For what it's worth, the latest prediction:

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2...tm?list1112475

ac6xg

On May 29, 4:21*pm, Jim Kelley wrote:
For what it's worth, the latest prediction:

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2...ction.htm?list...

ac6xg

Interesting Jim but just a small bit of knowledge. The Cern experiment
scheduled to start this year seems to me to be an attempt to stop
particles in their tracks faster that the Earth's atmosphere can. When
this passage of particles to Earth spiked a few years back our grid
became vunerable and the Northern lights were so bright they could be
seen as far south as the equator. Now Cern wants to stop the Neutrino
particles from the Sun by "impact" which suggests a coming presence of
Hallium that can create explosive pressures such that artificial
diamonds are readily made. When this experiment takes place it
suggests that radiation will really peak for a short time before we
all become incinerated. But the some scientists are comfortable that
all that can happen is known.
Well at least to the best of their knowledge
and in the short term ,
we think,
we hope!
And we have not figured out radio radiation yet, even tho we have a
multitude of formulae from a century ago!
Fortunately the Sun has not burnt out and solar particles are still
making it to Earth as the Sun's arbitrary border expands and fractures
as well as the coming radiation fractures in Italy

Art Unwin wrote:
And we have not figured out radio radiation yet, even tho we have a
multitude of formulae from a century ago!

Art, please do not include the majority of us here in your statements.

What you really should be saying is YOU have not figured out EM
radiation yet.

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.

This isn't unknown unpredictable territory, regardless of your claims,
none of which have been proven, by the way. This stuff works, and we
know how, and it's not the way you claim.

tom
K0TAR

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

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?

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

"tom" wrote in message
. net...
tom wrote:

snip

... 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.

Just a guess, but maybe it deals with the Wullenweber [or Wullenwever]
antenna, described here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wullenweber and
elsewhere.

The article cites Hanza, Okinawa, Japan, where I was stationed in 1965/66
and worked inside the antenna building. The basement was filled with
multicouplers and several very large spinning goniometers to pick off the
desired signals. It also cites the array at Imperial Beach, which is not
far. I see it several times a year but it was abandoned years ago and may
be coming down. I wonder who gets all that nice RF cable.

"Off-topic Sal"

On Fri, 29 May 2009 22:45:03 -0700, "Sal M. Onella"
wrote:

It also cites the array at Imperial Beach, which is not
far. I see it several times a year but it was abandoned years ago and may
be coming down. I wonder who gets all that nice RF cable.

It was decomissioned in 1999 but it's still there today:
http://addiejones.com/califimages/elephantcage.jpg
http://www.californiacoastline.org/cgi-bin/image.cgi?image=10010&mode=sequential&flags=0
http://www.navycthistory.com/images2/IBCDAALamberton.jpg
http://www.navycthistory.com/ibbradbury01.html
http://jproc.ca/rrp/masset_frd10.jpg
http://www.navycthistory.com/Imperial_beach_intro.html
Do you really want 50 year old coax?

"Off-topic Sal"

From sunspots to elephant cages. One small step for Art. One giant
leap for most of the newsgroup participants.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Sal M. Onella wrote:

Just a guess, but maybe it deals with the Wullenweber [or Wullenwever]
antenna, described here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wullenweber and
elsewhere.


Actually, unlike Wullenweber, they have multiple concentric rings of
verticals in the array with a complex phasing system. My guess is that
this may have been a contributor to the methods eventually used in
phased array radars. But also something that was an engineering study,
and not necessarily practical.

tom
K0TAR

On May 29, 8:10*pm, tom wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
And *we have not figured out radio radiation yet, even tho we have a
multitude of formulae from a century ago!

Art, please do not include the majority of us here in your statements.

What you really should be saying is YOU have not figured out EM
radiation yet.

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.

This isn't unknown unpredictable territory, regardless of your claims,
none of which have been proven, by the way. *This stuff works, and we
know how, and it's not the way you claim.

tom
K0TAR

Whoo aren't we sensitive! If the books say radiation is not "fully
understood "(. Tom with one exception Tom OK?) I will take them at
their word, well, at least until I publish the rest of the
story..GDay
By the way Tom, anybody can design an antenna as it is very hard for
them not to radiate but to design an antenna that is more efficient
than the present state of the art that is something else. 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. For instance, Einstein studied
Maxwell's laws in the hope of finding the properties of the "weak"
force. He failed. He then decided to move away from standard physics
to look at things from another view point but still failed. I know of
no books that illustrate the use of the "weak" force with respect to
radiation so would you say from your experience that Einstein was
wrong? Even the books do not print that suggestion. Now one scientist
has stated that radiation can be a point source which means the
radiation sphere of a radiator is of equal value at all points around
the arbitrary border, which of course is correct, and we are not
talking averages either. Pray tell me how I should go about making
such a radiator and what book is it to be found?
Best regards and lighten up
Art