Hi Art,
I just want to make sure what you are quoting from ToW8JI.
So, if you have the time and inclination, please cut and paste Tom's
comments about straight radiators so we can all be on the same page.
I was the one who initially mentioned Beverages- because, although I am not
an expert on Tom's site, that is the only referecne I recall about straight
wires on his site.

Dale W4OP

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...

snip a bunch of bafflegab... but now a real GEM! he was mumbling about
vertical antenna and the hole in the doughnut when they were vertical...

Thus when a radiator is tipped it now
fills up the hole in the donut to obtain radiation that is equal in
all directions( equilibrium) which is what a military installation
would prefer as possible observation is 100 %.

so now he has FINALLY defined his concept of "equilibrium"... read it
forever as isotropic! so his perfect antenna in equilibrium is isotropic or
has a gain of zero... to let him sum it up in his own words:

NUFF SAID

more than enough i would say!

On Aug 31, 7:00*pm, "Dave" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...

snip a bunch of bafflegab... *but now a real GEM! *he was mumbling about
vertical antenna and the hole in the doughnut when they were vertical...

Thus when a radiator is tipped it now
fills up the hole in the donut to obtain radiation that is equal in
all directions( equilibrium) which is what a military installation
would prefer as possible observation is 100 %.

so now he has FINALLY defined his concept of "equilibrium"... read it
forever as isotropic! *so his perfect antenna in equilibrium is isotropic or
has a gain of zero... to let him sum it up in his own words:

NUFF SAID

more than enough i would say!

Not bad David. I suppose that can be seen as more modern than
equilibrium used centuries ago. Actually isotropic is presently used
more by cosmopologists when refering
to matter transformations and thus include the latent energy transfer
Very good, Now you are on the same road as I (I think) at least until
the next insult. ( grin)

This is because the radiator is
oriented opposite to the gravitational force only. If one wants to
account for ALL forces involved then one must include with gravity the

Gravity has no measurable effect on electromagnetic radiation.

Thus to be in equilibrium a radiator
must be tipped to include the Coreolis force

The coriolis force does not effect electromagnetic radiation.

which then allows for a
spherical radiation pattern ala Poynting's vector where the forces
within the boundary equals ( and opposite) that outside the boundary
and is in a state of equilibrium

How is the Poynting vector related to boundary conditions. What
boundary are you talking about?

On Aug 31, 1:31*pm, Art Unwin wrote:

The above justifies my position on radiators unless you want to
declare "garbage in garbage out".

I declare.

Art Unwin wrote:

boundary to achieve equilibrium. Thus to be in equilibrium a radiator
must be tipped to include the Coreolis force which then allows for a
spherical radiation pattern ala Poynting's vector where the forces
within the boundary equals ( and opposite) that outside the boundary
and is in a state of equilibrium Thus when a radiator is tipped it now
fills up the hole in the donut to obtain radiation that is equal in
all directions( equilibrium) which is what a military installation

Ok, so this would mean that at every north or south latitude the angle
would be different, and at the equator would be zero, since there's no
coriolis effect there. Please give a table that shows the tip angle
versus latitude. (Bet you won't because it's secret) And at the north
or south pole it's not definable so antennas can't work there..

Why haven't you mentioned these facts before? Bet you haven't because
you didn't think of it, but you'll claim otherwise or just not respond.

tom
K0TAR

Frank wrote:
This is because the radiator is
oriented opposite to the gravitational force only. If one wants to
account for ALL forces involved then one must include with gravity the

Gravity has no measurable effect on electromagnetic radiation.

Actually it does, but it takes something like the gravity of a star to
become noticable.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

wrote in message
...
Frank wrote:
This is because the radiator is
oriented opposite to the gravitational force only. If one wants to
account for ALL forces involved then one must include with gravity the

Gravity has no measurable effect on electromagnetic radiation.

Actually it does, but it takes something like the gravity of a star to
become noticable.

True, as in the Einstein experiment with a star close to the eclipsed solar
disk.

On Mon, 31 Aug 2009 11:31:30 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin
wrote:

The above justifies my position on radiators unless you want to
declare "garbage in garbage out".

Close. It's like Kirchoff's Current Law. The sum of all comments
over a point on Usenet is zero.

http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/11-655899.pdf
Figure 3B on your patent application indicates:
Computer Derived Performance
(Use NEC, Mininec, or Mathcad style program)
along with some gain, F/B, and Z computation results. Above that is
part of a coordinate input table, showing wires 21 thru 23, used to
define antennas in a variety of NEC2 modeling programs. That suggests
that you have created an NEC2 (or NEC4) model for your Gaussian
Radiative Cluster (Antenna). This would be a big help in
understanding your antenna. I especially want to see how the elements
can be random and resonant at the same time, and what degree of
randomness is required.

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

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

I especially want to see how the elements
can be random and resonant at the same time, and what degree of
randomness is required.

Jeff, Art,

What bothered me is that if an antenna is really made from random elements,
I can't quite figure out who designed it? G-D? The ether bunnies? No one?
Is it a karmic joining of the forces of the universe? The work of the devil?

If it is a fixed number (or limited set) of elements placed in position,
then it is certainly not random.

I am not an expert on patents, but from what I do know, if you can't patent
randomly placing elements in no pattern. If you place them in a pattern, it
is no longer random and can be patented if you can define that pattern.

You could observe, measure or calculate that if you randomly place
elements, one or more of the resulting patterns, layouts, etc will
produce specific results and patent that specific pattern. There is no
requirment that you invent something by any means more scientific than
just throwning sticks on the floor randomly.

However if you can not identify that pattern, you can't patent it. If
you do identify that pattern, you can patent an Unwin antenna, or a
Liebermann-Unwin antenna, if Jeff were to find that critical piece you
were missing.

I did not read the entire patent application, Jeff posted it what was very
late last night for me, but I did browse it. If the antenna is a modified
Yagi-Uda design, then it is a design and not random. If it just happens to
work better than one, I'm not sure that is relevant to the patent.

I think that what you are trying to patent is randomly tossing metal
sticks on the ground and connecting wires to some of them in some random
fashion. I don't think this is what you had intended to do at all.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM