Art Unwin wrote:
On Sep 23, 3:06 pm, Registered User wrote:
snip
operate. Your idle speculation based upon incomplete information
serves no purpose.http://tinyurl.com/clxl9t

Fine.
Your correct and I am wrong.That should make you feel good
It matters little to me that my thoughts are different than yours so
that is the end of it.
Have a happy day

RU 1
Art minus several thousand

Apologies to Douglas Adams for the minor ripoff.

tom
K0TAR

Richard Fry wrote:
On Sep 23, 1:12 pm, Szczepan Bia³ek wrote:
The simplest dipole is a transmissing line (the two wires).

Not so.
A transmission line with balanced currents is not a dipole, and does
not / cannot produce the radiated fields of a dipole.

Yes, no matter what the conditions on an ideal transmission
line, the two currents are equal in magnitude and opposite
phase. Therefore, zero radiation from an ideal transmission
line.

At the ends of a 1/2WL dipole, the forward current and
reflected currents are equal in amplitude and opposite
phase. Therefore, destructive interference with no
radiation.

At the center of a 1/2WL dipole, the forward current
and reflected current are in phase and interfere
constructively. Therefore, RADIATION!
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com

tom wrote:
And it makes a lot more sense than your statement, although he could
have worded it better.

Sorry, sometimes I write in Texan rather than English.:-)
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com

On Sep 23, 7:09*pm, Cecil Moore wrote:
At the ends of a 1/2WL dipole, the forward current and
reflected currents are equal in amplitude and opposite
phase. Therefore, destructive interference with no
radiation.

At the center of a 1/2WL dipole, the forward current
and reflected current are in phase and interfere
constructively. Therefore, RADIATION!

Just to note that far-field radiation is produced, to some extent,
from all distances between the two ends of a 1/2WL linear dipole and
its feedpoint terminals.

RF

Cecil Moore wrote:
tom wrote:
And it makes a lot more sense than your statement, although he could
have worded it better.

Sorry, sometimes I write in Texan rather than English.:-)

Apology accepted. And I know you can't help it.

Richard Fry wrote:
Just to note that far-field radiation is produced, to some extent,
from all distances between the two ends of a 1/2WL linear dipole and
its feedpoint terminals.

Yes, if I am not mistaken, MOM assumes that the radiation
from each segment is proportional to the net current in
the segment. The maximum radiation comes from the segment
in which the forward and reflected currents are in phase.
The minimum radiation comes from the segment in which the
forward and reflected currents are out of phase.
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com

tom wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Sorry, sometimes I write in Texan rather than English.:-)

Apology accepted. And I know you can't help it.

Yep, Ah rekon Ah'm gonna amble over yonder directly.
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
tom wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Sorry, sometimes I write in Texan rather than English.:-)

Apology accepted. And I know you can't help it.

Yep, Ah rekon Ah'm gonna amble over yonder directly.

Oh you silly Texans.

On Sep 23, 5:46*am, Szczepan Bia³ek wrote:

Physics of radiation is unknown.

Perhaps to you at this point, but not to many others who read the
posts here and elsewhere.

RF

Szczepan Białek wrote:

Physics of radiation is unknown. Antennas are the nice apparatus to analyse
it.

The physics has been known for a very long time now.

You are a babbling idiot.

For me the magnetic field is the illusion.

Any semblance to reality of your "thinking" is an illusion.

snip

My description is shorter:
The supply unit sends the voltage pulses (in opposite phase) in the
transmissing line. If such pulses collide the voltage is doubled and the
strong radiation take place. In straight radiator the forward pulse collides
with the reflected. In folded dipoles with that from the other wire.
S*

Yet more babbling nonsense of an idiot kook.

Did you tire of being constantly spanked for being a babbling kook in
sci.physics and decide maybe your chances of being accepted are better
in an amateur group?

Guess what, a lot of amateurs are engineers and actually understand the
theory.

Hell, even those that are not engineers obviously understand it a hell of
a lot better than you do.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.