Szczepan Bialek wrote:

napisa? w wiadomo?ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:


All the links I quote are wrote by "people who have
spent decades building and using antennas in the real world, people
ranging
in education from knowledgable hobbyiests to degreed engineers and
scientists."


Are you one of them?
S*

Am I one of what?

If you mean what are MY qualifications to call you a babbling idiot, I
have
been building and using antennas for about 50 years and have a degree in
Electrical and Electronic Engineering.

How long have you been building and using antennas and what degrees do
you have?

Instead writting the "babbling idiot" write a long article on antennas
without ground.

Why as there already exists thousands and thousands of such literature
references?

Howver you are too much of an ignorant, ineducable, babbling idiot to be
able to read any of them and understand them.

You were totally unable to understand something as simple as:

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

and started babbling about the colors on the graphics showing you haven't
a clue what the article was actually saying.

You wrote: "Only end fed monopoles need radials". Do you mean that "Only end
fed monopoles need ground"?

No, I meant what I said.

You, however, are too much of an ignorant, ineducable, babbling idiot to be
able to understand it.

To be precise, only end fed monopoles need a counterpoise.

The counterpoise can consist of either radials, a large conductive area
fabricated for the purpose, or the Earth itself IF the surface conductivity
is high enough.

The words "ground", "radial", and "counterpoise" in relation to antennas
are three diffent things with three different meanings but you are too
much of an ignorant, ineducable, babbling idiot to be to understand that.

A quarter wave, end fed vertical monopole with a set of radials does NOT
need a connection to ground.

The radials serve as the counterpoise.

As you are an ignorant, ineducable, babbling idiot you will not understand
any of this and will reply with babbling nonsense.

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"Sal M. O'Nella" napisa? w wiadomo?ci
...

"tom" wrote in message
. net...
On 7/6/2012 3:46 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
napisal w wiadomosci

Do you agree that such "dipole" is the monopole?
S*


Absolutely not.

tom
K0TAR


Is this guy the ghost of Allen Funt? He has set up such an improbable
situation with his nonsense that we are unable to grasp it, so we suspend
disbelief.

Try to grasp that:

The Marconi antenna is vertical. It consists of an antena and the
counterpoise. The counterpoise can be in form of the vertical wire. So such
monopole is vertical.

No, it can not as by definition a Marconi antenna is a quarter wave, end fed
vertical fed against ground.


The "dipole" antenna with the coax and without the balun is exactly like te
above set.

No, it is not as the generally used meaning of the word "dipole" without
any qualifiers is a half wave, center fed antenna of any orientation but
MOST are oriented horizontally.

The only difference is that the second set is horizontal.

The difference is one is a quarter wave long and end fed and the other is
a half wave long and center fed.

Too difficult?

Yes, that is too difficult for an ignorant, ineducable, idiot like you to
understand.

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"tom" napisal w wiadomosci
. net...
On 7/6/2012 3:46 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
napisal w wiadomosci

Do you agree that such "dipole" is the monopole?
S*

Absolutely not.
tom


"Try to grasp that:

The Marconi antenna is vertical. It consists of an antenna and the
counterpoise. The counterpoise can be in form of the vertical wire. So such
monopole is vertical.

The "dipole" antenna with the coax and without the balun is exactly like the
above set.
The only difference is that the second set is horizontal.
Too difficult?
S*

The difference is one is a quarter wave length long and end fed and the
other is a half wave length long and center fed.

You are to much of an ignorant, ineducable, idiot to be able to understand
the difference.

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"Rob" napisa? w wiadomo?ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"tom" napisal w wiadomosci
. net...
On 7/6/2012 3:46 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
napisal w wiadomosci

Do you agree that such "dipole" is the monopole?
S*

Absolutely not.
tom


"Try to grasp that:

The Marconi antenna is vertical. It consists of an antenna and the
counterpoise. The counterpoise can be in form of the vertical wire. So
such
monopole is vertical.

When you have a vertical 1/4 wavelength antenna with a vertical 1/4
wavelength "counterpoise" below it, you don't have a monopole, you
have a dipole.

The real dipole need the ladder line (the two wires).
The coax shield is connected to the ground.

Ignorant babble of an ineducable idiot.

It is all explained in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipole_antenna but
you are too stupid to be able to understand even the pictures.

You should write "dipole". In NASA their dipole and your"dipole" are the
quite different things.

Word salad babble with no meaning as to be expected from an idiot.

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
...

snip

Marconi wrote that all antennas needs ground.

It is obvious that "the antenna with the two legs where the one leg is
connected to the shield of a coax" is the Marconi antenna.
It is not the dipole antenna.

The rest of your antennas (small power) can have the ground from AC supply
or chassis.
S*

Brilliant! I wish there were some way to preserve these teachings.

Maybe I can take a course and learn how to write. Then, if I had a pencil,
I could copy it all down, if I had some paper. Would that work?

"Sal"
(KD6VKW)

somebody wrote in message ...


snip

We (the group excluding Szczepan) have some good discussions.
Szczepan can be amusing in the views he puts forward. I can't work out
whether he is trying to tease us or really is confused.


Which is why I made my reference to Allen Funt of "Candid Camera." Funt
created preposterous situations and yet people tried their darndest to make
something real out of it.

I recall a car with no engine whose driver rolled it downhill into a service
station. The driver, Funt's attractive co-host, insisted that she had
driven around town all day and wanted the mechanic to check the car because
it didn't seem to have much power. In a perfect world, when the mechanic
popped the hood, he would have laughed and the "bit" would be spoiled. But
no! He tried eight ways to explain to her that she COULDN'T have been
driving around town. She just sweetly continued the hoax as several other
mechanics came over to check out the action. Classic!

Szczepan is that car with no engine and we are those mechanics. :-)

73,
"Sal"

Gosh Joel -- see what you started!! :-)

Irv VE6BP


"Joel365" wrote in message
...

I have a dipole with 134 feet of 20 gauge insulated copper wire. What
would happen if I wanted to replace one leg (67 feet) with 18 gauge
copper clad insulated steel wire but chose to keep the other leg with
the 20 gauge wire?
Tks,
Joel




--
Joel365

napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...

You were totally unable to understand something as simple as:

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

"The quarter wavemonopole antenna is a single element antenna fed at one
end, that behaves as a dipole antenna."

Are you able to understand something as simple as the above?


To be precise, only end fed monopoles need a counterpoise.

The radials serve as the counterpoise.

The Author in Wiki describes the "dipole" used by radio-amateurs.
Such dipole is simply "The quarter wavemonopole antenna".
S*

napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:


The Marconi antenna is vertical. It consists of an antena and the
counterpoise. The counterpoise can be in form of the vertical wire. So
such
monopole is vertical.


The "dipole" antenna with the coax and without the balun is exactly like
te
above set.

No, it is not as the generally used meaning of the word "dipole" without
any qualifiers is a half wave, center fed antenna

Radio-amateurs have "dipole" where one leg is end fed and the other is
connected to the grounded shield of the coax.

You should know that the true dipole is directional.
Are your "dipoles" directional?
S*

"Rob" napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:

You should write "dipole". In NASA their dipole and your"dipole" are the
quite different things.

What do you mean with "In NASA"?

"The Hertzian dipole Consider two small spherical conductors connected by a
wire. Suppose that electric charge flows periodically back and forth between
the spheres."

In " NASA" antennas (eg. phase radars) the each "sphere" is fed from special
feeder.
If are the two sphere we have a dipole (Hertzian dipole).

In Marconi antenna is only one "sphere". It is the monopole.
Do you have exactly the same voltages in the both ends of your "dipole"?
S*