Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#19
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
"Jeff Liebermann" napisal w wiadomosci ... On Tue, 29 May 2012 19:12:00 +0200, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote: " Inelectronic circuit theory, a "ground" is usually idealized as an infinite source or sink for charge, which can absorb an unlimited amount of current without changing its potential. " What does this have to do with measuring the weight change in an antenna that allegedly is transmitting electrons? Electrons have mass. Transmit enough of them and you'll loose mass. Receive enough electrons, and your mythical antenna should gain mass. Radio transmitter is an electron pump. No, it is not. You are an idiot. But without the "infinite source or sink for charge" it do not work. Yes, it does. You are an idiot. Also, if the earth is absorbing your electrons, something should be gaining a rather large positive charge as a result of the transmission. Where is the positive charge? Without the "infinite source or sink for charge" a transmitter is gaining a rather large positive charge. No, it does not. You are an idiot. While we're at it, there are many ways to detect electrons. One of them is with a phosophor screen, that will light up when hit by electrons. Some how, waving my HT near the phosphor screen of my oscilloscope fails to detect your alleged electrons. Could you perhaps offer a better way to detect the electrons allegedly radiating from an antenna? Tesla made the electron beam and next the X-rays. Irrelevant babble. You are an idiot. All antennas are grounded and you should be able to weigh the Earth because it gain and lose mass as they transmit and receive electrons" I see. If I'm standing on the ground, I can't be weighed. Well, my bathroom scale is sitting on the ground and works just fine measuring my weight. My HT antenna isn't grounded. Neither are any of the dipoles on my roof. I presume you're suggesting that they don't work. They are connected to the mass (chassis). Many things do not have a chassis or anything that could even remotely be called a chassis. You are an idiot. Now, that we have the requisite science fiction out of the way, could I trouble you to answer my original question. Is your theory that if you repeat the same garbage over and over, eventually someone will believe it? It is theory of Faraday, Lorenz, Marconi, Tesla and Dirac. No, it is not. You are an idiot. Who is the authors of yours? S* Modern science. And you are an idiot. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|