Szczepan Bialek wrote:

It is not true. You know that.

Marconi was wrong.

Most of the antennas in use today were not invented until after Marconi.

Marconi would be totally baffled if he were shown a helical, yagi or slot
antenna.

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"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*

It makes no difference.

Ian wrote:


I feel it is awkward to say that Marconi was wrong even though we now know
this is the case. Personally, I'd say that Marconi's opinion that "no
practical system of wireless telegraphy exists where the instruments are not
connected to earth" obviously related to his own use of wireless. As I
understand it, Marconi's aerials were not resonant at the frequency he was
using. They would therefore be a mis-match to his radios and this situation
was alleviated by using connections to earth.

Little of the technology in use today was known in Marconi's time.

Marconi knew nothing of resonance, impedance, or electromagnetic field
theory; it all came after his time.

Marconi would have been totally baffled if shown a helical, slot, yagi,
or any number of antennas invented after his time in common use today.

The only reference antenna Marconi had was a wire of some sort fed against
ground.

For that particular type of antenna, Marconi was correct, but his statement
is NOT correct for antennas in general.

wrote in message
...
Ian wrote:


Little of the technology in use today was known in Marconi's time.

Marconi knew nothing of resonance, impedance, or electromagnetic field
theory; it all came after his time.

Marconi would have been totally baffled if shown a helical, slot, yagi,
or any number of antennas invented after his time in common use today.

The only reference antenna Marconi had was a wire of some sort fed against
ground.

For that particular type of antenna, Marconi was correct, but his
statement
is NOT correct for antennas in general.


Hello again.

I bet that Marconi would have been very wiling to learn about new theory and
technology ... unlike some people.

Regards, Ian.

Ian wrote:
wrote in message
...
Ian wrote:


Little of the technology in use today was known in Marconi's time.

Marconi knew nothing of resonance, impedance, or electromagnetic field
theory; it all came after his time.

Marconi would have been totally baffled if shown a helical, slot, yagi,
or any number of antennas invented after his time in common use today.

The only reference antenna Marconi had was a wire of some sort fed against
ground.

For that particular type of antenna, Marconi was correct, but his
statement
is NOT correct for antennas in general.


Hello again.

I bet that Marconi would have been very wiling to learn about new theory and
technology ... unlike some people.

Regards, Ian.

I would also bet Marconi would not stubornly cling to something said a 100
years before his time as being absolutely correct.

wrote in message ...

Ian wrote:
wrote in message
...
Ian wrote:


Little of the technology in use today was known in Marconi's time.

Marconi knew nothing of resonance, impedance, or electromagnetic field
theory; it all came after his time.

Marconi would have been totally baffled if shown a helical, slot, yagi,
or any number of antennas invented after his time in common use today.

The only reference antenna Marconi had was a wire of some sort fed
against
ground.

For that particular type of antenna, Marconi was correct, but his
statement
is NOT correct for antennas in general.


Hello again.

I bet that Marconi would have been very wiling to learn about new theory
and
technology ... unlike some people.

Regards, Ian.

# I would also bet Marconi would not stubornly cling to something said a 100
# years before his time as being absolutely correct.

IMHO the guy is just jerking your chain by deliberately being dense. The
questions are nonsensical and remind me of that old "Eliza" software that
would take your words and run you around in endless circles.

On 4/17/2012 3:01 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
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*



It doesn't matter. 12v is 12v.. But to answer your question,
I open the hood of the car, and attach the wires to the battery
while it's in the car. That way I can start the car to charge
the battery every once in a while.
But the power source of the radio has nothing whatsoever to do with
the antenna. I could place the battery anywhere and the operation would
be the same. The car is not part of the antenna. The *complete* antenna
is suspended between a couple of oak trees well over my head.
The antenna is decoupled from the feed line. And there are no
connections to ground. One could consider the negative power lead
as connecting to a "chassis", IE: the body of the car, but that is
a DC connection, not RF.
Moving the battery would make no difference whatsoever in the
performance of the antenna.

"Wayne" wrote in message
...


wrote in message ...


IMHO the guy is just jerking your chain by deliberately being dense. The
questions are nonsensical and remind me of that old "Eliza" software that
would take your words and run you around in endless circles.

Hello Wayne.

Your humble opinion is correct. The argument has indeed gone in circles.
Sometimes I wonder if he's using a translation engine to handle English.

Regards, Ian.

wrote in message
...

Hello again.

I bet that Marconi would have been very wiling to learn about new theory
and
technology ... unlike some people.

Regards, Ian.

I would also bet Marconi would not stubornly cling to something said a 100
years before his time as being absolutely correct.

Hello again.

I agree. I'm sure that Marconi was bright enough to investigate new ideas. I
was at a social event with his widow and daughter a long time ago but there
wasn't
time to ask her about him.

Regards, Ian.

On 4/17/2012 10:47 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
napisal w wiadomosci
...
Szczepan 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?

But my "friend" Marconi had a lot. He wrote:
"but in my opinion no practical system of wireless telegraphy
exists
where the instruments are not connected to earth."

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

And without it, fine as well.

It is not true. You know that.
S*

I guess all the people I talk to using that portable rig
are just a figment of my imagination?
And likewise here at the house where most of my systems are
ungrounded..
It's actually quite astounding.. I've worked about 29
zillion people using various ungrounded antenna systems that don't work.

How did I pull off such a feat? Did I scream real loud?
Did I hire R. Lee Ermey to scream for me? He's pretty good at it..
Maybe I built a big fire behind the radio, and sent smoke signals..
I suppose that could be a viable explanation, being as that land was
Indian Territory until a couple of years before Marconi made that
statement. :\
I don't own any war drums, so we would have to rule those out.. :|
Maybe I pass notes around the country on the backs of tarantulas..
They usually don't mind as long as I don't use a hat pin to attach
the notes to their backs.
http://home.comcast.net/~disk100/oct17-4.jpg