"Rob" napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
This small transverse component is because the light is radiated by
dipole.
Radio waves radiated from monopole are the pressure waves (oscillatory
flow).

Do you want to claim that the kind of waves radiated from a transmitter
antenna varies depending on the type of antenna?

So that a dipole antenna produces another kind of wave than a monopole
antenna?

It should then be possible to determine at a distance what kind of
antenna was used to transmit the wave. Can you describe an experiment
to do this determination?

Faraday wrote in 1846 that to have the polarized waves you must use the two
or more sources.

To have the linear polarization we are using the dipole.
To have the circular polarization we are using the two dipoles.

The above is easy to "determine at a distance what kind of antenna was used
to transmit the wave."

But is the another phenomenon. The Luxembourg effect.
The dipole radiate the doubled frequency.
S*

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
...

Faraday wrote in 1846 that to have the polarized waves you must use the
two or more sources.

To have the linear polarization we are using the dipole.
To have the circular polarization we are using the two dipoles.

The above is easy to "determine at a distance what kind of antenna was
used to transmit the wave."

But is the another phenomenon. The Luxembourg effect.
The dipole radiate the doubled frequency.
S*

Ah yes - the famous "is it a dipole or is it a dipole?" test. Of course, it
wouldn't discriminate between a dipole and a yagi (staggered or phased?)

Luxembourg effect? Harmonics?

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

Faraday wrote in 1846 that to have the polarized waves you must use the
two or more sources.

To have the linear polarization we are using the dipole.
To have the circular polarization we are using the two dipoles.

The above is easy to "determine at a distance what kind of antenna was
used to transmit the wave."

But is the another phenomenon. The Luxembourg effect.
The dipole radiate the doubled frequency.
S*

Ah yes - the famous "is it a dipole or is it a dipole?" test. Of course,
it wouldn't discriminate between a dipole and a yagi (staggered or
phased?)

Luxembourg effect? Harmonics?

Harmonics are in string, plate, piano box etc.

Pendelum and LC circuit have the one frequency only.

LW from the dipole mast were (and are) received on MW receivers at exactly
doubled frequency.
S*

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
.. .
But is the another phenomenon. The Luxembourg effect.
The dipole radiate the doubled frequency.
S*

Ah yes - the famous "is it a dipole or is it a dipole?" test. Of course,
it wouldn't discriminate between a dipole and a yagi (staggered or
phased?)

Luxembourg effect? Harmonics?

Harmonics are in string, plate, piano box etc.

Pendelum and LC circuit have the one frequency only.

LW from the dipole mast were (and are) received on MW receivers at exactly
doubled frequency.
S*


Yup. Harmonics. The Luxembourg effect was cross-modulation. I'd completely
forgotten about it.

Was it a dipole or was it a dipole?

Regards, Ian

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"Rob" napisa? w wiadomo?ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
This small transverse component is because the light is radiated by
dipole.
Radio waves radiated from monopole are the pressure waves (oscillatory
flow).

Do you want to claim that the kind of waves radiated from a transmitter
antenna varies depending on the type of antenna?

So that a dipole antenna produces another kind of wave than a monopole
antenna?

It should then be possible to determine at a distance what kind of
antenna was used to transmit the wave. Can you describe an experiment
to do this determination?

Faraday wrote in 1846 that to have the polarized waves you must use the two
or more sources.

And after 166 have passed, we know that is not correct.

To have the linear polarization we are using the dipole.
To have the circular polarization we are using the two dipoles.

To have circular polarization, we also use helical antennas, something
that didn't exist 166 years ago.

We also have various types of loop, dielectric and waveguide based antennas,
such as the slot antenna, that did not exist 166 years ago.

The above is easy to "determine at a distance what kind of antenna was used
to transmit the wave."

No, it is not, in fact it is impossible to do.

But is the another phenomenon. The Luxembourg effect.
The dipole radiate the doubled frequency.

The Luxemburg-Gorky effect, which is the real name, has nothing to do
with antennas.

This is just more of your babbling idiocy.

"Jeff" napisal w wiadomosci
...


But is the another phenomenon. The Luxembourg effect.
The dipole radiate the doubled frequency.
S*

That is NOT the Luxembourg Effect. The Luxembourg effect is/was cross
modulation of 2 stations due to non-linearities in the atmosphere.

It is an explanation.
The Luxembourg effect WAS the receiving of LW from Luxembourg mast on the MW
receivers tuned to the doubled frequency..
S*

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
.. .

"Jeff" napisal w wiadomosci
...


But is the another phenomenon. The Luxembourg effect.
The dipole radiate the doubled frequency.
S*

That is NOT the Luxembourg Effect. The Luxembourg effect is/was cross
modulation of 2 stations due to non-linearities in the atmosphere.

It is an explanation.
The Luxembourg effect WAS the receiving of LW from Luxembourg mast on the
MW receivers tuned to the doubled frequency..
S*

Ah - so Wikipedia is incorrect. It reads " ... Luxemburg-Gorky effect is a
phenomenon of cross modulation between two radio waves ... ".

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"Jeff" napisal w wiadomosci
...


But is the another phenomenon. The Luxembourg effect.
The dipole radiate the doubled frequency.
S*

That is NOT the Luxembourg Effect. The Luxembourg effect is/was cross
modulation of 2 stations due to non-linearities in the atmosphere.

It is an explanation.
The Luxembourg effect WAS the receiving of LW from Luxembourg mast on the MW
receivers tuned to the doubled frequency..
S*

The effect has nothing what so ever to do with antennas.

You are an idiot.

On 6/2/2012 12:58 PM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
napisal w wiadomosci
...


But is the another phenomenon. The Luxembourg effect.
The dipole radiate the doubled frequency.
S*

That is NOT the Luxembourg Effect. The Luxembourg effect is/was cross
modulation of 2 stations due to non-linearities in the atmosphere.

It is an explanation.
The Luxembourg effect WAS the receiving of LW from Luxembourg mast on the MW
receivers tuned to the doubled frequency..
S*



What a maroon.

tom
K0TAR

Trying to straighten this guy out is about as productive
as teaching chickens to appreciate Mozart!

Irv VE6BP

"tom" wrote in message
. net...
On 6/2/2012 12:58 PM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
napisal w wiadomosci
...


But is the another phenomenon. The Luxembourg effect.
The dipole radiate the doubled frequency.
S*

That is NOT the Luxembourg Effect. The Luxembourg effect is/was cross
modulation of 2 stations due to non-linearities in the atmosphere.

It is an explanation.
The Luxembourg effect WAS the receiving of LW from Luxembourg mast on the
MW
receivers tuned to the doubled frequency..
S*



What a maroon.

tom
K0TAR