"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
It seems that some do not understand what the Corriolis force is so
here goes
When the Big Bang ocurred all energy was in an arbitrary boundary

that's enough... the rest is just more blabbering. first, spell it right,
its Coriolis with one r.
next, its not even a 'real' force, and is often called the Coriolis 'effect'
instead of force to make that clear. and it is not linked to gravity, its
linked to rotation. if the earth or any other body didn't rotate there
would be no Coriolis effect on it's surface and it would still have gravity.
I'm not even going to try to address the electro-weak babble, that is
totally non-sequitar.

On Sep 3, 6:14*pm, "Dave" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...

It seems that some do not understand what the Corriolis force is so
an find the here goes
When the Big Bang ocurred all energy was in *an arbitrary boundary

that's enough... the rest is just more blabbering. *first, spell it right,
its Coriolis with one r.
next, its not even a 'real' force, and is often called the Coriolis 'effect'
instead of force to make that clear. *and it is not linked to gravity, its
linked to rotation. *if the earth or any other body didn't rotate there
would be no Coriolis effect on it's surface and it would still have gravity.
I'm not even going to try to address the electro-weak babble, that is
totally non-sequitar.

David, you can find the famous "exclusion principle" by Wolfgang Pauli
in any
book on Quantum Mechanics. You should write a paper on where he weny
wrong based on your intuition. That gun you are firing is getting
lower and lower that I fear for your foot !

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
On Sep 3, 6:14 pm, "Dave" wrote:
David, you can find the famous "exclusion principle" by Wolfgang Pauli
in any book on Quantum Mechanics.

ah, bringing the Pauli Exclusion Principle in on the discusion now, that is
a new one i think... can we now not have any of your magical levitating
diamagnetic neutrinos on an antenna in the same quantum states??

Dave wrote:

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
On Sep 3, 6:14 pm, "Dave" wrote:
David, you can find the famous "exclusion principle" by Wolfgang Pauli
in any book on Quantum Mechanics.

ah, bringing the Pauli Exclusion Principle in on the discusion now, that
is a new one i think... can we now not have any of your magical
levitating diamagnetic neutrinos on an antenna in the same quantum states??

Drum roll........

From the department of everything you knew about physics is wrong
department......


The Coriolis effect upon RF radiation has some interesting other
ramifications.
Since Coriolis affects radio waves, it follows that gravity also affects
radio waves. This bring up a new and much simplified explanation for
radio propagation. As the RF spins away from the antenna, the coriolis
effect and gravity eventually pull the signal back to earth far away
from the originating point. I always thought that that silly stuff about
atmospheric layers and ionization was kind of dum anyhow.

Each time the RF hits the earth, a new point of reference is made, and
the signal bounces up with a new twist to it.

We're still working on why UHF + signals don't do this. Maybe their
twist is going the other way, so instead of coming back down, they spin
upwards never to be seen again.


- 73 de Mike N3LI -

On Sep 4, 9:33*am, Michael Coslo wrote:
Dave wrote:

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
....
On Sep 3, 6:14 pm, "Dave" wrote:
David, you can find the famous "exclusion principle" by Wolfgang Pauli
in any book on Quantum Mechanics.

ah, bringing the Pauli Exclusion Principle in on the discusion now, that
is a new one i think... can we now not have any of your magical
levitating diamagnetic neutrinos on an antenna in the same quantum states??

Drum roll........

*From the department of everything you knew about physics is wrong
department......

The Coriolis effect upon RF radiation has some interesting other
ramifications.
Since Coriolis affects radio waves, it follows that gravity also affects
radio waves. This bring up a new and much simplified explanation for
radio propagation. As the RF spins away from the antenna, the coriolis
effect and gravity eventually pull the signal back to earth far away
from the originating point. I always thought that that silly stuff about
atmospheric layers and ionization was kind of dum anyhow.

Each time the RF hits the earth, a new point of reference is made, and
the signal bounces up with a new twist to it.

We're still working on why UHF + signals don't do this. Maybe their
twist is going the other way, so instead of coming back down, they spin
upwards never to be seen again.

* * * * - 73 de Mike N3LI -

Mike you forget.
I do not subscribe to the wave theory over the particle aproach.
I cannot see any other way to fit that "radiation is from the
acceleration of a charge". And I can not find any explanation of this
in any books. Only mass is able to have spin and at the same time
transport energy, at least to my mind. Therefore accelaration is the
creation of two forces that are not in the same plain ala a shear
action where the combination of gravity and the Coriolis force are the
weakest forces known in the std model. I would remind you that spin is
a result of a force applied where the reaction force is not in the
same plane, otherwise referred to as torque ala force times distance.
It is quite easy to show that current flow consists of a direct vector
and a circular vector
within a boundary and where a direct vector and a circular vector on
the outside of the boundary creats a condition of equilibrium. This is
just physics per our Universe and now many want to deny physics by
intuition alone. I would also remind everybody that engineering,
electrical, mechanical or what ever is a subset of the subject of
physics where concentration of learning is of a niche of the physics .

Art Unwin wrote:

Mike you forget.
I do not subscribe to the wave theory over the particle aproach.
I cannot see any other way to fit that "radiation is from the
acceleration of a charge". And I can not find any explanation of this
in any books. Only mass is able to have spin and at the same time
transport energy, at least to my mind.

So are you saying that FR energy has mass, or that it doesn't have spin?



Therefore accelaration is the
creation of two forces that are not in the same plain ala a shear
action where the combination of gravity and the Coriolis force are the
weakest forces known in the std model.

What is the acceleration of RF?

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

On Sep 4, 12:48*pm, Michael Coslo wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
Mike you forget.
I do not subscribe to the wave theory over the particle aproach.
I cannot see any other way to fit that "radiation is from the
acceleration of a charge". And I can not find any explanation of this
in any books. Only mass is able to have spin and at the same time
transport energy, at least to my mind.

So are you saying that FR energy has mass, or that it doesn't have spin?

Therefore accelaration is the
creation of two forces that are not in the same plain ala a shear
action where the combination of gravity and the Coriolis force are the
weakest forces known in the std model.

What is the acceleration of RF?

* * * * - 73 de Mike N3LI -

The speed of light.