific simple question...cite the specific reference for
"Gauss's law of Statics". or are you going to pull another vanishing act
and come back later just to start fresh with more bafflegab?

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
spots ml Antenna 2 May 13th 09 07:37 PM
Sun Spots [email protected] Shortwave 3 April 15th 09 07:27 PM
Sun Spots During an Ice Age? Cecil Moore[_2_] Antenna 28 January 19th 09 09:13 PM
Waiting for 'spots... Scott in Baltimore CB 3 September 30th 08 10:17 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:11 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017