"K1TTT" wrote
...
On May 5, 8:52 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:

Wiki wrote: "The field can be viewed as the combination of an electric
field
and a magnetic field. The electric field is produced by stationary
charges,
and the magnetic field by moving charges (currents); "

an electric field can also be created by a changing magnetic field...
and a magnetic field by a changing electric field... no charges
needed.

In Maxwell's displacement current were charges (electricity).
In the space no charged bodies.

But what produce very slow charge?

a charge is a charge, it can neither be created nor destroyed.... well
except maybe by matter-anti-matter annihilation. charged particles
can move at any speed from 0 to c, nothing special about speeds.

Charged particles can move at any speed from 0 to c and always produce the
electric field. Why not?

Next Wiki weote: "From a classical perspective, the electromagnetic field
can be regarded as a smooth, continuous field, propagated in a wavelike
manner ;"

It is important to know that Maxwell's waves are rotational (oscillating
magnetic whirl).

no they aren't... at least not all of them. maxwells equations are
just as well satisfied by linearly polarized (magnetic AND electric
field) waves.

Maxwell's waves are transversal. It means that something oscillate around
the axis of rotation.
Linear polarization means thet the rotating oscillations are in the one
plane.

Alternate electric field also propagate in a wavelike manner. But here to
and fro (no rotations).

if the magnetic field is rotating then the electric field also
rotates. they always go together.

In Maxwell's Hypothesis.

The fundamental question: Are radio waves a simple electric waves or the
very sophisticated Maxwell's waves?

ALL radio waves can be described by maxwell's equations, both simple
linear polarized ones and circularly polarized ones.

Wiki wrote: " FM radio
The term "circular polarization" is often used erroneously to describe mixed
polarity signals used mostly in FM radio (87.5 to 108.0 MHz), where a
vertical and a horizontal component are propagated simultaneously by a
single or a combined array."

It seems that radio waves are the electric waves.
If yes, the light is also longitudinal.
S*

On May 6, 8:25*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:

you mangled the replies so badly that i couldn't even follow what you
were saying. light and radio waves are the same thing, as are gamma,
infra red, x-ray, etc... all the exact same phenomena explained very
well by maxwell's equations. scientists for 100 years have been
unable to come up with anything better, you aren't going to by your
misguided assertions that have no mathematics or experimental evidence
behind them.

sound waves and water waves are VERY different things. while some of
the equations take the same form because they share sinusoidal
repetition properties, the underlying physics is VERY different. you
have to abandon the analogies you learned in elementary school and
learn the proper physics to understand why electromagnetic waves are
not like sound or water... start with this, why can you polarize light
or radio waves but not sound waves?

Uzytkownik "K1TTT" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On May 6, 8:25 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:

you mangled the replies so badly that i couldn't even follow what you
were saying. light and radio waves are the same thing, as are gamma,
infra red, x-ray, etc... all the exact same phenomena explained very
well by maxwell's equations. scientists for 100 years have been
unable to come up with anything better, you aren't going to by your
misguided assertions that have no mathematics or experimental evidence
behind them.

Maxwell's electricity is incompressible.
Todays electron gas is compressible. Behind them is mathematics (plasma
physics) and experimental evidence.

sound waves and water waves are VERY different things. while some of
the equations take the same form because they share sinusoidal
repetition properties,

Sinusoidal means harmonics. Real waves are not harmonics. They are rather
the chain of the solitons.

the underlying physics is VERY different. you
have to abandon the analogies you learned in elementary school and
learn the proper physics to understand why electromagnetic waves are
not like sound or water.

Sound and water waves are the real waves and such have always the two
components (longitudinal and transversal).
Maxwell' em waves are pure transversal. Maxwell wrote that it is a
proposition.

.. start with this, why can you polarize light or radio waves but not sound
waves?

I did it. Radio waves and sound waves have the same directional patterns for
the same numbers, configurations (and phases).
The two waves emitted from the dipole (ACOUSTIC OR ELECTRIC) are
"polarized". You can experimentally determine the plane in which the dipole
is.

The same is with more sources.
S*

On May 7, 8:26*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
I did it. Radio waves and sound waves have the same directional patterns for
the same numbers, configurations (and phases).
The two waves emitted from the dipole (ACOUSTIC OR ELECTRIC) are
"polarized". You can experimentally determine the plane in which the dipole
is.

The same is with more sources.
S*

they may have the same patterns for some cases, that is why they are
used in lower grades, to keep the explanations of waves simple for
those who don't have the mathematical background to understand the
full detail of it. but pattern does not show polarization. by
matching an interference pattern you are not showing how a wave is
polarized, only that superposition principles work for both types of
waves. show me an experiment where a sound wave is polarized, that
one i would like to see. you might want to start with a couple of
these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave
http://universe-review.ca/R12-03-wave.htm
http://www.answers.com/topic/polarization-of-waves
http://www.isvr.soton.ac.uk/spcg/Tut...ther-light.htm

"K1TTT" wrote
...
On May 7, 8:26 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
I did it. Radio waves and sound waves have the same directional patterns
for
the same numbers, configurations (and phases).
The two waves emitted from the dipole (ACOUSTIC OR ELECTRIC) are
"polarized". You can experimentally determine the plane in which the
dipole
is.

The same is with more sources.
S*

they may have the same patterns for some cases, that is why they are
used in lower grades, to keep the explanations of waves simple for
those who don't have the mathematical background to understand the
full detail of it. but pattern does not show polarization. by
matching an interference pattern you are not showing how a wave is
polarized,

You assume that radio wave is transversal. Such are polarised. But such are
only in Maxwell's Hypothesis.

Radio waves from the ends of the dipole are coupled. The both are in one
plane.

Radio wave from one end is spherical.

only that superposition principles work for both types of
waves. show me an experiment where a sound wave is polarized,

Sound wave is not polarised. Sound waves from "dipole" is.

that one i would like to see.
you might want to start with a couple of
these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave
http://universe-review.ca/R12-03-wave.htm
http://www.answers.com/topic/polarization-of-waves
http://www.isvr.soton.ac.uk/spcg/Tut...ther-light.htm

In above no directional pattern for sound dipoles.

"Polarized" means directional. Are all radio waves directional?
S*

On May 8, 7:19*pm, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
*"K1TTT" ...
On May 7, 8:26 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:

I did it. Radio waves and sound waves have the same directional patterns
for
the same numbers, configurations (and phases).
The two waves emitted from the dipole (ACOUSTIC OR ELECTRIC) are
"polarized". You can experimentally determine the plane in which the
dipole
is.

The same is with more sources.
S*
they may have the same patterns for some cases, that is why they are

used in lower grades, to keep the explanations of waves simple for
those who don't have the mathematical background to understand the
full detail of it. *but pattern does not show polarization. *by
matching an interference pattern you are not showing how a wave is
polarized,

You assume that radio wave is transversal. Such are polarised. But such are
only in Maxwell's Hypothesis.

Radio waves from the ends of the *dipole are coupled. The both are in one
plane.

Radio wave from one end is spherical.

only that superposition principles work for both types of

waves. *show me an experiment where a sound wave is polarized,

Sound wave is not polarised. Sound waves from "dipole" is.

that one i would like to see.
you might want to start with a couple of

these:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wavehtt...rial_files/Web...

In above no directional pattern for sound dipoles.

"Polarized" means directional. Are all radio waves directional?
S*

this discussion is worthless until you go back to school and learn the
basics.

"K1TTT" wrote
...
On May 8, 7:19 pm, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:

You assume that radio wave is transversal. Such are polarised. But such
are
only in Maxwell's Hypothesis.

Radio waves from the ends of the dipole are coupled. The both are in one
plane.

Radio wave from one end is spherical.

only that superposition principles work for both types of

waves. show me an experiment where a sound wave is polarized,

Sound wave is not polarised. Sound waves from "dipole" is.

that one i would like to see.
you might want to start with a couple of

these:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wavehtt...rial_files/Web...

In above no directional pattern for sound dipoles.

"Polarized" means directional. Are all radio waves directional?
S*

this discussion is worthless until you go back to school and learn the
basics.

In textbooks must be all theories.
In one chapter light (and radio waves) is like photons, in the next chapter
like EM waves and in next like acoustics.

EM is the only example of transversal waves. So it must be in teaching
program.

But we try to help Peter. He wrote: "I begin to appreciate a comment made by
a fellow radio amateur and
technician that antenna theory was 15% science and 85% black magic! "

It seems that you are sure that radio waves are transversal. It is
impossible to help you (Maxwell was full of doubts).
May be that somebody consider the Acoustic analogy and the black magic
disappear for him.
S*

On 5/6/2010 3:25 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Charged particles can move at any speed from 0 to c and always produce the
electric field. Why not?

Incorrect. A particle has mass, and cannot attain light speed.

tom
K0TAR

On 5/6/2010 8:42 PM, tom wrote:
On 5/6/2010 3:25 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Charged particles can move at any speed from 0 to c and always produce
the
electric field. Why not?

Incorrect. A particle has mass, and cannot attain light speed.

tom
K0TAR


Should have said "charged particle" rather than "particle".

tom
K0TAR

tom wrote:
On 5/6/2010 8:42 PM, tom wrote:
On 5/6/2010 3:25 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Charged particles can move at any speed from 0 to c and always produce
the
electric field. Why not?

Incorrect. A particle has mass, and cannot attain light speed.

tom
K0TAR


Should have said "charged particle" rather than "particle".

tom
K0TAR

You were correct the first time.

Nothing with mass can attain light speed and it doesn't matter if it is
charged or not.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.