Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"Channel Jumper" napisa? w
wiadomo?ci ...


A mobile device uses the user as the counterpoise.
A vehicle is not physically bonded to the earth - yet still works.
A Mag Mount antenna is not physically bonded to the vehicle body - hence
it uses a loop radio to antenna antenna to radio and it changes the way
the coax interacts with the antenna.
If the radio is bonded to the body and the antenna is bonded to the body
the body is capacitive. Turns the whole body into one big
counterpoise.

Maybe this is the reason why a 102 inch whip works better then a mag
mount antenna or one of those silly dual sticks on a truckers mirrors...

Not all know that:
""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."
S*

Yeah, it was thought that a long time ago and it has since been proven
to be wrong, as you have been told several times now.

Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
Rob wrote:
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Not all know that:
""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."
S*

But it is Marconi's opninion. It is not the truth, it is only an
opinion. When you like, you can say he was "not right". Or you can
just respect that he had this opinion. Your choice.

So we can move on. What is your next question about 1910's scientists?

It may be more accurate than you are giving him credit for. It was based
upon the antenna designs and frequency ranges in use at the time.

Which means it is true for specific, limited cases, but not true in general.

There has been a lot learned about electromagnetic theory in the past
100 years that this babbling idiot just ignores.

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Uzytkownik "Jeff" napisal w wiadomosci
...


Not all know that:
""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."
S*

And those who do are WRONG!!

The trouble is that you keep taking old outdated quotes, out of context,
and do not understand that theories and knowledge have moved on.

Is even one textbooks where is wrote that Marconi was WRONG?

Yes, every modern textbook on electromagnetic theory.

See Electromagnetics by Kraus and Carver, Chapter 14, Antennas and Radiation
as but one example.

Are your transmitters without any earth?

Yes, some of them are, some of them aren't.

I am checking from time to time if your knowledge have moved on.
S*

You are just babbling because you can not accept the fact that a lot was
learned after Marconi died, some of which is in direct contridiction to
some of the things he thought were true at the time.

In article ,
Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:

PL-259 connectors are called UHF connectors for a reason, when they were
designed 30mHz was UHF. And that was 30-40 years later.

My understanding is that in this context, "UHF" is not an acronym for
"ultra-high frequency". It means "Universal High Frequency"... as in,
can be used for all "high frequency" applications.

--
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!

"NM5K" wrote in message
...

http://home.comcast.net/~disk200/ru.wmv

That summed it up, nicely. Well done, OM!

"Sal" wrote in message ...


"NM5K" wrote in message
...

http://home.comcast.net/~disk200/ru.wmv

# That summed it up, nicely. Well done, OM!

Indeed. Even youts can understand the question.

Dave Platt wrote:
In article ,
Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:

PL-259 connectors are called UHF connectors for a reason, when they were
designed 30mHz was UHF. And that was 30-40 years later.

My understanding is that in this context, "UHF" is not an acronym for
"ultra-high frequency". It means "Universal High Frequency"... as in,
can be used for all "high frequency" applications.


Thanks Dave, in all the years I have been interested in radio I never heard
or read that. It does clear up a lot of questions. :-)

73,

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, N3OWJ/4X1GM/KBUH7245/KBUW5379
In 1969 the US could put a man on the moon, now teenagers just howl at it. :-(

"Ian" napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
...

Is even one textbooks where is wrote that Marconi was WRONG?

Are your transmitters without any earth?

I am checking from time to time if your knowledge have moved on.
S*


Hello Szczepan.

In general, you seem to be looking at outdated techniques and technology.

My radio doesn't need to be connected to ground/earth other than for
static/lightning reasons. The theory and technology of radio have made a
lot of progress since the time of Marconi.

Hope this is of some help.
Kindest regards from the UK,
Ian.

Hello Ian,

So the earth is necessary in your radio for the static reasons.
In my also:
"In the lower half of the mast, there was a vertical steel tube, attached to
the mast's outer structure with large insulators. This tube was grounded at
the bottom, and connected electrically to the mast structure by an
adjustable metal bar at 328 metres.[2] This technique allowed adjusting the
impedance of the mast for the transmitter and worked by applying a DC ground
at a point of low radiofrequency voltage, to conduct static charge to ground
without diminishing the radio energy. Static electrical charge can build up
to high values, even at times of no thunderstorm activity, when such tall
structures are insulated from ground. Use of this technique provides better
lightning protection than using just a spark gap at the mast feed, as is
standard at most mast radiators insulated against ground."
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_radio_tower

It seems to me that the same reasons were in Marconi times.

So I repeat my question:

""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."(Marconi in 1909).

It is still true?
S*

Szczepan Bialek wrote:
So the earth is necessary in your radio for the static reasons.
In my also:
"In the lower half of the mast, there was a vertical steel tube, attached to
the mast's outer structure with large insulators. This tube was grounded at
the bottom, and connected electrically to the mast structure by an
adjustable metal bar at 328 metres.[2] This technique allowed adjusting the
impedance of the mast for the transmitter and worked by applying a DC ground
at a point of low radiofrequency voltage, to conduct static charge to ground
without diminishing the radio energy. Static electrical charge can build up
to high values, even at times of no thunderstorm activity, when such tall
structures are insulated from ground. Use of this technique provides better
lightning protection than using just a spark gap at the mast feed, as is
standard at most mast radiators insulated against ground."
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_radio_tower

It seems to me that the same reasons were in Marconi times.

You have a big problem with comprehending, don't you?
Earlier you wrote that Marconi said that a capacitive coupling to ground
was good for HF grounding and now you want DC coupling to discharge
static electricity. Those two reasons for grounding are completely
different.

So I repeat my question:

Why do you repeat your question? It has been answered so many
times already.

"Jeff" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On 12/04/2012 09:41, Szczepan Bialek wrote:

So the earth is necessary in your radio for the static reasons.
In my also:
"In the lower half of the mast, there was a vertical steel tube, attached
to
the mast's outer structure with large insulators. This tube was grounded
at
the bottom, and connected electrically to the mast structure by an
adjustable metal bar at 328 metres.[2] This technique allowed adjusting
the
impedance of the mast for the transmitter and worked by applying a DC
ground
at a point of low radiofrequency voltage, to conduct static charge to
ground
without diminishing the radio energy. Static electrical charge can build
up
to high values, even at times of no thunderstorm activity, when such tall
structures are insulated from ground. Use of this technique provides
better
lightning protection than using just a spark gap at the mast feed, as is
standard at most mast radiators insulated against ground."
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_radio_tower

It seems to me that the same reasons were in Marconi times.

So I repeat my question:

""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."(Marconi in 1909).

It is still true?
S*



How many times do you need to be told? NO IT IS NOT TRUE, Marconi may have
been correct when he made the statement considering the equipment and
practices at the time, BUT he was not correct as a statement concerning
radio systems in general. Things move on. Your mobile phone has no earth
connection, satellites have no earth connection. Accept this and move on.

Radio on the Moon has the "earth connection". The Moon is smaller than the
Earth.
Do you think that "the earth" must be giant?

Your mobile phone has earth connection, radio on satellites and planes
have earth connection because they are on the chassis. Accept this and
move on.

Some antenna systems do have an earth connection, many don't.

All must have.

Some have them in order to work correctly, some have them for protection
against a lightening strike or a build up of static, some for both. Many
have no earth connection at all.

All must have for protection against the build up of static.
"Static electrical charge can build up to high values, even at times of no
thunderstorm activity,"
S*