"william ewald" wrote in message
...
On 03 Jun 2004 23:47:08 GMT, (JGBOYLES) wrote:

Anyone know anything about the "technology" in the article below?

http://www.uri.edu/news/releases/?id=2659

No, they do not explain the "new" technology. This is the way the CFA
and EH
got started. Vincent has created a revolutionary antenna technology
using
Yankee ingenuity. Sorry, being from the South, I don't care for Yankees.
More
details are needed, but the antenna will be about like the CFA and EH.
Build
it (when you find out how). It will not work, just like the CFA and EH.
73 Gary N4AST

"The University and its Physics Department has been very supportive
and given me time and space to work on this project," says Vincent
http://www.phys.uri.edu/people/rob.html who was recently presented
the 2004 Outstanding Intellectual Property Award by URI's Research
Office. "I couldn't have done this without the University's support.
It's only fair that it share in the profits."

Profits? What profits?

An antenna that melts with 100W of RF going to it seems to be at odds with
its claim of high efficiency.

Tam/WB2TT

Oh come on, he said it's revolutionary! You are being way too judgemental.

The melting probably had nothing to do with losses. I mean, it could
have burst into flames due to corona igniting the revolutionary
materials it was made of, and that's what melted it. Yeah, that's the
ticket.

tom
K0TAR

Tam/WB2TT wrote:


An antenna that melts with 100W of RF going to it seems to be at odds with
its claim of high efficiency.

Tam/WB2TT

"Tom Ring" wrote in message
...
Oh come on, he said it's revolutionary! You are being way too
judgemental.

The melting probably had nothing to do with losses. I mean, it could
have burst into flames due to corona igniting the revolutionary
materials it was made of, and that's what melted it. Yeah, that's the
ticket.

You mean like a helical carbon filament?

Tam

tom
K0TAR

Tam/WB2TT wrote:


An antenna that melts with 100W of RF going to it seems to be at odds
with
its claim of high efficiency.

Tam/WB2TT

Yea...That's the ticket. Well, I figure he looked at the melted part and
said: "Gee, if I can keep this from melting..oh no... _WHY_ is it melting?
....perhaps high current. Yea, that's the ticket. There's high current in
this part. I'll make it less lossy and it'll heat less and then the
antenna'll be more efficient.....

New technology, yea (;-). You can work Chile with a light bulb. As I say;
"You need iron in the sky." PUBLISH and let the experts poke at it.

My lot is 50' x 150' [155m x 460m outside the US] and I _very_ easily fit a
40M inverted Vee @35'. Work the world - several bands.

There's a never ending quest for a number of physically unrealizable things
including, but not limited to: a small, directive, high efficency antenna --
free power -- the "best" route to work -- the ideal mate...Yadda, Yadda

I'll believe when...
--
Steve N, K,9;d, c. i My email has no u's.




"Tom Ring" wrote in message
...
Oh come on, he said it's revolutionary! You are being way too
judgemental.

The melting probably had nothing to do with losses. I mean, it could
have burst into flames due to corona igniting the revolutionary
materials it was made of, and that's what melted it. Yeah, that's the
ticket.

tom
K0TAR

Tam/WB2TT wrote:


An antenna that melts with 100W of RF going to it seems to be at odds
with
its claim of high efficiency.

Tam/WB2TT

On Thu, 3 Jun 2004 21:00:56 -0400, Tam/WB2TT Wrote :
snip

An antenna that melts with 100W of RF going to it seems to be at odds with
its claim of high efficiency.

Stand by for a "Revolutionary Antenna Cooling System". Then again, perhaps
we're still thinking too far inside the box. What if this antenna is meant
to radiate HEAT ? Hmmm doesn't do that all that well either - I know
cover the thing in fins like a '60s car...:-)


--

Humbug