On May 11, 4:26*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
Uzytkownik "K1TTT" napisal w ...
On May 10, 7:41 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:



But the source of sound is an increase of the pressure.
The source of electric waves is an increase of the voltage.

The voltage increases at the ends of a dipole.

The electric waves and sound propagate in metal wires, but with different
speeds.
Are electric waves in a wire also transversal?
yes.

" As the wave propagates along the line, it is accompanied by currents which
flow longitudinally in the conductors".
From:http://www.answers.com/topic/electro...e-transmission

In reality no pure transversal waves. Such are only possible in the math.
S*

but as dilbert's trolls know, numbers create reality, not the other
way around. if you can't describe it in a formula, it can't exist.
and yes, while the current moves longitudinally along the wire, the
fields are transverse. look at the formulas, they apply to the wire
also. they just get more complex because you have to take into
account the boundry conditions at the interface between the wire and
what is around it... something that freshman physics and calculus are
not enough to handle.

"K1TTT" wrote
...
On May 11, 4:26 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:

But the source of sound is an increase of the pressure.
The source of electric waves is an increase of the voltage.

The voltage increases at the ends of a dipole.

The electric waves and sound propagate in metal wires, but with
different
speeds.
Are electric waves in a wire also transversal?
yes.

" As the wave propagates along the line, it is accompanied by currents
which
flow longitudinally in the conductors".
From:http://www.answers.com/topic/electro...e-transmission

In reality no pure transversal waves. Such are only possible in the math.
S*

but as dilbert's trolls know, numbers create reality, not the other
way around. if you can't describe it in a formula, it can't exist.
and yes, while the current moves longitudinally along the wire, the
fields are transverse. look at the formulas, they apply to the wire
also. they just get more complex because you have to take into
account the boundry conditions at the interface between the wire and
what is around it... something that freshman physics and calculus are
not enough to handle.

You all time about Maxwell's hypothesis. But Maxwell wrote: "The general
type of a stress is not suitable as a representation of a magnetic force,
because a line of magnetic force has direction and intensity, but has no
third qufility indicating any difference between the sides of the line,
which would be analogous to that observed in the case of polarized
light[2]." From: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_Phy...Lines_of_Force

To explain the light polarization Maxwell assumed that the current in the
wire create the magnetic whirl around the wire (The same for displacement
current in the space).

Maxwell's waves are polarized. Now you know that the dipoles are "polarized"
(not waves).
S*

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

You all time about Maxwell's hypothesis. But Maxwell wrote: "The general
type of a stress is not suitable as a representation of a magnetic force,
because a line of magnetic force has direction and intensity, but has no
third qufility indicating any difference between the sides of the line,
which would be analogous to that observed in the case of polarized
light[2]." From: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_Phy...Lines_of_Force

Yeah, and Maxwell was talking about magnetic fields, not electromagnetic
fields, in that sentence.

To explain the light polarization Maxwell assumed that the current in the
wire create the magnetic whirl around the wire (The same for displacement
current in the space).

Gibberish.

Maxwell's waves are polarized. Now you know that the dipoles are "polarized"
(not waves).
S*

More gibberish.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On May 13, 3:29*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
*"K1TTT" ...
On May 11, 4:26 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:







But the source of sound is an increase of the pressure.
The source of electric waves is an increase of the voltage.

The voltage increases at the ends of a dipole.

The electric waves and sound propagate in metal wires, but with
different
speeds.
Are electric waves in a wire also transversal?
yes.

" As the wave propagates along the line, it is accompanied by currents
which
flow longitudinally in the conductors".
From:http://www.answers.com/topic/electro...e-transmission

In reality no pure transversal waves. Such are only possible in the math.
S*
but as dilbert's trolls know, numbers create reality, not the other

way around. *if you can't describe it in a formula, it can't exist.
and yes, while the current moves longitudinally along the wire, the
fields are transverse. *look at the formulas, they apply to the wire
also. *they just get more complex because you have to take into
account the boundry conditions at the interface between the wire and
what is around it... something that freshman physics and calculus are
not enough to handle.

You all time about Maxwell's hypothesis. But Maxwell wrote: "The general
type of a stress is not suitable as a representation of a magnetic force,
because a line of magnetic force has direction and intensity, but has no
third qufility indicating any difference between the sides of the line,
which would be analogous to that observed in the case of polarized
light[2]." From: *http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_Phy...Lines_of_Force

To explain the light polarization Maxwell assumed that the current in the
wire create the magnetic whirl around the wire (The same for displacement
current in the space).

Maxwell's waves are polarized. Now you know that the dipoles are "polarized"
(not waves).
S*- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

of course dipoles are polarized, dipoles = two poles, if you have two
poles you have to have at least 2 points, and 2 points define a line
and that line defines the polarization. qed.

U¿ytkownik "Szczepan Bialek" napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
.. .

"K1TTT" wrote
...
On May 9, 10:30 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
"tom"
se.net...



On 5/8/2010 2:04 PM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Yes. But one end of the dipole may have the better conditions to
propagate.

if it only moves in one direction as it would have
to in a monopole there is no wave only a simple field.

I am writing about a dipole with one end visible and the second
shielded.

In nature is always as you wrote. The both ands are always "visible".

Light is always directional. Radio waves can be omnidirectional.
Of course light is emitted by many dipoles. Radio waves by halve, one,
two
(circular polarity) or many (phase radar).
S*

Astonishing understanding of the subject.

Light is not coherent. So dipole radiate for very short time.
Radio waves are coherent and can be from one source. It is easy to
analyse
them.
Are they transversal?
S*

light can be coherent, what do you think lasers are?

"The most monochromatic sources are usually lasers; such high
monochromaticity implies long coherence lengths (up to hundreds of
meters). For example, a stabilized helium-neon laser can produce light
with coherence lengths in excess of 5 m. Not all lasers are monochromatic,
however (e.g. for a mode-locked Ti-sapphire laser, ?? ? 2 nm - 70 nm).
LEDs are characterized by ?? ? 50 nm, and tungsten filament lights exhibit
?? ? 600 nm, so these sources have shorter coherence times than the most
monochromatic lasers". From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coherence_(physics)

Up to now light is not coherent. But in future who knows.

"As the electrons are undergoing acceleration they radiate electromagnetic
energy in their flight direction, and as they interact with the light
already emitted, photons along its line are emitted in phase, resulting in a
"laser-like" monocromatic and coherent beam. The mirrors show in the sketch
below are superfluous, as all the light is emitted in one direction anyway."
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halbach_array

So we have the light like the radio waves: Monocromatic and coherent. But it
is not from plain lasers.
S*

"Sz Bialek wrote:
"Why the dipoles exhibit the directional pattern?".

John D. Ktaus wrote on page 3 of his 1950 efition of "Antennas": Fig.
1-3. a length chart for EM waves from the microscopic to the astronomic.
Kraus was a famous radio astromoner. He obviously believed the EM
Spectrum was continuous, so do I.

Terman begins his antenna section in his 1955 edition of "Electronic and
Radio Engineering" on page 864. He explains and illustrates how vectors
form and control the far field radiation pattern of antennas.
Polarization is the direction of the electric field in the antenna and
in the field produced by the antenna.

Dipoles have nulls at their ends and maxima perpendicular to the
conductor as Terman shows in Fig. 23 on page 865,

Today, the postman felivered my eagerly awaited copy of W2DU`s
"Reflections III" and I can`t wait to read it either.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

On May 16, 4:41*pm, "Szczepan Bia³ek" wrote:
U¿ytkownik "Szczepan Bialek" napisa³ w trada.pl...





"K1TTT" wrote
....
On May 9, 10:30 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
"tom"
se.net...

On 5/8/2010 2:04 PM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Yes. But one end of the dipole may have the better conditions to
propagate.

if it only moves in one direction as it would have
to in a monopole there is no wave only a simple field.

I am writing about a dipole with one end visible and the second
shielded.

In nature is always as you wrote. The both ands are always "visible".

Light is always directional. Radio waves can be omnidirectional.
Of course light is emitted by many dipoles. Radio waves by halve, one,
two
(circular polarity) or many (phase radar).
S*

Astonishing understanding of the subject.

Light is not coherent. So dipole radiate for very short time.
Radio waves are coherent and can be from one source. It is easy to
analyse
them.
Are they transversal?
S*

light can be coherent, what do you think lasers are?

"The most monochromatic sources are usually lasers; such high
monochromaticity implies long coherence lengths (up to hundreds of
meters). For example, a stabilized helium-neon laser can produce light
with coherence lengths in excess of 5 m. Not all lasers are monochromatic,
however (e.g. for a mode-locked Ti-sapphire laser, ?? ? 2 nm - 70 nm).
LEDs are characterized by ?? ? 50 nm, and tungsten filament lights exhibit
?? ? 600 nm, so these sources have shorter coherence times than the most
monochromatic lasers". From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coherence_(physics)

Up to now light is not coherent. But in future who knows.

"As the electrons are undergoing acceleration they radiate electromagnetic
energy in their flight direction, and as they interact with the light
already emitted, photons along its line are emitted in phase, resulting in a
"laser-like" monocromatic and coherent beam. The mirrors show in the sketch
below are superfluous, as all the light is emitted in one direction anyway."
From:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halbach_array

So we have the light like the radio waves: Monocromatic and coherent. But it
is not from plain lasers.
*S*

nothing is perfect. even radio waves are not perfectly monochromatic
and hence not perfectly coherent either. but they are close enough
that we can tell they are the same phenomenon, they are all
electromagnetic waves and obey the same laws.

"K1TTT" wrote
...
On May 16, 4:41 pm, "Szczepan Bia³ek" wrote:


"As the electrons are undergoing acceleration they radiate
electromagnetic
energy in their flight direction, and as they interact with the light
already emitted, photons along its line are emitted in phase, resulting in
a
"laser-like" monocromatic and coherent beam. The mirrors show in the
sketch
below are superfluous, as all the light is emitted in one direction
anyway."
From:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halbach_array

So we have the light like the radio waves: Monocromatic and coherent. But
it
is not from plain lasers.
S*

nothing is perfect. even radio waves are not perfectly monochromatic
and hence not perfectly coherent either. but they are close enough
that we can tell they are the same phenomenon, they are all
electromagnetic waves and obey the same laws.

Nobody know what the EM waves are. See what Maxwell wrote: "I propose now
to examine magnetic phenomena from a mecha nical point of view, and to
determine what tensions in, or motions of, a medium are capable of producing
the mechanical pheno mena observed. If, by the same hypothesis, we can
connect the phenomena of magnetic attraction with electromagnetic phe nomena
and with those of induced currents, we shall have found a theory which, if
not true, can only be proved to be erroneous by experiments which will
greatly enlarge our knowledge of this part of physics. " From:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_Phy...Lines_of_Force

Our knowledge is enlarged enough to say:
Now we can tell that light. radio waves and sound are the same phenomenon
and obey the same laws.
S*

"Richard Harrison" wrote
...
"Sz Bialek wrote:
"Why the dipoles exhibit the directional pattern?".

John D. Ktaus wrote on page 3 of his 1950 efition of "Antennas": Fig.
1-3. a length chart for EM waves from the microscopic to the astronomic.
Kraus was a famous radio astromoner. He obviously believed the EM
Spectrum was continuous, so do I.

Terman begins his antenna section in his 1955 edition of "Electronic and
Radio Engineering" on page 864. He explains and illustrates how vectors
form and control the far field radiation pattern of antennas.
Polarization is the direction of the electric field in the antenna and
in the field produced by the antenna.

Electric field is along the wire. If antenna has the ball on the end the
electric field is at right angle to tha ball surface.

Dipoles have nulls at their ends and maxima perpendicular to the
conductor as Terman shows in Fig. 23 on page 865,

At the ends of the dipole the voltage is doubled (at least).

Today, the postman felivered my eagerly awaited copy of W2DU`s
"Reflections III" and I can`t wait to read it either.

In meantime read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_wave

In Maxwell's hypothesis the electricity is incompressible. Standing waves in
antennas are the experimental prove that the hypothesis is erroneous.

See what Maxwell wrote: "I propose now
to examine magnetic phenomena from a mecha nical point of view, and to
determine what tensions in, or motions of, a medium are capable of producing
the mechanical pheno mena observed. If, by the same hypothesis, we can
connect the phenomena of magnetic attraction with electromagnetic phe nomena
and with those of induced currents, we shall have found a theory which, if
not true, can only be proved to be erroneous by experiments which will
greatly enlarge our knowledge of this part of physics. " From:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_Phy...Lines_of_Force

In textbooks are prsented all theories and hipothesis.
It is your choose which one do you prefer: EM, photons or like sound.
S*

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

On May 19, 8:36*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
*"Richard Harrison" ...

"Sz Bialek wrote:
"Why the dipoles exhibit the directional pattern?".

John D. Ktaus wrote on page 3 of his 1950 efition of "Antennas": Fig.
1-3. a length chart for EM waves from the microscopic to the astronomic..
Kraus was a famous radio astromoner. He obviously believed the EM
Spectrum *was continuous, so do I.

Terman begins his antenna section in his 1955 edition of "Electronic and
Radio Engineering" on page 864. He explains and illustrates how vectors
form and control the far field radiation pattern of antennas.
Polarization is the direction of the electric field in the antenna and
in the field produced by the antenna.

Electric field is along the wire. If antenna has the ball on the end the
electric field is at right angle to tha ball surface.

Dipoles have nulls at their ends and maxima perpendicular to the
conductor as Terman shows in Fig. 23 on page 865,

At the ends of the dipole the voltage is doubled (at least).



Today, the postman felivered my eagerly awaited copy of W2DU`s
"Reflections III" and I can`t wait to read it either.

In meantime read this:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_wave

In Maxwell's hypothesis the electricity is incompressible. Standing waves in
antennas are the experimental prove that the hypothesis is erroneous.

See what Maxwell wrote: "I propose now

to examine magnetic phenomena from a mecha nical point of view, and to
determine what tensions in, or motions of, a medium are capable of producing
the mechanical pheno mena observed. If, by the same hypothesis, we can
connect the phenomena of magnetic attraction with electromagnetic phe nomena
and with those of induced currents, we shall have found a theory which, if
not true, can only be proved to be erroneous by experiments which will
greatly enlarge our knowledge of this part of physics. " From:http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_Phy...Lines_of_Force

In textbooks are prsented all theories and hipothesis.
It is your choose which one do you prefer: EM, photons or like sound.
S*


mr. b. you and art should get together. i'm sure his vortices off the
ends of his over optimized dipole would work well with your sound
model of electromagnetics. he has forced the particles off the dipole
by making it superconductive so they should respond like perfectly
compressible sound carriers and since they are massless the sound will
travel at the speed of light. how perfect could that be! both new
theories come together in one big never ending thread where we can all
read the bafflegab and have a big laugh behind your backs, or maybe
right in your faces. Sorry i've been a bit slow responding, i had a
nice trip to dayton, but didn't find any of the unwin antennas for
sale, or any sound driven dipoles out in the flea market either...
well, maybe next year, i'm sure you'll both be selling those new
superconductive longitudinal wave generating magical levitating
diamagnetic neutrino hyperwave antennas at bargain basement prices
after everyone learns how bad they really are.