On Oct 4, 5:52*am, "christofire" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...

Chris
I took your advice and sent an E mail to sci.physics research
explaining what I have found
and asking for comment. I am not a member of that group so it may well
not be picked up.
-snip-
Regards
Art

* Unfortunately I can't see your message when I look at
sci.physics.research, but I believe it's a moderated group so it may not
have made its way over the moderator's desk yet, as it were. *Can you see
your message there? ... and, if so, what title did you give it?

Chris

re Weak force
Yes, it goes directly to the moderator so I imagine that it will take
time. The question being that 2 vectors can be traced from the big
bang to the boundary of earth. If it is not the weak force then where
does it fit in with GUT? This also was predicted by Einstein with
respect to radiation so if this is not it we have more searching to
do. We will have to wait and see what the technical level is and it
may well be as low as this group! Time will tell.

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
On Oct 4, 5:52 am, "christofire" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...

Chris
I took your advice and sent an E mail to sci.physics research
explaining what I have found
and asking for comment. I am not a member of that group so it may well
not be picked up.
-snip-
Regards
Art

* Unfortunately I can't see your message when I look at
sci.physics.research, but I believe it's a moderated group so it may not
have made its way over the moderator's desk yet, as it were. Can you see
your message there? ... and, if so, what title did you give it?

Chris

re Weak force
Yes, it goes directly to the moderator so I imagine that it will take
time. The question being that 2 vectors can be traced from the big
bang to the boundary of earth. If it is not the weak force then where
does it fit in with GUT? This also was predicted by Einstein with
respect to radiation so if this is not it we have more searching to
do. We will have to wait and see what the technical level is and it
may well be as low as this group! Time will tell.


* I don't think the 'technical level' of this group is low - some of the
posts are very well informed - but a group devoted to physics research must
be a more appropriate forum for airing thoughts about fundamental physics
and the Universe, thoughts that go way beyond amateur radio. I look forward
to seeing your posting there and, if you've read much of what appears there,
I think you'll find the 'technical level' there is very high.

Chris

On Oct 4, 10:01*am, "christofire" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...
On Oct 4, 5:52 am, "christofire" wrote:



"Art Unwin" wrote in message

....

Chris
I took your advice and sent an E mail to sci.physics research
explaining what I have found
and asking for comment. I am not a member of that group so it may well
not be picked up.
-snip-
Regards
Art

* Unfortunately I can't see your message when I look at
sci.physics.research, but I believe it's a moderated group so it may not
have made its way over the moderator's desk yet, as it were. Can you see
your message there? ... and, if so, what title did you give it?

Chris

re Weak force
Yes, it goes directly to the moderator so I imagine that it will take
time. The question being that 2 vectors can be traced from the big
bang to the boundary of earth. If it is not the weak force then where
does it fit in with GUT? This also was predicted by Einstein with
respect to radiation so if this is not it we have more searching to
do. We will have to wait and see what the technical level is and it
may well be as low as this group! Time will tell.

* I don't *think the 'technical level' of this group is low - some of the
posts are very well informed - but a group devoted to physics research must
be a more appropriate forum for airing thoughts about fundamental physics
and the Universe, thoughts that go way beyond amateur radio. *I look forward
to seeing your posting there and, if you've read much of what appears there,
I think you'll find the 'technical level' there is very high.

Chris

It is a question of interpretation. There are many computer programs
that are used by hams
and they do quite well. But they generally are used for planar forms
and not what Maxwell
proposed in his formulae, where accountability of all forces involved
is a must.
So when these programs show that a radiator is tipped against the
ground to arrive at "100% efficiency" then it becomes worthy of hams
to review why this is the case. Actually it shows two vectors at work
outside the earths boundary where hams have only taken into
consideration of one, and that is gravity. So hams are now presented
with an opportunity to re asses their position on antennas such that
maybe returning to full compliance to Maxwells formula will provide a
path of improvement with respect to radiation, where one can look at
point radiation as the path towards smaller radiators. I have shown
that reviewing radiation in the light of Maxwells equations, when
compared to those of an extended Gaussian law as being equal, states
that " A conductive radiator can be of any shape, size or elevation as
long as it is in equilibrium" This obviously presents opportunities
for hams to approach with advantage antennas over and above those used
today. The sad thing is that the hobby has changed so much that the
theme is not to explore but to deny change, because we have lost the
base of curiousity and experimentation to the use of radio as a means
of talking behind the shade of anonimity
where one can assume a station in life that they really have not
earned.

On Oct 4, 11:40*am, Art Unwin wrote
about "computer programs," e.g., NEC
So when these programs show that a radiator is tipped against the
ground to arrive at "100% efficiency"...

Your conclusion is faulty. See
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...19e5b91e29e0be

and...

A conductive radiator can be of any shape, size or elevation as
long as it is in equilibrium

Any conductor exposed to space will produce far-field EM radiation
from nearly 100% of the r-f current that can be made to flow along it,
in directions where fields from various parts of the conductor do not
cancel each other.

Those that will radiate most of the rated power of a transmitter will
have a high radiation resistance compared to the sum of the other
ohmic losses in the antenna system, whatever matching network is
required at the feedpoint to match the feedpoint Z to the transmission
line connected there, and a transmitter designed to supply its rated
power into that net load impedance.

Wire conductors and configurations that are small in terms of
wavelength necessarily have low radiation resistance. So systems
using them do not radiate a very high percentage of the available
power of the transmitter.

RF