|
Antenna materials
Antennas usually are made of aluminum as copper is somewhat heavier
and silver and gold is to expensive. Since lead is now banned in a lot of places especially with solder you can now buy solder that is doped with Bismuth ! Now you can't coat your elements with it but if you have a solder bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi tho bandwidth may well suffer some what. What do you think? |
Antenna materials
On 10/4/2010 7:31 PM, Art Unwin wrote:
Antennas usually are made of aluminum as copper is somewhat heavier and silver and gold is to expensive. Since lead is now banned in a lot of places especially with solder you can now buy solder that is doped with Bismuth ! Now you can't coat your elements with it but if you have a solder bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi tho bandwidth may well suffer some what. What do you think? What do I think? I think I'd rather have a platinum antenna! Sure, it would be a lot heavier than aluminum, or even copper. Sure, I'd have to keep it in a bank ... but, I'd still like it! Regards, JS |
Antenna materials
On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 19:31:38 -0700, Art Unwin rearranged some electrons to
say: Antennas usually are made of aluminum as copper is somewhat heavier and silver and gold is to expensive. Since lead is now banned in a lot of places especially with solder you can now buy solder that is doped with Bismuth ! Now you can't coat your elements with it but if you have a solder bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi tho bandwidth may well suffer some what. What do you think? Lead free solder is still mostly tin. |
Antenna materials
On 10/5/2010 8:06 AM, Jim Higgins wrote:
... I think the RF current flowing thru the crystallized bismuth will result in the Peltier occurring and will cause the outer ends of the elements to become very cold and the inner ends to become very hot and that the heat will soften the inner portions and the cold will cause heavy icing on the outer portions weighing them down considerably, the combination resulting in the elements bending and destroying the antenna. You guys are just nuts to consider messing around with a device capable of emitting Orgone Radiation! I mean, you may doom yourself to a life of having to use medical marijuana to alleviate the migraine headaches and pain! Not even getting into the heavy genetic damage which is likely to occur! Regards, JS |
Antenna materials
I think I will stick with good ole lightweight and relatively cheap Al
You Miny Um. |
Antenna materials
On 10/5/2010 9:46 AM, R.Scott wrote:
I think I will stick with good ole lightweight and relatively cheap Al You Miny Um. Aye! Beer and aluminum! That is the way to go ... grin Regards, JS |
Antenna materials
|
Antenna materials
On Oct 5, 2:12*pm, Owen Duffy wrote:
Art Unwin wrote in Now you can't coat your elements with it but *if you have a solder bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi tho bandwidth may well suffer some what. What do you think? I am not sure whether you are considering coating the elements with solder, tin, or bismuth... but they *all* degrade the RF resistance of an aluminium element. Nevertheless, hams are suckers for snake oil salesmen. Just look at the products sold for antenna wire, open wire feed line and whips... so you might have an opportunity there Art. Owen Hmmmm! Isn't the idea to get current to flow on the surface without the skin depth problem? For instance, when you make a Meander antenna distributed loads are not existent as they cancel out. This also means that skin depth is non existant as there is no magnetic field. Thus there is nothing to prevent the current going beyond where the skin depth is usually situated where it can continue on to flow on the surface the path of least resistance. Now the element resistance is of no concern as it is not now part of the radiation circuit! Instead of two resistances we only have the one which pertains to radiation, the sole object of a radiator. Capacitance and inductance does nothing to advance radiation, tho it is quite useful to have in other areas of science so why fool with it? Magnetism and polarization only comes into the picture after propagation is initiated when particles/electrons are ejected with helical spin and acceleration which generates various movements, fields etc after the fact. Remember, for both transmission and receive the only object that can break up the parts of electrical and magnetic fields together with time varying current is the Faraday cage, so it is useful to start with the cage function to get a true story of radiation. A radiator is only efficient when you can present a flow path for applied current where the source becomes totally resistive. I threw Bismuth in since it is part and parcel of the superconductor scenario. grin." Super" has many pleasant conoctations for a salesman to use. |
Antenna materials
On Oct 5, 8:16*pm, Art Unwin wrote:
On Oct 5, 2:12*pm, Owen Duffy wrote: Art Unwin wrote in Now you can't coat your elements with it but *if you have a solder bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi tho bandwidth may well suffer some what. What do you think? I am not sure whether you are considering coating the elements with solder, tin, or bismuth... but they *all* degrade the RF resistance of an aluminium element. Nevertheless, hams are suckers for snake oil salesmen. Just look at the products sold for antenna wire, open wire feed line and whips... so you might have an opportunity there Art. Owen Hmmmm! Isn't the idea to get current to flow on the surface without the skin depth problem? For instance, when you make a Meander antenna distributed loads are not existent as they cancel out. This also means that skin depth is non existant as there is no magnetic field. Thus there is nothing to prevent the current going beyond where the skin depth is usually situated where it can continue on to flow on the surface the path of least resistance. Now the element resistance is of no concern as it is not now part of the radiation circuit! * Instead of two resistances we only have the one which pertains to radiation, the sole object of a radiator. Capacitance and inductance does nothing to advance radiation, tho it is quite useful to have in other areas of science so why fool with it? Magnetism and polarization only comes into the picture after propagation is initiated when particles/electrons are ejected with helical spin and acceleration which generates various movements, fields etc after the fact. Remember, for both transmission and receive the only object that can break up the parts of electrical and magnetic fields together with time varying current is the Faraday cage, so it is useful to start with the cage function to get a true story of radiation. A radiator is only efficient when you can present a flow path for applied current where the source becomes totally resistive. I threw Bismuth in since it is part and parcel of the superconductor scenario. grin." Super" has many pleasant conoctations for a salesman to use. you see art, they just don't understand how the magical levitating solar neutrinos will jump from the diamagnetic bismuth much more efficiently than from aluminum... and they never will understand until you can explain how my ferromagnetic vertical antennas that obviously can't support a coating of your magical levitating solar neutrinos could possibly work at all. |
Antenna materials
On 10/5/2010 10:06 AM, Jim Higgins wrote:
On Mon, 4 Oct 2010 19:31:38 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin wrote: Antennas usually are made of aluminum as copper is somewhat heavier and silver and gold is to expensive. Since lead is now banned in a lot of places especially with solder you can now buy solder that is doped with Bismuth ! Now you can't coat your elements with it but if you have a solder bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi tho bandwidth may well suffer some what. What do you think? As we all know, you are CLUELESS! And you never check underlying facts. Never. Ever. I think the RF current flowing thru the crystallized bismuth will result in the Peltier occurring and will cause the outer ends of the elements to become very cold and the inner ends to become very hot and that the heat will soften the inner portions and the cold will cause heavy icing on the outer portions weighing them down considerably, the combination resulting in the elements bending and destroying the antenna. ` As the Brothers Guinness said in their famous television ads - "BRILLIANT!!" tom K0TAR |
Antenna materials
On Oct 5, 5:58*pm, K1TTT wrote:
On Oct 5, 8:16*pm, Art Unwin wrote: On Oct 5, 2:12*pm, Owen Duffy wrote: Art Unwin wrote in Now you can't coat your elements with it but *if you have a solder bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi tho bandwidth may well suffer some what. What do you think? I am not sure whether you are considering coating the elements with solder, tin, or bismuth... but they *all* degrade the RF resistance of an aluminium element. Nevertheless, hams are suckers for snake oil salesmen. Just look at the products sold for antenna wire, open wire feed line and whips... so you might have an opportunity there Art. Owen Hmmmm! Isn't the idea to get current to flow on the surface without the skin depth problem? For instance, when you make a Meander antenna distributed loads are not existent as they cancel out. This also means that skin depth is non existant as there is no magnetic field. Thus there is nothing to prevent the current going beyond where the skin depth is usually situated where it can continue on to flow on the surface the path of least resistance. Now the element resistance is of no concern as it is not now part of the radiation circuit! * Instead of two resistances we only have the one which pertains to radiation, the sole object of a radiator. Capacitance and inductance does nothing to advance radiation, tho it is quite useful to have in other areas of science so why fool with it? Magnetism and polarization only comes into the picture after propagation is initiated when particles/electrons are ejected with helical spin and acceleration which generates various movements, fields etc after the fact. Remember, for both transmission and receive the only object that can break up the parts of electrical and magnetic fields together with time varying current is the Faraday cage, so it is useful to start with the cage function to get a true story of radiation. A radiator is only efficient when you can present a flow path for applied current where the source becomes totally resistive. I threw Bismuth in since it is part and parcel of the superconductor scenario. grin." Super" has many pleasant conoctations for a salesman to use. you see art, they just don't understand how the magical levitating solar neutrinos will jump from the diamagnetic bismuth much more efficiently than from aluminum... and they never will understand until you can explain how my ferromagnetic vertical antennas that obviously can't support a coating of your magical levitating solar neutrinos could possibly work at all. Ferromagnetic materials will work but the diamagnetic vectors get a bit swamped in competition. Any good physics book will explain that phenomina or alternatively look up wilkpedia. Didn't you once state that physics was your major? Your statements appears to put that as a matter of fiction. Why not explain radiation from your point of view? You can have your posting removed after a given time in case you embarrase yourself. Tom where did all these weirdoes come from ? |
Antenna materials
On Oct 6, 12:04*am, Art Unwin wrote:
On Oct 5, 5:58*pm, K1TTT wrote: On Oct 5, 8:16*pm, Art Unwin wrote: On Oct 5, 2:12*pm, Owen Duffy wrote: Art Unwin wrote in Now you can't coat your elements with it but *if you have a solder bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi tho bandwidth may well suffer some what. What do you think? I am not sure whether you are considering coating the elements with solder, tin, or bismuth... but they *all* degrade the RF resistance of an aluminium element. Nevertheless, hams are suckers for snake oil salesmen. Just look at the products sold for antenna wire, open wire feed line and whips... so you might have an opportunity there Art. Owen Hmmmm! Isn't the idea to get current to flow on the surface without the skin depth problem? For instance, when you make a Meander antenna distributed loads are not existent as they cancel out. This also means that skin depth is non existant as there is no magnetic field. Thus there is nothing to prevent the current going beyond where the skin depth is usually situated where it can continue on to flow on the surface the path of least resistance. Now the element resistance is of no concern as it is not now part of the radiation circuit! * Instead of two resistances we only have the one which pertains to radiation, the sole object of a radiator. Capacitance and inductance does nothing to advance radiation, tho it is quite useful to have in other areas of science so why fool with it? Magnetism and polarization only comes into the picture after propagation is initiated when particles/electrons are ejected with helical spin and acceleration which generates various movements, fields etc after the fact. Remember, for both transmission and receive the only object that can break up the parts of electrical and magnetic fields together with time varying current is the Faraday cage, so it is useful to start with the cage function to get a true story of radiation. A radiator is only efficient when you can present a flow path for applied current where the source becomes totally resistive. I threw Bismuth in since it is part and parcel of the superconductor scenario. grin." Super" has many pleasant conoctations for a salesman to use. you see art, they just don't understand how the magical levitating solar neutrinos will jump from the diamagnetic bismuth much more efficiently than from aluminum... and they never will understand until you can explain how my ferromagnetic vertical antennas that obviously can't support a coating of your magical levitating solar neutrinos could possibly work at all. Ferromagnetic materials will work but the diamagnetic vectors get a bit swamped in competition. Any good physics book will explain that phenomina or alternatively look up wilkpedia. Didn't you once state that physics was your major? Your statements appears to put that as a matter of fiction. Why not explain radiation from your point of view? You can have your posting removed after a given time in case you embarrase yourself. *Tom where did all these weirdoes come from ? no, i'm an ee, not a scientist... my company wanted to change my title to scientist once, i told them only if i could put 'mad' in front of it and they let me keep the engineer title. I have to go with the writings of the masters as mr. b would put it, except i got with the final set of maxwell's equations as published in books like jackson and other contemporary writers... which, by the way, do explain that gauss'es law is a part of maxwell's equations and is a dynamic equation even without the explicit 't' in it. |
Antenna materials
On Oct 5, 7:04*pm, tom wrote:
On 10/5/2010 10:06 AM, Jim Higgins wrote: On Mon, 4 Oct 2010 19:31:38 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin *wrote: Antennas usually are made of aluminum as copper is somewhat heavier and silver and gold is to expensive. Since lead is now banned in a lot of places especially with solder you can now buy solder that is doped with Bismuth ! Now you can't coat your elements with it but *if you have a solder bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi tho bandwidth may well suffer some what. What do you think? As we all know, you are CLUELESS! *And you never check underlying facts.. * Never. *Ever. I think the RF current flowing thru the crystallized bismuth will result in the Peltier occurring and will cause the outer ends of the elements to become very cold and the inner ends to become very hot and that the heat will soften the inner portions and the cold will cause heavy icing on the outer portions weighing them down considerably, the combination resulting in the elements bending and destroying the antenna. ` As the Brothers Guinness said in their famous television ads - "BRILLIANT!!" tom K0TAR Tom, you like many others, feel that your postings are like a private E mail, but it is not. Your writings and past postings are available for all to see and judge what sort of person you are. You continually embarrase yourself. I invite all to view your past postings to see what manner of man you really are. As for the Peltier effect that you are referring to, it is you who needs to check the facts as to who posted that. It certainly was not I. But if you have the real facts then spit it out to show that you know them and can prove it, until then you are spitting into the wind. So Tom back to you. What are the "real" facts that you wish to point to and be specific with respect to the connecting physics for supporting data? You may have a open physics book at your side when responding so you can read up on diamagnetic, levitation, neutrons etc since it is very clear that you were able to jump semesters at will leaving large holes in your educational standing which does not allow you to debate in a reasonable fashion. OR You can continue with verbal bullying without contribution or follow up discussion with other members of the group. |
Antenna materials
On Oct 5, 7:39*pm, K1TTT wrote:
On Oct 6, 12:04*am, Art Unwin wrote: On Oct 5, 5:58*pm, K1TTT wrote: On Oct 5, 8:16*pm, Art Unwin wrote: On Oct 5, 2:12*pm, Owen Duffy wrote: Art Unwin wrote in Now you can't coat your elements with it but *if you have a solder bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi tho bandwidth may well suffer some what. What do you think? I am not sure whether you are considering coating the elements with solder, tin, or bismuth... but they *all* degrade the RF resistance of an aluminium element. Nevertheless, hams are suckers for snake oil salesmen. Just look at the products sold for antenna wire, open wire feed line and whips... so you might have an opportunity there Art. Owen Hmmmm! Isn't the idea to get current to flow on the surface without the skin depth problem? For instance, when you make a Meander antenna distributed loads are not existent as they cancel out. This also means that skin depth is non existant as there is no magnetic field. Thus there is nothing to prevent the current going beyond where the skin depth is usually situated where it can continue on to flow on the surface the path of least resistance. Now the element resistance is of no concern as it is not now part of the radiation circuit! * Instead of two resistances we only have the one which pertains to radiation, the sole object of a radiator. Capacitance and inductance does nothing to advance radiation, tho it is quite useful to have in other areas of science so why fool with it? Magnetism and polarization only comes into the picture after propagation is initiated when particles/electrons are ejected with helical spin and acceleration which generates various movements, fields etc after the fact. Remember, for both transmission and receive the only object that can break up the parts of electrical and magnetic fields together with time varying current is the Faraday cage, so it is useful to start with the cage function to get a true story of radiation. A radiator is only efficient when you can present a flow path for applied current where the source becomes totally resistive. I threw Bismuth in since it is part and parcel of the superconductor scenario. grin." Super" has many pleasant conoctations for a salesman to use. you see art, they just don't understand how the magical levitating solar neutrinos will jump from the diamagnetic bismuth much more efficiently than from aluminum... and they never will understand until you can explain how my ferromagnetic vertical antennas that obviously can't support a coating of your magical levitating solar neutrinos could possibly work at all. Ferromagnetic materials will work but the diamagnetic vectors get a bit swamped in competition. Any good physics book will explain that phenomina or alternatively look up wilkpedia. Didn't you once state that physics was your major? Your statements appears to put that as a matter of fiction. Why not explain radiation from your point of view? You can have your posting removed after a given time in case you embarrase yourself. *Tom where did all these weirdoes come from ? no, i'm an ee, not a scientist... my company wanted to change my title to scientist once, i told them only if i could put 'mad' in front of it and they let me keep the engineer title. *I have to go with the writings of the masters as mr. b would put it, except i got with the final set of maxwell's equations as published in books like jackson and other contemporary writers... which, by the way, do explain that gauss's law is a part of maxwell's equations and is a dynamic equation even without the explicit 't' in it. So what is your point exactly? Are you holding on to radiation by "waves" instead of "particles" or what? What is the specific relevant law of Gauss that you are referring to? Show me specifically what Jackson states so I can get a handle on the specific problem in question. I have no idea what is troubling you whether it be levitation which you call "magical", "Neutrinos" which occupy every cubic metre in the atmosphere on Earth. Or, the "double slot" experiment which opposes a particular law of Gauss. Spit it out specifically and I and the rest of the group can then discuss it. As an aside, Gauss's work is in the form of cgs units which are not the same as Maxwell's units so you have to be careful as how you explain "this matches that" in your response when and if it comes up. Regards Art |
Antenna materials
On 10/5/2010 8:07 PM, Art Unwin wrote:
On Oct 5, 7:04 pm, wrote: On 10/5/2010 10:06 AM, Jim Higgins wrote: I think the RF current flowing thru the crystallized bismuth will result in the Peltier occurring and will cause the outer ends of the elements to become very cold and the inner ends to become very hot and that the heat will soften the inner portions and the cold will cause heavy icing on the outer portions weighing them down considerably, the combination resulting in the elements bending and destroying the antenna. ` As the Brothers Guinness said in their famous television ads - "BRILLIANT!!" tom K0TAR Tom, you like many others, feel that your postings are like a private E mail, but it is not. Your writings and past postings are available for all to see and judge what sort of person you are. You continually embarrase yourself. I invite all to view your past postings to see what manner of man you really are. As for the Peltier effect that you are referring to, it is you who needs to check the facts as to who posted that. It certainly was not I. But if you have the real facts then spit it out to show that you know them and can prove it, until then you are spitting into the wind. So Tom back to you. What are the "real" facts that you wish to point to and be specific with respect to the connecting physics for supporting data? You may have a open physics book at your side when responding so you can read up on diamagnetic, levitation, neutrons etc since it is very clear that you were able to jump semesters at will leaving large holes in your educational standing which does not allow you to debate in a reasonable fashion. OR You can continue with verbal bullying without contribution or follow up discussion with other members of the group. Anyone reading can see you responded, mostly anyway, to Jim, not to me, although I can guess that your feelings are pointed my way regardless. Such is life to be tilted at by a Quixote pretender. tom K0TAR |
Antenna materials
On Oct 5, 8:39*pm, Art Unwin wrote:
On Oct 5, 7:39*pm, K1TTT wrote: On Oct 6, 12:04*am, Art Unwin wrote: On Oct 5, 5:58*pm, K1TTT wrote: On Oct 5, 8:16*pm, Art Unwin wrote: On Oct 5, 2:12*pm, Owen Duffy wrote: Art Unwin wrote in Now you can't coat your elements with it but *if you have a solder bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi tho bandwidth may well suffer some what. What do you think? I am not sure whether you are considering coating the elements with solder, tin, or bismuth... but they *all* degrade the RF resistance of an aluminium element. Nevertheless, hams are suckers for snake oil salesmen. Just look at the products sold for antenna wire, open wire feed line and whips.... so you might have an opportunity there Art. Owen Hmmmm! Isn't the idea to get current to flow on the surface without the skin depth problem? For instance, when you make a Meander antenna distributed loads are not existent as they cancel out. This also means that skin depth is non existant as there is no magnetic field. Thus there is nothing to prevent the current going beyond where the skin depth is usually situated where it can continue on to flow on the surface the path of least resistance. Now the element resistance is of no concern as it is not now part of the radiation circuit! * Instead of two resistances we only have the one which pertains to radiation, the sole object of a radiator. Capacitance and inductance does nothing to advance radiation, tho it is quite useful to have in other areas of science so why fool with it? Magnetism and polarization only comes into the picture after propagation is initiated when particles/electrons are ejected with helical spin and acceleration which generates various movements, fields etc after the fact. Remember, for both transmission and receive the only object that can break up the parts of electrical and magnetic fields together with time varying current is the Faraday cage, so it is useful to start with the cage function to get a true story of radiation. A radiator is only efficient when you can present a flow path for applied current where the source becomes totally resistive. I threw Bismuth in since it is part and parcel of the superconductor scenario. grin." Super" has many pleasant conoctations for a salesman to use. you see art, they just don't understand how the magical levitating solar neutrinos will jump from the diamagnetic bismuth much more efficiently than from aluminum... and they never will understand until you can explain how my ferromagnetic vertical antennas that obviously can't support a coating of your magical levitating solar neutrinos could possibly work at all. Ferromagnetic materials will work but the diamagnetic vectors get a bit swamped in competition. Any good physics book will explain that phenomina or alternatively look up wilkpedia. Didn't you once state that physics was your major? Your statements appears to put that as a matter of fiction. Why not explain radiation from your point of view? You can have your posting removed after a given time in case you embarrase yourself. *Tom where did all these weirdoes come from ? no, i'm an ee, not a scientist... my company wanted to change my title to scientist once, i told them only if i could put 'mad' in front of it and they let me keep the engineer title. *I have to go with the writings of the masters as mr. b would put it, except i got with the final set of maxwell's equations as published in books like jackson and other contemporary writers... which, by the way, do explain that gauss's law is a part of maxwell's equations and is a dynamic equation even without the explicit 't' in it. So what is your point exactly? Are you holding on to radiation by "waves" instead of "particles" or what? What is the specific relevant law of Gauss that you are referring to? Show me specifically what Jackson states so I can get a handle on the specific problem in question. I have no idea what is troubling you whether it be levitation which you call "magical", "Neutrinos" which occupy every cubic metre in the atmosphere on Earth. Or, the "double slot" experiment which opposes a particular law of Gauss. Spit it out specifically and I and the rest of the group can then discuss it. As an aside, Gauss's work is in the form of cgs units which are not the same as Maxwell's units so you have to be careful as how you explain "this matches that" in your response when and if it comes up. Regards Art With respect to the works of the Masters which one could include the books by Jackson and others. They all state that Gauss;'s law on MAGNETISM was included in Maxwell's laws or equations on radiation. I know of no text book that outlines the connection between ":statics" and the equations of Maxwell. A debate was held on this forum on the connection between statics and Maxwell which was held in denial by all. After a year or so the statement was made that" the Jackson book outlined the connection between Gauss and Maxwell" so the connection of statics was wrongly connected to the Gaussian law on" magnetics" and not his laws on "statics.". The boundary laws of Maxwell which is the basis of all of his equations are also those of statics which, when made dynamic, are the one and the same equation arrived at by Maxwell . I know of no mention in any book on radiation that equates as fact that classical physics mathematically supports the position of particles as the root of propagation which is in agreement with Einsteins laws on Relativity. Point being that mass is required for "acceleration of charge" as with particles./ electrons and to my knowledge has not been stated as the Gaussian connection to Maxwell..... anywhere! I would appreciate it if you or anybody can point to where I am in error and where your position can be determined as credible. Regards Art. |
Antenna materials
On Oct 4, 9:31*pm, Art Unwin wrote:
What do you think? It's quite well known that the best antennas are built from zircon encrusted wire, which is trimmed using only zircon encrusted tweezers. If you can look at the wire ends on a sunny day and can see noticeable tweezer glint, you know you have a world class antenna system worthy of the masters praise and endorsement. |
Antenna materials
|
Antenna materials
"Art Unwin" wrote ... So what is your point exactly? Are you holding on to radiation by "waves" instead of "particles" or what? In reality are the continuous flow and the oscillatory flow. Flow of the particles. The oscillatry flow is the wave. In the ink printer works the oscillatory flow. In antennas and the space also. With respect to the works of the Masters which one could include the books by Jackson and others. They all state that Gauss;'s law on MAGNETISM was included in Maxwell's laws or equations on radiation. I know of no text book that outlines the connection between ":statics" and the equations of Maxwell. A debate was held on this forum on the connection between statics and Maxwell which was held in denial by all. After a year or so the statement was made that" the Jackson book outlined the connection between Gauss and Maxwell" so the connection of statics was wrongly connected to the Gaussian law on" magnetics" and not his laws on "statics.". The boundary laws of Maxwell which is the basis of all of his equations are also those of statics which, when made dynamic, are the one and the same equation arrived at by Maxwell . I know of no mention in any book on radiation that equates as fact that classical physics mathematically supports the position of particles as the root of propagation which is in agreement with Einsteins laws on Relativity. Point being that mass is required for "acceleration of charge" as with particles./ electrons and to my knowledge has not been stated as the Gaussian connection to Maxwell..... anywhere! I would appreciate it if you or anybody can point to where I am in error and where your position can be determined as credible. "Maxwell equations" have nothing common with Maxwell. http://www.ivorcatt.com/2810.htm "Heaviside said that mathematics was an experimental science. He organised Maxwell's mathematical work into the four equations which we now call "Maxwell's Equations". S* |
Antenna materials
On Oct 4, 10:31*pm, Art Unwin wrote:
Antennas usually are made of aluminum as copper is somewhat heavier and silver and gold is to expensive. Since lead is now banned in a lot of places especially with solder you can now buy solder that is doped with Bismuth ! Now you can't coat your elements with it but *if you have a solder bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi tho bandwidth may well suffer some what. What do you think? Obviously a reduction in IR losses will improve any antenna. Art how much do you thing making an antenna out of silver instead of aluminum would reduce the IR losses. Jimmie |
Antenna materials
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
In reality are the continuous flow and the oscillatory flow. Flow of the particles. The oscillatry flow is the wave. In reality you are a babbling kook. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Antenna materials
Art Unwin wrote:
Antennas usually are made of aluminum as copper is somewhat heavier and silver and gold is to expensive. Since lead is now banned in a lot of places especially with solder you can now buy solder that is doped with Bismuth ! Now you can't coat your elements with it but if you have a solder bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi tho bandwidth may well suffer some what. What do you think? Since the conductivity of aluminum is about 43 times higher than that of bisimuth, I think you are babbling. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Antenna materials
|
Antenna materials
|
Antenna materials
On Wed, 6 Oct 2010 04:31:55 -0700 (PDT), JIMMIE
wrote: Obviously a reduction in IR losses will improve any antenna. Art how much do you thing making an antenna out of silver instead of aluminum would reduce the IR losses. InfraRed loss in an antenna? or perhaps: IR Voltage Loss in an antenna? or perhaps: IR Power Loss in an antenna? ************** Yes, IR loss is the entire point (and positive characteristic) of an antenna, especially if R is radiation resistance. Hmmm, IR loss could be said to be a naturally occurring fact of life along the length of any antenna if we consider the distribution of potential. Ouch, InfraRed loss could burn you - but it would be curious to note that if an antenna is truly an equal performer (transmit/receive) what would we hear from the antenna when the sun rises in the morning? As to the receive-mode phenomenon of this sunrise observation, if that antenna were coated with diamagnetic water (dew), then we would observe particles leaping (-um- steaming) off of it (with sizzle)! 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Antenna materials
On Oct 6, 2:47*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
In reality are the continuous flow and the oscillatory flow. Flow of the particles. The oscillatry flow is the wave. Seems you have it backwards. The slow-moving free electrons oscillate back and forth at HF, moving forward and backward very little (calculate it for yourself). The energy flow from source to load is in the form of photons/fields/waves traveling at the speed of light which is impossible for electrons. As far as ham radio antenna functions go, electrons and photons are the only things known to physics to be active in transferring and radiating RF energy. -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com |
Antenna materials
"Cecil Moore" wrote ... On Oct 6, 2:47 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote: In reality are the continuous flow and the oscillatory flow. Flow of the particles. The oscillatry flow is the wave. Seems you have it backwards. The slow-moving free electrons oscillate back and forth at HF, moving forward and backward very little (calculate it for yourself). Symmetrical back and forth take place only in the simple equations. In EACH wave the forth is stronger than back. The energy flow from source to load is in the form of photons/fields/waves traveling at the speed of light which is impossible for electrons. Photons in a wire? As far as ham radio antenna functions go, electrons and photons are the only things known to physics to be active in transferring and radiating RF energy. Electrons were discovered. Photons are the products of speculations. S* |
Antenna materials
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
"Cecil Moore" wrote ... On Oct 6, 2:47 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote: In reality are the continuous flow and the oscillatory flow. Flow of the particles. The oscillatry flow is the wave. Seems you have it backwards. The slow-moving free electrons oscillate back and forth at HF, moving forward and backward very little (calculate it for yourself). Symmetrical back and forth take place only in the simple equations. In EACH wave the forth is stronger than back. Babbling, work salad, nonsense. The energy flow from source to load is in the form of photons/fields/waves traveling at the speed of light which is impossible for electrons. Photons in a wire? No, you idiot. As far as ham radio antenna functions go, electrons and photons are the only things known to physics to be active in transferring and radiating RF energy. Electrons were discovered. Photons are the products of speculations. S* No, you idiot. Photons have been observed. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Antenna materials
Symmetrical back and forth take place only in the simple equations.
In EACH wave the forth is stronger than back. The intellectual product of a Stalinist education system. Or the most lucid manifesto available from the Tea Party. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Antenna materials
On 10/6/2010 2:13 PM, Richard Clark wrote:
Symmetrical back and forth take place only in the simple equations. In EACH wave the forth is stronger than back. The intellectual product of a Stalinist education system. Or the most lucid manifesto available from the Tea Party. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Ah, I almost forgot, it's election time. Could you please let it go just one election season? It is boring and repetitious crap and way beneath your normal responses. tom K0TAR |
Antenna materials
On 10/6/2010 12:24 PM, Richard Clark wrote:
On Wed, 6 Oct 2010 04:31:55 -0700 (PDT), JIMMIE wrote: Obviously a reduction in IR losses will improve any antenna. Art how much do you thing making an antenna out of silver instead of aluminum would reduce the IR losses. InfraRed loss in an antenna? or perhaps: IR Voltage Loss in an antenna? or perhaps: IR Power Loss in an antenna? ************** Yes, IR loss is the entire point (and positive characteristic) of an antenna, especially if R is radiation resistance. Hmmm, IR loss could be said to be a naturally occurring fact of life along the length of any antenna if we consider the distribution of potential. Ouch, InfraRed loss could burn you - but it would be curious to note that if an antenna is truly an equal performer (transmit/receive) what would we hear from the antenna when the sun rises in the morning? As to the receive-mode phenomenon of this sunrise observation, if that antenna were coated with diamagnetic water (dew), then we would observe particles leaping (-um- steaming) off of it (with sizzle)! 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC What an idea! IR night vision could be used to tune antennas! I redact my previous obfuscation against you Art. You are BRIALLAINT! tom K0TAR |
Antenna materials
On 10/6/2010 5:45 PM, tom wrote:
... What an idea! IR night vision could be used to tune antennas! I redact my previous obfuscation against you Art. You are BRIALLAINT! tom K0TAR First consuming Ayawaska and then putting on a 3d pair of glasses actually allows you to see the photons shooting out from the antenna. I believe it is the "time dilation effect" from the Ayawaska which is responsible for this, seemingly, "superman ability" occurring. As always, first consult your local shaman or witchdoctor before taking Ayawaska ... Regards, JS |
Antenna materials
"Richard Clark" wrote ... Symmetrical back and forth take place only in the simple equations. In EACH wave the forth is stronger than back. The intellectual product of a Stalinist education system. "It was shown by Stokes that in a water wave the particles of fluid possess, apart from their orbital motion, a steady second-order drift velocity (usually called the mass-transport velocity)." In all schools the second-order effects are neglected. In Stokes time no radio. But the above apply to all waves. You should start with the selfeducation. S* |
Antenna materials
"tom" wrote . net... On 10/6/2010 2:13 PM, Richard Clark wrote: Symmetrical back and forth take place only in the simple equations. In EACH wave the forth is stronger than back. The intellectual product of a Stalinist education system. Or the most lucid manifesto available from the Tea Party. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Ah, I almost forgot, it's electron time. And the field emissions. Could you please let it go just one electron season? It is boring and repetitious crap and way beneath your normal responses. Electrons, mass transport and the field emission are reality. EM is a myth. S* |
Antenna materials
On 10/7/2010 1:05 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
... "It was shown by Stokes that in a water wave the particles of fluid possess, apart from their orbital motion, a steady second-order drift velocity (usually called the mass-transport velocity)." ... Sounds like you are using a stream of salt water as a radiator! Is the pump Bismuth coated to prevent corrosion? Regards, JS |
Antenna materials
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 10:26:49 +0200, "Szczepan Bialek"
wrote: "tom" wrote Ah, I almost forgot, it's electron time. Evidence of the revisionist Stalinist influence. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Antenna materials
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
"Richard Clark" wrote ... Symmetrical back and forth take place only in the simple equations. In EACH wave the forth is stronger than back. The intellectual product of a Stalinist education system. "It was shown by Stokes that in a water wave the particles of fluid possess, apart from their orbital motion, a steady second-order drift velocity (usually called the mass-transport velocity)." In all schools the second-order effects are neglected. In Stokes time no radio. But the above apply to all waves. You should start with the selfeducation. S* Babbling, kook word salad. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Antenna materials
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 10:05:40 +0200, "Szczepan Bialek"
wrote: In all schools the second-order effects are neglected. Rabble of the lumpenproletariat. Continuing to wander in the fog is a sure sign of never achieving class consciousness, and is therefore worthless in the context of revolutionary struggle. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Antenna materials
Since the conductivity of aluminum is about 43 times higher than that of
bisimuth, I think you are babbling. You meant I could use the aluminum window frames as a big antenna? :) -- @~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY. / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you! /( _ )\ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.35.7 ^ ^ 00:36:01 up 8 days 1:53 1 user load average: 0.00 0.11 0.08 不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA): http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa |
Antenna materials
"John Smith" wrote ... On 10/7/2010 1:05 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote: ... "It was shown by Stokes that in a water wave the particles of fluid possess, apart from their orbital motion, a steady second-order drift velocity (usually called the mass-transport velocity)." ... Sounds like you are using a stream of salt water as a radiator! Is the pump Bismuth coated to prevent corrosion? In each radiator is a stream of electrons. The oscillating pump is in the transmitter. But where is the tank with the electrons? It is in the buried or elevated radials. R. Roy wrote: "If the earth was a perfect conductor then those currents could travel through the earth without loss, and a single, short ground rod would serve as an electrical reference point for the r-f current flowing in the antenna system. The sum of those r-f currents flowing in the earth around the monopole, and collected by that ground rod will be equal to the base current in the 1/4-wave, series-fed monopole" The soil is different in each place. The air is similar. So the elevated radials are universal. They catch the electrons from the air. S* |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:17 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com