loop antennas
 

"W5DXP" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On Saturday, June 16, 2012 3:12:44 AM UTC-5, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
In the pure vacuum are electrons. Do not you know about the Dirac
electron
sea?

Yes, I know about it but Dirac nor anyone else who matters has claimed that
electrons can travel at the speed of light.

For Faraday, Lorenz and Tesla the light and radio waves are exactly like the
sound.
So we must distinguish the speed of the light and the speed of the particles
of the medium.
For Faraday, Lorenz and Tesla the medium is the plasma (ions + electrons).

So the key issue is if "In the pure vacuum are electrons". Are they?

?The thing that travels at the speed of light has been proven to be
quantized, i.e. to consist of discrete packets or particles. It has been 84
years since Dirac came up with his theory. It is now generally accepted that
Dirac's "sea of electrons" is made up of something other than electrons,
i.e. dark matter/energy, in a quantum structure which results in the Casimir
effect.

Here's the problem with a "sea of electrons" or virtual particles to explain
the quantum structu

http://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics...s-dark-energy/

"But when physicists tried to calculate how much energy this would give
empty space, the answer came out wrong - wrong by a lot. The number came out
10120 times too big. That's a 1 with 120 zeros after it. It's hard to get an
answer that bad. So the mystery continues."

The "electron waves" or oscillatory flow of electrons is simply seen in the
crystal radio and rectennas.
But everybody prefer "So the mystery continues."
S*

loop antennas
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Feynman was a teacher.

Richard Feynman was a Ph.D. in physics and, among other awards, won a
Nobel Prize in Physics (1965) for his theory of quantum electrodynamics.

The scientists were the opposite opinion:

The scientists in 1900 had different opinions, but by Feynman's time
everyone knew better.

You are apparently the only one who hasn't yet learned.

You are a babbling idiot.

loop antennas
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:


For Faraday, Lorenz and Tesla the light and radio waves are exactly like the
sound.

And they were wrong and you are an idiot.

loop antennas
 

"Rob" wrote in message
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Feynman was a teacher. The scientists were the opposite opinion:

Were. In 1900. But now it is 2012.


Everyone's attempts to reason with Snicklefritz Dingle )
will come to naught. It reminds me of a joke:


A farmer was having a hard time with his new mule. The stubborn mule
wouldn't take the harness. Reluctantly, he hired a mule-trainer, who
arrived promptly the next morning.

The mule-trainer picked up a sledgehammer and slammed the mule between the
eyes. The mule staggered backwards from the blow.

"Hey," screamed the farmer, "I don't want you to kill my mule!"

"Relax, pal." replied the mule-trainer. "Before you can train 'em, you have
to get their attention."


In my considered opinion, nobody really has Snicklefritz's attention.

"Sal"

loop antennas
 

In message , Boomer
writes



The worst antenna I hear on the air comes from people using G5RVs.
Their signal is just totally lame when they use the recommended 80 foot
dipole on 75 meters. If they would just extend that same antenna to 120
feet they would do so much better.

The full-size G5RV is 102' (not 80'), and works pretty well as a
shortish halfwave on 80m. The half-size is 51', and is intended for 40m
and above. However, although maybe not the antenna of choice, with a
tuner and 450 or 600 ohm twin feeder it should be possible to make even
an 80' dipole work fairly effectively on 80m.

One amateur (local to me), who I believe has limited space, reckons that
a straight, short dipole works better than a squeezed-in, dog-legged
full-size dipole. I think his is 85', and it certainly works well on
80m.




--
Ian

loop antennas
 

On Saturday, June 16, 2012 12:15:34 PM UTC-5, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
The "electron waves" or oscillatory flow of electrons is simply seen in the
crystal radio and rectennas. But everybody prefer "So the mystery continues."

If empty space were filled with a "sea of electrons", their combined massive gravity would have an observable effect but actual gravity calculations prove that the "sea of electrons" cannot exist. You are correct about there being a medium through which EM waves flow, but it is impossible for it to consist of any form of known visible matter. Exactly what it consists of is still a mystery.

If empty space were filled with electrons, we would be able to measure the drag caused by the electrons. Any known particle of matter with a rest mass would cause a drag on movement of matter through it.

You remind me of the story of the man who is looking under the street light for his lost keys even though he lost them a block away. His explanation was, "I'm looking for my keys here because the light is better."
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

loop antennas
 

On 6/16/2012 2:19 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Boomer
writes



The worst antenna I hear on the air comes from people using G5RVs.
Their signal is just totally lame when they use the recommended 80
foot dipole on 75 meters. If they would just extend that same antenna
to 120 feet they would do so much better.

The full-size G5RV is 102' (not 80'), and works pretty well as a
shortish halfwave on 80m. The half-size is 51', and is intended for 40m
and above. However, although maybe not the antenna of choice, with a
tuner and 450 or 600 ohm twin feeder it should be possible to make even
an 80' dipole work fairly effectively on 80m.

One amateur (local to me), who I believe has limited space, reckons that
a straight, short dipole works better than a squeezed-in, dog-legged
full-size dipole. I think his is 85', and it certainly works well on 80m.





On 160m, I had better luck using a full size "Z" dipole than
I did shorter dipoles that were loaded with high Q coils.

I sort of agree with him about the G5RV, but it's the feed that
is the problem, not the length of the radiator. Generally too much
feedline loss with the way most people run them. Same problem with
many of the various commercial Windoms that they sell.

I prefer the full length dipoles because it's easy to feed them in
a low loss manner. On the low bands, it's very hard to beat a dipole
fed with coax for overall system efficiency. Maybe nearly impossible,
being as I've never found anything more efficient so far.
I suppose a tuned feeder of ladder line would be as good, "IE: the Cecil
method" but not nearly as convenient.
I never could match coax performance using ladder line and a tuner.
Close, but not quite.. No matter how careful setting the tuner using
the very minimum of inductance.

I guess that's why I'm such a coax fan... May not be good for multi-
band use with a single dipole, but for single or limited band use, very
hard to beat.

I remember one year I got stuck using some kind of Windom for 80 and 40
at field day.
It was terrible... I swore never, ever again..
But sure nuff.. The next year they tried to stick me on a windom again.
But I was ready.. :) I brought everything I needed to make a dipole
on site. Which I did. I then whipped out a coax switch so I could
A/B the two antennas, just to prove I wasn't barking at the moon.
When you switched to the coax fed dipole, *everything* jumped up
at least full 2 S units on his rig. His eyes got big as saucers.
He never really suspected he was losing that much.
Needless to say, I stayed on the coax fed dipole.
The RF mayhem of field day is no time to be using lossy compromise
antennas.. I never could see that, when you have enough room to
use just about anything.

loop antennas
 

On Saturday, June 16, 2012 2:48:21 PM UTC-5, NM5K wrote:
I guess that's why I'm such a coax fan... May not be good for multi-
band use with a single dipole, but for single or limited band use, very
hard to beat.

Here's one that will beat most RG-8x fed dipoles.

http://www.w5dxp.com/notuner.htm
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp

loop antennas
 

On 6/16/2012 3:21 PM, W5DXP wrote:
On Saturday, June 16, 2012 2:48:21 PM UTC-5, NM5K wrote:
I guess that's why I'm such a coax fan... May not be good for multi-
band use with a single dipole, but for single or limited band use, very
hard to beat.

Here's one that will beat most RG-8x fed dipoles.

http://www.w5dxp.com/notuner.htm
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp

I use 213 though... :) Your method is about the only other one
I can think of that should be as good. On paper, slightly less
loss than the coax, but being I've never compared them side by
side, I couldn't say if your method is actually superior enough
to see a difference on a meter.. I've never tried your method of
feeding. The physical aspects are not too convenient for me most
of the time.
In the case of the ladder line/tuner vs coax, the difference was
small, but enough to notice a bit of difference on an S meter.
Of course, I'm using received signals to judge. Things should be
reciprocal, so I usually don't bother trying to do transmit tests
as I consider it less reliable than quick A/B comparisons and my
eyes on a meter.
Good ladder line is generally less loss than good coax, but on the
low bands, the loss per foot of good coax is pretty low.
I would think the advantage to your system would increase as you
rise in frequency. IE: at 50 Mhz, might be quite worthwhile.. Or if
long runs are involved. When I ran ATV on 70 cm, I preferred TV twin
lead over coax for the UHF TV antenna I used for receive.
It had less loss than coax to a 4:1 TV balun. As long as it was dry..
Wet? Nearly useless... :(

loop antennas
 

"W5DXP" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On Saturday, June 16, 2012 12:15:34 PM UTC-5, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
The "electron waves" or oscillatory flow of electrons is simply seen in
the
crystal radio and rectennas. But everybody prefer "So the mystery
continues."

If empty space were filled with a "sea of electrons", their combined
massive gravity would have an observable effect but actual gravity
calculations prove that the "sea of electrons" cannot exist. You are
correct about there being a medium through which EM waves flow, but it is
impossible for it to consist of any form of known visible matter. Exactly
what it consists of is still a mystery.

All physisists (not teachers) are opinion that in space is enough matter to
propagate the electric waves.

If empty space were filled with electrons,

In "empty space" is ISM (interstellar medium = ions, electrons and dust)

we would be able to measure the drag caused by the electrons. Any known
particle of matter with a rest mass would cause a drag on movement of
matter through it.

Michelson discovered in 1887 and 1925 that ISM rotate with the Sun and do
not rotate with the Earth.
Meteorologists know that above the equator is steady wind caused by ISM.
In the rest of the globe the winds are caused by many factors.

You remind me of the story of the man who is looking under the street light
for his lost keys even though he lost them a block away. His explanation
was, "I'm looking for my keys here because the light is better."

Michael wrote: "In the end for almost all amateur radio operators it does
not matter one
wit how an antenna works. It most certainly matters if it works and how
well."

But the all of you are "the infinite sink" of the real information for me.
Not all Amateur radio operators are teachers.
Faraday and Marconi did not go to schools.
S*