"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
.. .

Hello Szczepan
No, I did not say that Marconi was correct. I did say that the earth
connection is not necessary in order to receive signals. I suspect that
your English is not as good as we think.

But you wrote that your radio have the earth/chassis.
S*


Hello again Szczepan. I rarely ever use the term "chassis" and I don't
remember mentioning an earth on a radio.

For clarification - radios can and do transmit and receive successfully
without any connection to earth, either the actual ground or to an
artificial earth.

Kindest regards, Ian.

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
.. .
Are we discussing spark transmission and non-resonant aerials?

The earth/chassis and the field electron emission..
S*


Good afternoon Szczepan.
You didn't answer my question about aerials.
Are you discussing resonant or non-resonant aerials, please?

Kindest regards, Ian.

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
.. .

A dipole with one ene earthed becomes a monopole.
Hertz transmitter is a dipole. The Tesla's is a monopole.
Todays dipoles are simply the two monopoles.
Thanks this the waves are polarized.

But the question is if Marconi was right:"
"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."

Best regards,
S*
Hello Szczepan.
A dipole with one end earthed wouldn't be a monopole.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipole_antenna
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopole_antenna

Best wishes, Ian.

Well I am going to be unusually kind today, since it is Sunday and also because I am going to show some intelligence here. So everyone listen up - because I am only going to do this one time.

I am not going to fight over who invented radio, or the different types of modulation scheme's - since the days of spark gap transmitters.

I tried to post some relevant information - but it seemed to get lost in the jumble.

The bottom line is - 3rd world countries and places such as the Soviet Union and their sattelite countries does not understand how communications works - to the extent that people in the free world does - because when you live in a communist society you are told what to think and how to think and so you cannot think for yourself.

When the day comes when someone emancipates you and you are free and all of a sudden there is no one telling you how to think or what to say - your mind goes beserk and you just start thinking about things that no one has thought about in 50 years - because even a infant has to crawl before it can walk and those people are so far behind the times it will take them a certain period of time to readjust to the way the rest of the world operates and so we have to be kind to people who were not born and raised in the USA and thinks that they are the worlds leading source of all information and that everything published on the internet is factual.

The Sattelite one was the one that really got me to thinking.
There is nothing in outer space for the signals to bounce off of - so they travel millions of miles in just a couple of seconds and you have to wonder if there is some other form of intelligence on another planet several galaxies away that is monitoring our simple form of communications - and probably laughing at us for what we say and how we act and what we do.
Rock n roll music is probably the most entertaining of all the types of transmissions we make - because it doesn't make much sense when some rapper repeats the same thing over and over again and other musicians plays the same 3 chords over and over again and people pays millions of dollars to buy their albums and listen to them at concerts or that we would allow someone to play advertising over the radio and not turn it off or turn the dial to another frequency.

Or that some ham would be willing to spend 10's of thousands of dollars to buy a transceiver that does the same basic thing as a AM radio you can buy in any Walmart or Goodwill for a couple of bucks.

When you crank up the power, it allows the person on the other end to use a smaller antenna - hence the people who buys or builds the big towers and the big beam antenna's would think that their investment would allow them global communications on a daily basis - and still we have not gotten past the fact that all reliable communicatiosn is LOS - even 100 years later...

The OP wanted to debate the fact that some antenna's works best when we include some type of ground. Yes a good vertical transmitting antenna includes some type of ground to keep the signal from warming the clouds and being wasted.
A beam antenna does not have a physical ground, yet still works - maybe the ground reflections helps the signals to travel further.
But we all know that effective communications requires the antenna to be as high as possible.
Only once you get to what is it 38,000 miles one antenna will transmit to one hemisphere - or is it what ever part of the earth you can see and will transmit no further.
That is the point of diminishing returns.

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/astronomy/f...ection-12.html

http://www.keytelemetering.com/9600_Antenna.htm

Uzytkownik "Rob" napisal w wiadomosci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Are we discussing spark transmission and non-resonant aerials?

The earth/chassis and the field electron emission..
S*

Hey Szczepan,

Spark transmitters are not used anymore.
Try to find some more recent articles about transmitting.

Today we use nicely synthesized carrier waves that are fed to
antennas suitable for the frequency in use, not a noise generator
and transformer to high voltages connected to a random wire net.

Especially when that frequency is somewhat higher (much higer
than what Marconi and Tesla were transmitting on), there is no
need for en earth connection or even a chassis.
That is because an antenna is used that is balanced or has its
own counterpoise for the driven element.

Counterpoise, chassis and the earth are the same.

A connection to earth would not be effective anyway, because
antennas used at higher frequencies are often several wavelengths
above the earth, and a wire used to connect to the earth would
not behave like a conductor at those frequencies.

We also operate our antennas well below the point where arcing
occurs, so we don't have to deal with electron emission.

The field electron emission take place at each electric field.

So now please go off to a group that operates the century old
techniques that you seem to be discussing.
Maybe you can find a Tesla coil enthousiasts group where your
voice will be appreciated, although I think they are not using
sparkgaps anymore either.

We are discussing "The earth/chassis/counterpoise and the field electron
emission."
S*

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

Szczepan - do you hold an amateur radio licence, please?

I have even never seen a transmitter.
For me it is a "black box".

I only want to know if the box is connected to the earth/chassis.

Your the first answer was Yes ("The "static to earth" in my HF aerial is
merely to get the static to bypass my receiver).
S*

Hello Szczepan.
It seems that you totally misunderstood my answer.
A ground connection is NOT necessary in order to receive a signal.

Is it necessary to "get the static to bypass my receiver".

You tell me that you have not seen a transmitter and regard it as a black
box. I recommend that you get a modern textbook on radio technology so
that you can understand how radios and aerials work.

For me is enough to know "Is it the ground/chassis/counterpoise necessary to
"get the static to bypass a transmitter/receiver".?
I hope that some of you know the answer.

I am not asking If "Does a ground connection is necessary in order to
receive a signal."

Best regards,
S*

"Ian" napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
.. .

Hello Szczepan
No, I did not say that Marconi was correct. I did say that the earth
connection is not necessary in order to receive signals. I suspect that
your English is not as good as we think.

But you wrote that your radio have the earth/chassis.
S*


Hello again Szczepan. I rarely ever use the term "chassis" and I don't
remember mentioning an earth on a radio.

For clarification - radios can and do transmit and receive successfully
without any connection to earth, either the actual ground or to an
artificial earth.

And what do you do with the static build up?
Best Regards,
S*

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

A dipole with one ene earthed becomes a monopole.
Hertz transmitter is a dipole. The Tesla's is a monopole.
Todays dipoles are simply the two monopoles.
Thanks this the waves are polarized.

But the question is if Marconi was right:"
"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."

Best regards,
S*
Hello Szczepan.
A dipole with one end earthed wouldn't be a monopole.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipole_antenna

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Di..._in_meters.png

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

"One side of the antenna feedline is attached to the lower end of the
monopole, and the other side is attached to the ground plane, which is often
the Earth.

This contrasts with a dipole antennawhich consists of two identical rod
conductors, with the signal from the transmitter applied between the two
halves of the antenna.

Any comments?
Best Regards,
S*

"Jeff" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On 15/04/2012 10:33, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Uzytkownik napisal w wiadomosci
...
On 15/04/2012 09:58, Szczepan Bialek wrote:

But you wrote that your radio have the earth/chassis.

The point that you are missing is that the earth connection has
NOTHING
to do with transmitting or receiving a signal. If is merely there for
safety in the event of a lightening strike or build up or static.

So the radio have the earth/chassis.

Ian's equipment will work no differently is the earth connection is
disconnected. Marconi was WRONG!!!!

And what about your equipment?
Is the earth connection disconnected?
S*



I have no earth connection, so it cannot be connected or disconnected.

Why than: "The ideal ground system forAM broadcasters comprises at least 120
buried copper or phosphor bronze radial wires at least one-quarter
wavelength long and a ground-screen in the immediate vicinity of the tower.
All the ground system components are bonded together, usually by welding,
brazing or using coin silversolder to help reduce corrosion". From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopole_antenna

Tell them that they are WRONG.
S*

Szczepan Bialek wrote:
"One side of the antenna feedline is attached to the lower end of the
monopole, and the other side is attached to the ground plane, which is often
the Earth.

This contrasts with a dipole antennawhich consists of two identical rod
conductors, with the signal from the transmitter applied between the two
halves of the antenna.

Any comments?
Best Regards,
S*

Now you have written it yourself! With a dipole antenna you do not
need an earth connection because the signal is applied between the
two halves of the antenna, not between earth and the antenna.

End of discussion.