On Nov 11, 1:12*pm, Bill wrote:
On Nov 11, 5:50*pm, Art Unwin wrote:



On Nov 11, 10:41*am, Bill wrote:

fromhttp://unwinantennas.com/:

"The Sun is very hot because it is burning. Burning as we know it
produces soot and other by products in abundance that when these
particles collect in the air they become visual to the eye as smoke
even tho the particles themselves are invisible to the eye unless
there is a contrast in light as with particles passing thru a shaft of
light thru a window."

Does the author not understand the difference between fusion and
combustion? Why would anyone pay attention to such an ignoramus when
he writes about antenna theory?

By all means re write it according to your own teachings

It is too hopeless to be rewritten.

I paid for the option of what I wrote and I assume you can do the same.

You should have paid for an editor. I would not pay to display myself
as a great ass on the internet.

Maybe your efforts will be printed in many books as a

* cannon, tho critiscism alone rarely is !

You are illiterate AND ignorant. Can't you even use a dictionary?

It is better to ask for forgiveness than requesting permission

On Nov 11, 3:12*pm, Art Unwin wrote:



It is better to ask for forgiveness than requesting permission-


http://unwinantennas.com/ appears to be gone. That is a good
start :-)

"Bill" wrote in message
...
On Nov 11, 3:12 pm, Art Unwin wrote:



It is better to ask for forgiveness than requesting permission-


http://unwinantennas.com/ appears to be gone. That is a good
start :-)


* No, it's back!

Chris

On Nov 14, 9:12*pm, "christofire" wrote:
"Bill" wrote in message

...
On Nov 11, 3:12 pm, Art Unwin wrote:



It is better to ask for forgiveness than requesting permission-

http://unwinantennas.com/appears to be gone. That is a good
start *:-)

* No, it's back!

Chris

Its true the sun runs on coal, English coal no doubt of the finest
grade.

Jimmie

On Nov 15, 3:10*am, JIMMIE wrote:
On Nov 14, 9:12*pm, "christofire" wrote:

"Bill" wrote in message

...
On Nov 11, 3:12 pm, Art Unwin wrote:

It is better to ask for forgiveness than requesting permission-

http://unwinantennas.com/appearsto be gone. That is a good
start *:-)

* No, it's back!

Chris

Its true the sun runs on coal, English coal no doubt of the finest
grade.

Jimmie

that is either poorly written satire, or a result of todays education
system... either way its 99.9% wrong... he did get the first 5 words
correct, and that English was not Einsteins native language. His
citing of Gauss's law in one of the patent claims is rather unique, as
is the inclusion of the weak force in the other... obviously a result
of too many google snippets and not enough in depth study.

On Nov 15, 6:27*am, Dave wrote:
On Nov 15, 3:10*am, JIMMIE wrote:



On Nov 14, 9:12*pm, "christofire" wrote:

"Bill" wrote in message

....
On Nov 11, 3:12 pm, Art Unwin wrote:

It is better to ask for forgiveness than requesting permission-

http://unwinantennas.com/appearstobe gone. That is a good
start *:-)

* No, it's back!

Chris

Its true the sun runs on coal, English coal no doubt of the finest
grade.

Jimmie

that is either poorly written satire, or a result of todays education
system... either way its 99.9% wrong... he did get the first 5 words
correct, and that English was not Einsteins native language. *His
citing of Gauss's law in one of the patent claims is rather unique, as
is the inclusion of the weak force in the other... obviously a result
of too many google snippets and not enough in depth study.

This is only true if one demands total adherence to the teachings of
the books.
Many are just theories that have been expanded upon via the use of
constants to account for the unknown and often most collapse over time
due to misinterpretation by humans.
In the case of making the static situation into a dynamic system the
mathematics are the duplication of Maxwell's laws for radiation. This
is why the use of full wave radiators satisfy equilibrium laws such
that 100% efficiencies are obtained that satisfy the teachings of
other sciences that particles and not waves are the carriers of
radiation.

On Nov 15, 4:50*pm, Art Unwin wrote:
On Nov 15, 6:27*am, Dave wrote:





On Nov 15, 3:10*am, JIMMIE wrote:

On Nov 14, 9:12*pm, "christofire" wrote:

"Bill" wrote in message

...
On Nov 11, 3:12 pm, Art Unwin wrote:

It is better to ask for forgiveness than requesting permission-

http://unwinantennas.com/appearstobegone. That is a good
start *:-)

* No, it's back!

Chris

Its true the sun runs on coal, English coal no doubt of the finest
grade.

Jimmie

that is either poorly written satire, or a result of todays education
system... either way its 99.9% wrong... he did get the first 5 words
correct, and that English was not Einsteins native language. *His
citing of Gauss's law in one of the patent claims is rather unique, as
is the inclusion of the weak force in the other... obviously a result
of too many google snippets and not enough in depth study.

This is only true if one demands total adherence to the teachings of
the books.
Many are just theories that have been expanded upon *via the use of
constants to account for the unknown and often most collapse over time
due to misinterpretation by humans.
In the case of making the static situation into a dynamic system the
mathematics are the duplication of Maxwell's laws for radiation. This
is why the use of full wave radiators satisfy equilibrium laws such
that 100% efficiencies are obtained that satisfy the teachings of
other sciences that particles and not waves are the carriers of
radiation.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

i don't demand adherence to the books, but since the books i learned
from haven't been proven false in the last 30 years i am inclined to
keep believing them. particles or waves depend on your preference,
however when computing from currents in conductors it is easiest to
use waves, when working at higher energies and when studying electron
or nuclear interactions it is often easier to use particles. i don't
see how using full waves helps since 1/2 wave antennas are self
resonant, and there is no equilibrium in radiating systems... maybe if
you consider perfectly conducting and lossless closed systems like
waveguides or coax stubs, but once you add a radiating element energy
must flow out of the system so there can't be equilibrium.

Its true the sun runs on coal, English coal no doubt of the finest
grade.

Jimmie

"The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant
tortoise."

Bill wrote:
Its true the sun runs on coal, English coal no doubt of the finest
grade.

Jimmie

"The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant
tortoise."


"And it's turtles all the way down."

tom
K0TAR

On Nov 15, 8:42*pm, tom wrote:
Bill wrote:
Its true the sun runs on coal, English coal no doubt of the finest
grade.

Jimmie

"The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant
tortoise."

"And it's turtles all the way down."

tom
K0TAR

So here you are again with nothing of value other than insults.
You mentioned that credible evidence has been presented( obviously not
you)
that provides credible evidence supplied that refutes my position. Why
not push that point over and over again where the credible evidence
becomes readily accepted by those skilled in the art? The church once
declared that the World is flat and those who do not follow the
teachings will be excommunicated. Eventually scientific knoweledge
increased as the Century past such that teaching became discreditedand
the church had to recant to allow the teachings of faith by the
servants of the church could continue. Come to think of it I bet the
findings of Steven Best has already made it in the latest books for
assimilation by those now entering college regardles of what the
naysayers promote by refuting change to all that every thing is now
is known about the science of antennas. These people eventually die
thus leaving the education field to review the sciences of old and
update them where necessary so they may be duplicated by plagurizers
that are natural followers.