I made a time varying field addition to a static field in equilibrium
some time back. All on this group said it was and still is B.S.!
It was this finding that created the basis of a new antenna science
that I have shared with this group and with page Unwin antennas.
If one goes to
http://www.james-clerk-maxwell.com/

one can read in better in detail a description of my findings in a
much better way than I can fully explain where a mathematical error
existed when changing from MKS units 150 years ago when utelizing the
laws of statics in antenna design.
My findings are in the patents loosely described on my page
Unwin antennas!
The author of the paper goes on to say how this error has placed
physics back to the middle ages or something like that and for my self
I have the feeling that this error was the sole reason for Einstein
not solving the Standard model before he gave up and moved on to start
the idea of Quantum physics. For myself I am very comfortable with the
idea that communication is by the "particle" as a carrier of the
charge and not the often much quoted "wave." In addition I would point
out that the array I gave in another thread is further proof of the
correctness of what I have stated which is according to Maxwells
equations where accountability
is made of all forces. All antenna text books as well as those in
physics will now have to be updated to reflect the above findings
I am so pleased that I have been found not guilty of spreading B.S. in
the amateur radio community and thus exposing spammers for what they
really are. In summation it is now possible to make antennas in a
smaller volume such that a radiator for top band can now be placed
upon a tower or in a small garden as envisaged by Mr Moxon who has
since become a SK.
Regards
Art Unwin KB9MZ.....xg (uk)

Art Unwin wrote:
I made a time varying field addition to a static field in equilibrium
some time back. All on this group said it was and still is B.S.!
It was this finding that created the basis of a new antenna science
that I have shared with this group and with page Unwin antennas.
If one goes to
http://www.james-clerk-maxwell.com/

One finds another crank web site put up by an Aether kook.



--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Feb 26, 11:10*pm, wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
I made a time varying field addition to a static field in equilibrium
some time back. All on this group said it was and still is B.S.!
It was this finding that created the basis of a new antenna science
that I have shared with this group and with page Unwin antennas.
If one goes to
* * * * * * * * * * * * *http://www.james-clerk-maxwell.com/

One finds another crank web site put up by an Aether kook.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

An "Aether kook" is one that recognises that if you rub two
dielectrics together you generate a charge, the basis of
communication. You do this when it is dry and you walk across a carpet
that has resistance or rubbing two balloons together. The same thing
happens in reverse when the atmosphere or wind/atmosphere brushes
against matter at ground level, again there is a charge generated. Now
we look at a particle moving thru the Aether, again a charge is
generated.
In this instance hams know that the impedance of the air is 377 ohms
so the particle is generating a charge just like the other instances.
It also does the same in the weather cycle
with clouds. As hams we are all very familiar with the idea of what
would appear to be nothing actually has a resistance of a dielectric
thus it cannot be nothing if it can generate friction. The Aether
argument started years ago and is directly connected to the time
varying field made dynamic as Newton envisioned. Thus it is static
charge that is the basics of physics and electricity is a subset of
that and thus we must re examine all physics
analysis done in the last 100 years to see how this mathematical error
slanted things the wrong way. A partical duallity is just a very small
part of what must now be re examined.
All of this is a culmination of what I have stated before where
physics relied to much on mathematical numbers instead of the
observations that provided those numbers which has now put physics
behind over a century. In other words mathematics became a priority
over observation which is the core of the Universe.

Art Unwin wrote:
On Feb 26, 11:10Â*pm, wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
I made a time varying field addition to a static field in equilibrium
some time back. All on this group said it was and still is B.S.!
It was this finding that created the basis of a new antenna science
that I have shared with this group and with page Unwin antennas.
If one goes to
Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â*http://www.james-clerk-maxwell.com/

One finds another crank web site put up by an Aether kook.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

An "Aether kook" is one that recognises that if you rub two
dielectrics together you generate a charge, the basis of
communication.

Nope, an "Aether kook" is any gibbering idiot that belives there is an
"aether".

No aether:
http://arXiv.org/abs/0706.2031
Physics Today 57(7) 40 (2004)
http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/Walsworth...omalis0704.pdf


No Lorentz violation:
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/...5-5/index.html
Phys. Rev. D 81 022003 (2010)
http://arxiv.org/abs/0801.0287
http://arxiv.org/abs/0905.1929


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Art Unwin wrote:
In this instance hams know that the impedance of the air is 377 ohms

No Art, the impedance of free space is 377 ohms. Air changes it a bit,
just not enough that we care.

tom
K0TAR

On Feb 27, 5:46*pm, tom wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
In this instance hams know that the impedance of the air is 377 ohms

No Art, the impedance of free space is 377 ohms. *Air changes it a bit,
just not enough that we care.

tom
K0TAR

Yes, you are correct and I misspoke!
The point I was trying to make that space as we know it, yes free
space, has a resistance value tha same as the carpet and balloons that
I described earlier. This resistance gives substance that the
atmosphere is a true substance or a dielectric and not just nothing or
an empty space. After all, if it was a true nothing or vacuum then
outside forces upon the boundary with in which it exists would
compress that boundary until it really did not exist.
This same explanation explains why a plane or a satellite can transmit
and receive a radio signal because in each case it qualifies as a
Farady cage. As to whether we care or not is dependent on whether we
need the outer layers around earth that sectionalize the boundary
around earth because it is our boundary that hold the layers in
position to provide frictional qualities against the communication
particles. The bottom line is that the eather is not just nothing but
a sea of particles separated by charge and can just as easily land on
a sattellite or impinge on the high density magnetic field at our
magnetic poles where light is created. I would also point out that the
speed of light is determined by "white light" which thus limits the
visible spectrum of light seen at the poles.
Bottom line is that our outer space is not just nothing but is a
dielectric substance that has
a measurable resistance which puts us back fully into the camp of
Newton from which we strayed 100 years ago. The mathematical error is
real and just like a check book that doesn't balance time competes
against its correction.Remember that all this is a result of illness
which forced me back in years where my vocablery was that of a child
and consisted of what, why, when, e.tc that reflects human curiousity
and where one is forced to start from the same datum line which is one
of first principles and not blind acceptance as our experiences and
education system rewards.

On Feb 28, 12:56*am, Art Unwin wrote:

Yes, you are correct and I misspoke!

oh no! i never thought i would see this!

The point I was trying to make that space as we know it, yes free
space, has a resistance value tha same as the carpet and balloons that
I described earlier.

resistance, reactance, impedance, they are all the same i guess in
your world.

This same explanation explains why a plane or a satellite can transmit
and receive a radio signal because in each case it qualifies as a
Farady cage.

then why can a plastic model plane transmit a radio signal?

speed of light is determined by "white light" which thus limits the
visible spectrum of light seen at the poles.

is that why its dark at the poles in winter? they run out of magical
levitating diamagnetic neutrinos? I thought the speed of all
electromagnetic waves was equal in free space.... but thats just a
pesky fact that you are free to ignore in your own little world i
guess.


Remember that all this is a result of illness
which forced me back in years where my vocablery was that of a child

ah, now it all makes sense... you need your meds refilled!

On Feb 26, 11:08*pm, Art Unwin wrote:
I made a time varying field addition to a static field in equilibrium
some time back. All on this group said it was and still is B.S.!
*It was this finding that created the basis of a new antenna science
that I have shared with this group and with page Unwin antennas.
If one goes to
* * * * * * * * * * * * *http://www.james-clerk-maxwell.com/

one can read in better in *detail a description of my findings in a
much better way than I can fully explain where a mathematical error
existed when changing from MKS units 150 years ago when utelizing the
laws of statics in antenna design.
My findings *are in the patents loosely described on my page
*Unwin antennas!
The author of the paper goes on to say how this error has placed
physics back to the middle ages or something like that and for my self
I have the feeling that this error was the sole reason for Einstein
not solving the Standard model before he gave up and moved on to start
the idea of Quantum physics. For myself I am very comfortable with the
idea that communication is by the "particle" as a carrier of the
charge and not the often much quoted "wave." In addition I would point
out that the array I gave in another thread is further proof of the
correctness of what I have stated which is according to Maxwells
equations where accountability
is made of all forces. All antenna text books as well as those in
physics will now have to be updated to reflect the above findings
I am so pleased that I have been found not guilty of spreading B.S. in
the amateur radio community and thus exposing spammers for what they
really are. In summation it is now possible to make antennas in a
smaller volume such that a radiator for top band can now be placed
upon a tower or in a small garden as envisaged by Mr Moxon who has
since become a SK.
Regards
Art Unwin KB9MZ.....xg (uk)

Yep the mesh antenna is pure BS. In efficient antennas the DC
resistance of the antenna is usually quite small, values in the
1/100ths or 1/1000th of ohms would be expected. Normally the RF
impedance of the antenna is hundreds or thousands of times greater
than this. Under these conditions most of the power is going to be
radiated and only a small part radiated as heat. In the case of the
mess antenna the feed point impedance of the antenna is what you would
expect the DC resistance to be( around 1/100th of an ohm) . This means
most of your power is going to be used to heat wire. Congratulation
Art, you have made another Dummy Load.

Jimmie

On Feb 27, 12:33*am, JIMMIE wrote:
On Feb 26, 11:08*pm, Art Unwin wrote:



I made a time varying field addition to a static field in equilibrium
some time back. All on this group said it was and still is B.S.!
*It was this finding that created the basis of a new antenna science
that I have shared with this group and with page Unwin antennas.
If one goes to
* * * * * * * * * * * * *http://www.james-clerk-maxwell.com/

one can read in better in *detail a description of my findings in a
much better way than I can fully explain where a mathematical error
existed when changing from MKS units 150 years ago when utelizing the
laws of statics in antenna design.
My findings *are in the patents loosely described on my page
*Unwin antennas!
The author of the paper goes on to say how this error has placed
physics back to the middle ages or something like that and for my self
I have the feeling that this error was the sole reason for Einstein
not solving the Standard model before he gave up and moved on to start
the idea of Quantum physics. For myself I am very comfortable with the
idea that communication is by the "particle" as a carrier of the
charge and not the often much quoted "wave." In addition I would point
out that the array I gave in another thread is further proof of the
correctness of what I have stated which is according to Maxwells
equations where accountability
is made of all forces. All antenna text books as well as those in
physics will now have to be updated to reflect the above findings
I am so pleased that I have been found not guilty of spreading B.S. in
the amateur radio community and thus exposing spammers for what they
really are. In summation it is now possible to make antennas in a
smaller volume such that a radiator for top band can now be placed
upon a tower or in a small garden as envisaged by Mr Moxon who has
since become a SK.
Regards
Art Unwin KB9MZ.....xg (uk)

Yep the mesh antenna is pure BS. In efficient antennas the DC
resistance of the antenna is usually quite small, values in the
1/100ths or 1/1000th of ohms would be expected. Normally the RF
impedance of the antenna is hundreds or thousands of times greater
than this. Under these conditions most of the power is going to be
radiated and only a small part radiated as heat. In the case of the
mess antenna the feed point impedance of the antenna is what you would
expect the DC resistance to be( around 1/100th of an ohm) . This means
most of your power is going to be used to heat wire. Congratulation
Art, you have made another Dummy Load.

Jimmie

No Jimmie, the function of a Faraday shield is not the same as a wire
antenna. It's function is to cancel the arriving fields to obtain the
time varing current which is the product of same
so it can be used by a radio. There are plenty of descriptions on the
web showing how the fields are separated and then cancelled by the
movement of charge which in turn generates the current that the radio
can use. The movement to cancel each other is an accelleration of
charge which is the prime mover of communication.

On Feb 27, 4:08*am, Art Unwin wrote:
I made a time varying field addition to a static field in equilibrium
some time back. All on this group said it was and still is B.S.!
*It was this finding that created the basis of a new antenna science
that I have shared with this group and with page Unwin antennas.

From Art's web page http://unwinantennas.com/

"THE NATURE OF LIGHT AND RADIATION WITH RESPECT TO PARTICLES OF THE
UNIVERSE

"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.

"The particles produced by the Sun are called Leptons where the
difference between them is the colour of light that they can emit.
Thus we have three types of Leptons each able to produce one of the
primary colours, red, green or yellow. Thus we have three types of
Leptons each able to produce one of the primary colours, red, green or
yellow. When the pressure increases beyond a certain point the Sun's
boundary is unable to contain them so they escape to the tune of
millions per unit of time and float to all different directions."

And so on...