antenna physics question
 

On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 13:28:32 -0800, Art Unwin rearranged some electrons to
say:


Well it is interesting to note that the oscillation of a radiater
inplanted the notion of a wave as the eye follows the change in
amplitude which led to the assumption that the medium entered after
leaving the radiator was the Aether of which the product of surface wave
came about.

I think Art has been replaced by a random word generator.

antenna physics question
 

On Dec 13, 2:06*am, david wrote:
On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 13:28:32 -0800, Art Unwin rearranged some electrons to
say:

Well it is interesting to note that the oscillation of a radiater
inplanted the notion of a wave as the eye follows the change in
amplitude which led to the assumption that the medium entered after
leaving the radiator was the Aether of which the product of surface wave
came about.

I think Art has been replaced by a random word generator.

no, that is classic art... pseudo random bafflegab that bears no
relation to the question that was posed and wanders off into unrelated
topics. the result of too much googling combined with lack of
knowledge and a need to explain the universe so he feels important.

antenna physics question
 

On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 00:13:10 -0000, wrote:

Registered User wrote:
On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 17:32:53 -0000, wrote:

Registered User wrote:

Efficiency is a measure so it must have one or more dimensions

Efficiency is a ratio usually expressed as a percentage and has no dimensions.

The efficiency of an antenna is the radiated power divided by the input
power.

There are two dimensions in the calculation, radiated power and input
power. Although the units of measure associated with the dimensional
data may cancel the dimensional metadata doesn't.

x power/ y power = x/y

The units cancel to form a dimensionles, unitless, ratio.

This is grade school math.

unitless yes and in the example given no metadata is provided. The
result of the calculation is just a meaningless number.

What of the equation :
x units of radiated power / y units of input power
The units cancel but the metadata doesn't. The result is a number that
describes the ratio of radiated power to input power.

The phrase "dimensional metadata" is meaningless babble.

You can call it meaningless babble but in its simplest form
dimensional metadata provides meaning and additional information to
raw data. You have used dimensional metadata in this thread and
unknowningly use it every day. The phrase "80% antenna efficiency"
contains both a unitless number and dimensional metadata. In this case
the metadata describes the dimensional calculation used to produce the
result. Remove the dimensional metadata and the phrase becomes "80%".
The latter has no context and conveys no meaningful information
because it represents a ratio of two unknowns. It could be a ratio
representing antenna efficiency or the price of apples compared to the
price of oranges. Raw data without metadata is meaningless babble.

antenna physics question
 

Registered User wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 00:13:10 -0000, wrote:

Registered User wrote:
On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 17:32:53 -0000, wrote:

Registered User wrote:

Efficiency is a measure so it must have one or more dimensions

Efficiency is a ratio usually expressed as a percentage and has no dimensions.

The efficiency of an antenna is the radiated power divided by the input
power.

There are two dimensions in the calculation, radiated power and input
power. Although the units of measure associated with the dimensional
data may cancel the dimensional metadata doesn't.

x power/ y power = x/y

The units cancel to form a dimensionles, unitless, ratio.

This is grade school math.

unitless yes and in the example given no metadata is provided. The
result of the calculation is just a meaningless number.

What of the equation :
x units of radiated power / y units of input power
The units cancel but the metadata doesn't. The result is a number that
describes the ratio of radiated power to input power.

2 watt / 10 watt = 0.2

No "metadata".

If the 2 watts is the radiated power of an antenna and the 10 watts is the
input power, the antenna efficiency is 0.2 or 20% since efficiency is normally
expressed as a percentage.

If the 2 watts is the output power of some circuit and the 10 watts is the
input power, the circuit has a gain of 0.2 or -7db.

If the input energy to a heat engine is 10 joules and the output energy is
2 joules, the efficiency of the engine is:

100 * (2 joule / 10 joule) = 20%



--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

antenna physics question
 

Registered User wrote:

You can call it meaningless babble but in its simplest form
dimensional metadata provides meaning and additional information to
raw data.

Yes, meaningless babble.

The phrase "antenna efficiency is 80%" says everything you need to know.

The phrase "engine efficiency is 35%" says everything yoy need to know.

And if antennas is the topic to begin with, the phrase "efficiency is 80%"
says everything you need to know.

No "dimensional metadata" required.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

antenna physics question
 

On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 08:34:39 -0500, Registered User
wrote:

The phrase "80% antenna efficiency"
contains both a unitless number and dimensional metadata.

Actually, it doesn't - you are filling in the blanks with presumption.
Given that "efficiency" has been hijacked, the phrase above could as
easily relate to wind load. 80% survival rate at 100 mph. I could
well anticipate the counter-argument that "antenna efficiency" as you
intend it is power based, and I would counter-counter that power
delivered to the end user is far below 80% by 6 to 9 orders of
magnitude. There is nothing efficient about 79.999999% of the power
warming clouds and worms. HOWEVER, if the intended recipient receives
even that miniscule power with full quieting, then it is in fact 100%
efficient. In that regard, 80% and 100% as figures become meaningless
when they are both applied to the same statement of efficiency.

In this case
the metadata describes the dimensional calculation used to produce the
result. Remove the dimensional metadata and the phrase becomes "80%".

No, efficiency in engineering terms has always been well understood
and does not embrace this adornment. In an earlier posting I've seen
the distinction of miles-per-gallon and passenger-miles-per-gallon
stretched over the argument to fit it to efficiency. No, these two
comparisons (and what you largely characterize as the need to include
Metadata) are "figure of merit" measures. FOM is also dimensionless
but demands the Metadata you speak of.

FOM could easily lead you into a very energy (the engineering
consideration) inefficient solution (due to social or economic
considerations, eg. passenger-miles-per-gallon).

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

antenna physics question
 

On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 18:02:55 -0000, wrote:

Registered User wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 00:13:10 -0000, wrote:

Registered User wrote:
On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 17:32:53 -0000, wrote:

Registered User wrote:

Efficiency is a measure so it must have one or more dimensions

Efficiency is a ratio usually expressed as a percentage and has no dimensions.

The efficiency of an antenna is the radiated power divided by the input
power.

There are two dimensions in the calculation, radiated power and input
power. Although the units of measure associated with the dimensional
data may cancel the dimensional metadata doesn't.

x power/ y power = x/y

The units cancel to form a dimensionles, unitless, ratio.

This is grade school math.

unitless yes and in the example given no metadata is provided. The
result of the calculation is just a meaningless number.

What of the equation :
x units of radiated power / y units of input power
The units cancel but the metadata doesn't. The result is a number that
describes the ratio of radiated power to input power.

2 watt / 10 watt = 0.2

No "metadata".

Yes no metadata beyond the UOM and when the UOMs cancel the result is
a bare number. Twenty percent of what?

If the 2 watts is the radiated power of an antenna and the 10 watts is the
input power, the antenna efficiency is 0.2 or 20% since efficiency is normally
expressed as a percentage.

Now you're adding metadata to provide information about what the 0.2
or 20% means.

If the 2 watts is the output power of some circuit and the 10 watts is the
input power, the circuit has a gain of 0.2 or -7db.

If the input energy to a heat engine is 10 joules and the output energy is
2 joules, the efficiency of the engine is:

100 * (2 joule / 10 joule) = 20%

A selected calculated expression provides a ratio which resolved to a
value of three-tenths. Which of the three previously shown
expressions, if any, was selected to produced the result 0.3?

A - antenna efficiency
B - engine efficiency
C - circuit efficiency
D - none of the above

It's a simple question with no metadata provided about the calculated
expression arguments and no metadata associated with the result. In a
nutshell, no metadata what so ever. If metadata is unimportant then
there should be no problem answering the question.

antenna physics question
 

On Dec 13, 7:32*pm, Registered User wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 18:02:55 -0000, wrote:
Registered User wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 00:13:10 -0000, wrote:

Registered User wrote:
On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 17:32:53 -0000, wrote:

Registered User wrote:

Efficiency is a measure so it must have one or more dimensions

Efficiency is a ratio usually expressed as a percentage and has no dimensions.

The efficiency of an antenna is the radiated power divided by the input
power.

There are two dimensions in the calculation, radiated power and input
power. Although the units of measure associated with the dimensional
data may cancel the dimensional metadata doesn't.

x power/ y power = x/y

The units cancel to form a dimensionles, unitless, ratio.

This is grade school math.

unitless yes and in the example given no metadata is provided. The
result of the calculation is just a meaningless number.

What of the equation :
* * x units of radiated power / y units of input power
The units cancel but the metadata doesn't. The result is a number that
describes the ratio of radiated power to input power.

2 watt / 10 watt = 0.2

No "metadata".

Yes no metadata beyond the UOM and when the UOMs cancel the result is
a bare number. Twenty percent of what?

If the 2 watts is the radiated power of an antenna and the 10 watts is the
input power, the antenna efficiency is 0.2 or 20% since efficiency is normally
expressed as a percentage.

Now you're adding metadata to provide information about what the 0.2
or 20% means.

If the 2 watts is the output power of some circuit and the 10 watts is the
input power, the circuit has a gain of 0.2 or -7db.

If the input energy to a heat engine is 10 joules and the output energy is
2 joules, the efficiency of the engine is:

100 * (2 joule / 10 joule) = 20%

A selected calculated expression provides a ratio which resolved to a
value of three-tenths. Which of the three previously shown
expressions, if any, was selected to produced the result 0.3?

A - antenna efficiency
B - engine efficiency
C - circuit efficiency
D - none of the above

It's a simple question with no metadata provided about the calculated
expression arguments and no metadata associated with the result. In a
nutshell, no metadata what so ever. If metadata is unimportant then
there should be no problem answering the question.

the answer is 42

antenna physics question
 

Registered User wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 18:02:55 -0000, wrote:

Registered User wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 00:13:10 -0000, wrote:

Registered User wrote:
On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 17:32:53 -0000, wrote:

Registered User wrote:

Efficiency is a measure so it must have one or more dimensions

Efficiency is a ratio usually expressed as a percentage and has no dimensions.

The efficiency of an antenna is the radiated power divided by the input
power.

There are two dimensions in the calculation, radiated power and input
power. Although the units of measure associated with the dimensional
data may cancel the dimensional metadata doesn't.

x power/ y power = x/y

The units cancel to form a dimensionles, unitless, ratio.

This is grade school math.

unitless yes and in the example given no metadata is provided. The
result of the calculation is just a meaningless number.

What of the equation :
x units of radiated power / y units of input power
The units cancel but the metadata doesn't. The result is a number that
describes the ratio of radiated power to input power.

2 watt / 10 watt = 0.2

No "metadata".

Yes no metadata beyond the UOM and when the UOMs cancel the result is
a bare number. Twenty percent of what?


Have you the slightest clue what the word "context" means?

"Antenna efficiency is 20%" has all the information required and if the
discussion is about antennas, "efficiency is 20%" has all the information
required.



--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

antenna physics question
 

On 12/12/2010 7:44 PM, Art Unwin wrote:
snip

Metadata is just a expanded project for archival analysis. It is not
intended to revise language
in various countries so scientific works and patent will not be
withdrawn by non conformance with the program by being termed
"meaningless" with respect to the new project.
The project has had numorous changes and revisions and certainly has
not yet arrived in its final form in libraries and archival uses in
computer programs There are no plans as yet to announce that most
scientific data is to be revised or declared illegal , patents
overturned etc Or the institution of such projects where computer
language will be taught in schools as a globalization of the new
speech or verbal communication of the day in the way Fortran was once
considered since thinkers of the computer era are still in a state of
flux as to what should be imposed and who has the authority to change.
There will be many enforcement programmers milling around to spread
virus regarding the program but generally these self appointed
programmers and the like are just trying to impose a new regime on the
public at hand via the imposition
of expansion regulations in a global fashion

Folks, I think he's about due for a week or 3 disappearance again. The
white coated men can't be far away.

tom
K0TAR