Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Is the field electron emission from the tip top of antenna or not?

No.

Read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_electron_emission

Read all of it.

Then read it again until you understand it.

After you have mastered that, read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corona_discharge

Read all of it.

Then read it again until you understand it.

After you have mastered that, read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_arc

Read all of it.

Then read it again until you understand it.

If you can get this far, your question has been answered fully.

I "do not know anything about Antennas, Transmitters. Feedlines, Matching,
Efficiency,"

Obviously.

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

So Marconi was not stupid.

No, Marconi was not stupid, but he was wrong about some things because he
did not have all the information we now have 100 years later.

You, however, are very stupid.

Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Will be better to end the discussion.
S*

Would be even better when you did not start the discussion.
Remember that for next time.

On 4/16/2012 5:16 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:


To push and pull the current in and out of the capacitor, it was
necessary to have a good, solid, zero-potential reference point, and the
best one available was ground/earth (or, at sea, the hull of the ship).
So, for the types of antennas being experimented with (and used) at the
time, Marconi was absolutely correct.

Yep.. I think the frustration tends to be difficulty in understanding
that it's just one type of system, and others that do not require any
ground connection do exist.
Which means you would have to classify his statement as incorrect in
the overall larger picture. I believe most have already stated that
while some antennas do require such a connection, any "complete"
antenna does not require one.

The vast majority of my antennas do not require any ground connection
for proper operation.
Fer instance, I'm sitting out in the woods up at my recreational living
center.. I have dipoles strung up in the trees which I leave there,
and I roll the rg-58 coax up and hang it on a tree branch when I leave.
Not a ground wire, or ground connection in sight.. And works perfectly
well. Of course, you can't really see the wires here, but "S" can trust
me, there is no ground connection. The radio is sitting on that stone
bench, and the only connections are 12v to my car battery, and rg-58
coax feeding the dipoles. "I have 80 and 40 meter dipoles fed parallel
with a single coax, and can slap a tuner on it, if I want to use some
other band. " I have videos of this radio session using almost every
band from 80m to 10m.. I went through each one seeing if they were
active. They all were, up through 10m, on that day. If one wants to
hear another band, just change the "80" in the url to "40", 20", "17",
etc.. I think they should be on the server.. I think I missed 12m
though for some reason.. Maybe no one was talking when I tuned it..
But it was open to somewhere, as I recorded Rarotonga Islands on 10m.
http://home.comcast.net/~disk200/80.wmv

Also, it wouldn't have taken them long to appreciate the benefits of
bringing the antenna system to resonance on the frequency the operators
wanted (rather than it simply being an act-of-God and hope-for-the-best
affair).

But note that with Marconi's famous crossing the Atlantic experiment, I
believe there is no documentation of exactly what frequency was used.
Instead of it being something extremely low (which is what they
expected), it is now thought that the signal which travelled 3000 miles
would have been one of the many harmonic resonances of the antenna, as
this would have been excited by the extremely wide band of frequencies
created by the spark transmitter. Knowing now what frequencies cross the
Atlantic in daylight, the signal might have been as high as 10 or 15MHz
(frequencies which Marconi only dreamt about using!).

It wouldn't surprise me too much. Heck, I've been faked out more
than once when using cheap receivers, and picking up something that
was actually not on the frequency that I thought it was. :|

In article , NM5K wrote:

Yep.. I think the frustration tends to be difficulty in understanding
that it's just one type of system, and others that do not require any
ground connection do exist.

Which means you would have to classify his statement as incorrect in
the overall larger picture. I believe most have already stated that
while some antennas do require such a connection, any "complete"
antenna does not require one.

Correct.

One interesting counter-example, would be the simple one of a
full-wavelength loop of wire, which is fed with a balanced feedline
(twinlead or open-wire or ladder line), which is fed from a
fully-balanced transmitter output stage (e.g. with transformer
coupling from the driver transistors). To be extreme about it, let's
say that the transmitter is itself based on a fully-balanced
(differential) circuit, all the way back to the crystal oscillator.
It's powered by a single battery, and is installed in a plastic chassic.

This sort of antenna would have no galvanic connection to "earth" at
all. Measure the resistance or RF impedance between any part of the
antenna or feedline structure, and *anything* not part of the antenna,
and the result will be "huge".

Since it's a loop antenna, it has no "ends"... no points at which
electrons could "fly off". The net current flow going up the feedline
to the antenna will be zero, at all points - a positive current on one
side of the feedline will be exactly balanced by a negative current on
the other side of the feedline. There are no "excess" electrons or
charge flowing in either direction.

You can even insulate the antenna wires, if you wish.

It will transmit just fine, with no connection at all to "ground".
Disconnect the transmitter, install a receiver of a similar "balanced
and isolated" design, and it'll receive just as well... again, with no
connection to "ground".

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

On 4/16/2012 3:51 AM, Rob wrote:
Szczepan wrote:
The original Marconi's claim was:

In 1909 Marconi wrote:
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_priz...ni-lecture.pdf "The necessity or utility of the earth connection has been sometimes questioned, but in my opinion no practical system of wireless telegraphy exists where the instruments are not connected to earth.""By "connected to earth" I do not necessarily mean an ordinary metallicconnection as used for ordinary wire telegraphs.The earth wire may have a condenser in series with it, or it may beconnected to what is really equivalent, a capacity area placed close to thesurfaceof the ground (Fig. 4).It is now perfectly well known that a condenser, if large enough, does notprevent the passage of high frequency oscillations, and therefore in thesecasesthe earth is for all practical purposes connected to the antennae."Is the original claim wrong?S*


Yes, the original claim is wrong.
It is wrong.
Wrong.

But you are not prepared to accept that.
Please stop arguing.

He is a troll. Stopping feeding him would be the best idea.

Google "PLONK".

K0TAR

U¿ytkownik napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Is the field electron emission from the tip top of antenna or not?

No.

Read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_electron_emission

Read all of it.

Then read it again until you understand it.

After you have mastered that, read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corona_discharge

Read all of it.

Then read it again until you understand it.

After you have mastered that, read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_arc

Read all of it.

Then read it again until you understand it.

If you can get this far, your question has been answered fully.

I "do not know anything about Antennas, Transmitters. Feedlines,
Matching,
Efficiency,"

Obviously.

You are ordering me to read the above. Why you do not read it.
There is wrote:
"A further feature of the structure of negative coronas is that as the
electrons drift outwards, they encounter neutral molecules and,
withelectronegative molecules (such as oxygen and water vapor), combine to
produce negative ions. These negative ions are then attracted to the
positive uncurved electrode, completing the 'circuit'.". From: Negative
coronas. Mechanism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corona_...gative_coronas

"The difference, then, between positive and negative coronas, in the matter
of the generation of secondary electron avalanches, is that in a positive
corona they are generated by the gas surrounding the plasma region, the new
secondary electrons travelling inward, whereas in a negative corona they are
generated by the curved electrode itself, the new secondary electrons
travelling outward."

"in a negative corona the electrons are generated by the curved electrode
itself".

Is the field electron emission from the tip top of antenna or not?

S*

"NM5K" napisal w wiadomosci
...

Fer instance, I'm sitting out in the woods up at my recreational living
center.. I have dipoles strung up in the trees which I leave there,
and I roll the rg-58 coax up and hang it on a tree branch when I leave.
Not a ground wire, or ground connection in sight.. And works perfectly
well. Of course, you can't really see the wires here, but "S" can trust
me, there is no ground connection. The radio is sitting on that stone
bench, and the only connections are 12v to my car battery,

Where is the car battery?
On the stone bench or in the car?
S*

"Dave Platt" napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...

Since it's a loop antenna, it has no "ends"... no points at which
electrons could "fly off".

A loop antena have the antinodes. The points at which electrons could "fly
off".

See Fig. 2: http://www.antiquewireless.org/otb/lodge1102.htm

The net current flow going up the feedline
to the antenna will be zero, at all points - a positive current on one
side of the feedline will be exactly balanced by a negative current on
the other side of the feedline. There are no "excess" electrons or
charge flowing in either direction.

""A further feature of the structure of negative coronas is that as the
electrons drift outwards, they encounter neutral molecules and,
withelectronegative molecules (such as oxygen and water vapor), combine to
produce negative ions. These negative ions are then attracted to the
positive uncurved electrode, completing the 'circuit'.". From: Negative
coronas. Mechanism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corona_...gative_coronas

In the each antenna is the excess/deficit of electrons and "charge flowing
in either direction."
But the negative corona and the positive corona are not simmetrical.
At transmitting you have the deficit and at receiving the excess.
Without the earth the static build up and radio stop working.

You can even insulate the antenna wires, if you wish.

Can you measure the static electricity?

It will transmit just fine, with no connection at all to "ground".
Disconnect the transmitter, install a receiver of a similar "balanced
and isolated" design, and it'll receive just as well... again, with no
connection to "ground".

You will transmit just fine if you have the ground/chassis/counterpoise.
S*

Szczepan Bialek wrote:
At transmitting you have the deficit and at receiving the excess.
Without the earth the static build up and radio stop working.

How would you know that when you don't even have a transmitter?

You will transmit just fine if you have the ground/chassis/counterpoise.
S*

And without it, fine as well.