Szczepan Bialek wrote:

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


The braid and the arm are together the counterpoise.

No, they are not, you babbling idiot.

Have you the same voltages on the braid and on the coax "live" wire?

Not without a ballancing device of some sort.

Are the same voltages on the counterpoise and on the arm?

A dipole does not have a counterpoise so your question is nonsense.


If not, than you heve the monopole.

What an utter idiot; a monopole has one physical element while a dipole
has two physical elements.

Monopole have always the two elements: the antenna and the counterpoise.

A counterpoise is not concidered an element, idiot.

That is the meaning of the prefixes "mono", which means one, and "di",
which means two.

So monopole has the one pole. The end of the counterpoise is not the pole.
In your "dipole" the counterpoise is in the form of one elevated radial.

Babbling gibberish; a dipole does not have a counterpoise.

How many antennas have you built in your lifetime?

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

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


"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.

Phased radars don't use spheres for antennas.

Hertz was using the spheres or plates. They both were the ends of the open
circuit. The end can be without any "hat".

Once again, phased radars don't use spheres for antennas and Hertz was
long dead when radar was invented.

Do you have exactly the same voltages in the both ends of your "dipole"?

Of course I do.

How many antennas have you built?

"Ian Jackson" napisal w wiadomosci
...
In message , Rob
writes
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
The "dipole" where one element is connected to "live" wire and the
second
to a "ground" is the monopole.

It is your misunderstanding that:

1. amateurs always connect coax directly to a dipole. they don't.
those that are in the know will use a balun.

In the past, many amateurs did connect coax directly to a dipole.

And what they do if they have the monopole?

The reason is that - on most occasions - it worked perfectly well, and they
'got away with it'. It was only when problems occurred (interference to TV,
radio, Hi-Fi etc) that much thought was given to the need for a balun.

And what if somebody have the monopole with the radials?

In modern times, there is a lot more opportunity for amateurs to interfere
with - and suffer interference from - all kinds of domestic equipment, and
the use of a balun (or twin feeder) has more-or-less become an absolute
necessity.

The twin feeder ensure the electrical symmetry.

2. the braid of the coax is "ground". this is not true. there will
be voltage at the braid of the coax at the antenna end when a balun
is not used.

Szczepan is obviously making the fundamental mistake of thinking that,
because the coax screen is grounded at the transmitter end (or at least
connected to the chassis of the transmitter), it is therefore at zero RF
potential - and that it is still at RF potential at the far (antenna) end,
where it is connected directly to the 'other' leg of the dipole. This is
wrong.

I know that in the coax screen something is induced. But I am sure that
such "dipole" is not electrically symmetrical.

He is then assuming that if the coax screen is at zero RF potential where
it is connected to the other leg of the dipole, then the other leg of the
dipole is also at zero RF potential (and doesn't radiate). This is wrong.

I am sure that the other leg radiate almost nothing.
In Hertz time all scientists investigate which part of the Hertz apparature
radiate.
He is therefore concluding that as both the coax screen and the other leg
of the dipole are at zero RF potential, the only part of the antenna
system that is 'RF live' is the leg of the dipole which is connected to
the inner conductor of the coax - which is what happens with a monopole.
As a result, he is then claiming that a dipole is really only a monopole.
This is wrong.

I am only claiming that it works like the monopole.
In your literature is wrote that "monopole with the counterpoise works like
the dipole". But in your literature the dipole means the mechanical
symmetry.

However, I'm still convinced that Szczepan knows far more about radio than
he appears to, and is cunningly trying to get us to explain phenomena
which maybe we really don't know as much about as we like to think we do!

Exactly.

But if I am right than the "counterpoise" leg of your dipole should be made
of the proper material and have the proper dimenssion not necesary the same
as the "live" leg.
So I start the new thread "Joels question".

The history of radio-amateur is so long that that issue is probably solved
long ago.
S*

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
.. .

In your literature is wrote that "monopole with the counterpoise works
like the dipole". But in your literature the dipole means the mechanical
symmetry.

Hello Szczepan. Which amateur radio book said that "dipole" means the
"mechanical symmetry", please?
Regards, Ian.

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"Ian Jackson" napisal w wiadomosci
...
In message , Rob
writes
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
The "dipole" where one element is connected to "live" wire and the
second
to a "ground" is the monopole.

It is your misunderstanding that:

1. amateurs always connect coax directly to a dipole. they don't.
those that are in the know will use a balun.

In the past, many amateurs did connect coax directly to a dipole.

And what they do if they have the monopole?

Connect it with coaxial transmission line, idiot.

The reason is that - on most occasions - it worked perfectly well, and they
'got away with it'. It was only when problems occurred (interference to TV,
radio, Hi-Fi etc) that much thought was given to the need for a balun.

And what if somebody have the monopole with the radials?

Since a monopole with radials is an unbalanced load, there is no current
flow on the outside of the coax, idiot.

In modern times, there is a lot more opportunity for amateurs to interfere
with - and suffer interference from - all kinds of domestic equipment, and
the use of a balun (or twin feeder) has more-or-less become an absolute
necessity.

The twin feeder ensure the electrical symmetry.

Yes, it does, as does a balancing device and coax transmission line, idiot.

2. the braid of the coax is "ground". this is not true. there will
be voltage at the braid of the coax at the antenna end when a balun
is not used.

Szczepan is obviously making the fundamental mistake of thinking that,
because the coax screen is grounded at the transmitter end (or at least
connected to the chassis of the transmitter), it is therefore at zero RF
potential - and that it is still at RF potential at the far (antenna) end,
where it is connected directly to the 'other' leg of the dipole. This is
wrong.

I know that in the coax screen something is induced. But I am sure that
such "dipole" is not electrically symmetrical.

That is because you are an ignorant, ineducable, idiot.

You have been told and you actually referenced a web link that shows how
a balancing device is used between a coax transmission line and and balanced
load, but no matter how many times you are told this and how many links
you post that say this, you are totally incapable of understanding any of
it.

He is then assuming that if the coax screen is at zero RF potential where
it is connected to the other leg of the dipole, then the other leg of the
dipole is also at zero RF potential (and doesn't radiate). This is wrong.

I am sure that the other leg radiate almost nothing.

That is because you are an ignorant, ineducable, idiot.

In Hertz time all scientists investigate which part of the Hertz apparature
radiate.

In Hertz's time the instruments to measure the voltages, currents, and
fields didn't exist.


He is therefore concluding that as both the coax screen and the other leg
of the dipole are at zero RF potential, the only part of the antenna
system that is 'RF live' is the leg of the dipole which is connected to
the inner conductor of the coax - which is what happens with a monopole.
As a result, he is then claiming that a dipole is really only a monopole.
This is wrong.

I am only claiming that it works like the monopole.

That is because you are an ignorant, ineducable, idiot.

In your literature is wrote that "monopole with the counterpoise works like
the dipole". But in your literature the dipole means the mechanical
symmetry.

That is because you are an ignorant, ineducable, idiot.

What you quoted means the far field for a monopole with a counterpoise is
the same as the far field as a vertical dipole.

It does NOT mean the antenna voltages and currents are the same.

However, I'm still convinced that Szczepan knows far more about radio than
he appears to, and is cunningly trying to get us to explain phenomena
which maybe we really don't know as much about as we like to think we do!

Exactly.

You know NOTHING about radio.

You are a babbling, ignorant, ineducable, idiot.

How many transmitters have you run in your lifetime?

How many antennas have you built in your lifetime?


But if I am right than the "counterpoise" leg of your dipole should be made
of the proper material and have the proper dimenssion not necesary the same
as the "live" leg.

You are NOT right.

Dipoles do not have a counterpoise.

You are a babbling, ignorant, ineducable, idiot.

So I start the new thread "Joels question".

The history of radio-amateur is so long that that issue is probably solved
long ago.

The "issue" was solved long ago, you are totally wrong about EVERYTHING
you say, and amateur radio has NOTHING to do with the issue other than
you are posting in an amatuer radio group.

Post your nonsense in sci.physics.electromag and you will get exactly the
same response, you babbling idiot.

How many antennas have you built in your lifetime?

In message ,
writes
Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"Ian Jackson" napisal w wiadomosci
...
In message , Rob
writes
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
The "dipole" where one element is connected to "live" wire and the
second
to a "ground" is the monopole.

It is your misunderstanding that:

1. amateurs always connect coax directly to a dipole. they don't.
those that are in the know will use a balun.

In the past, many amateurs did connect coax directly to a dipole.

And what they do if they have the monopole?

Connect it with coaxial transmission line, idiot.

I think Szczepan is using the type of logic that concludes, as cats have
four legs and dogs have four legs, then cats are dogs.







--
Ian

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

In your literature is wrote that "monopole with the counterpoise works
like the dipole". But in your literature the dipole means the mechanical
symmetry.

Hello Szczepan. Which amateur radio book said that "dipole" means the
"mechanical symmetry", please?

"A dipole antenna is a radio antenna that can be made of a simple wire, with
a center-fed driven element. It consists of two metal conductors of rod or
wire, oriented parallel and collinear with each other (in line with each
other), with a small space between them. "

As you see Your dipoles are mechanically symmetrical.
It can works as the monopole or as the dipole. It depends on electrical
connections.

S*

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

"Ian Jackson" napisal w
wiadomosci
...

In the past, many amateurs did connect coax directly to a dipole.

And what they do if they have the monopole?

Connect it with coaxial transmission line, idiot.

If the monopole has only one radial it is exactly as the your dipole.
Right?


And what if somebody have the monopole with the radials?

Since a monopole with radials is an unbalanced load, there is no current
flow on the outside of the coax, idiot.

But your "dipole" is exactly like the monopole with the one radial.

The twin feeder ensure the electrical symmetry.

Yes, it does, as does a balancing device and coax transmission line,
idiot.

Are you sure?


I know that in the coax screen something is induced. But I am sure that
such "dipole" is not electrically symmetrical.

He is then assuming that if the coax screen is at zero RF potential
where
it is connected to the other leg of the dipole, then the other leg of
the
dipole is also at zero RF potential (and doesn't radiate). This is
wrong.

I am sure that the other leg radiate almost nothing.

In Hertz time all scientists investigate which part of the Hertz
apparature
radiate.

In Hertz's time the instruments to measure the voltages, currents, and
fields didn't exist.

In Faraday's time the all was measured. The only difference was in the
electrons name. Faraday's name for the electric particle was "nuclei".
S*

"Ian Jackson" napisal w wiadomosci
news
In message ,
writes
Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"Ian Jackson" napisal w
wiadomosci
...
In message , Rob

writes
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
The "dipole" where one element is connected to "live" wire and the
second
to a "ground" is the monopole.

It is your misunderstanding that:

1. amateurs always connect coax directly to a dipole. they don't.
those that are in the know will use a balun.

In the past, many amateurs did connect coax directly to a dipole.

And what they do if they have the monopole?

Connect it with coaxial transmission line, idiot.

I think Szczepan is using the type of logic that concludes, as cats have
four legs and dogs have four legs, then cats are dogs.

Antenna with the four legs is used for the circullar polarization.

Tell us if the your dipole ( the two legs and coax directly to a dipole)
radiate the polarised waves?
S*

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

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

In your literature is wrote that "monopole with the counterpoise works
like the dipole". But in your literature the dipole means the mechanical
symmetry.

Hello Szczepan. Which amateur radio book said that "dipole" means the
"mechanical symmetry", please?

"A dipole antenna is a radio antenna that can be made of a simple wire, with
a center-fed driven element. It consists of two metal conductors of rod or
wire, oriented parallel and collinear with each other (in line with each
other), with a small space between them. "

As you see Your dipoles are mechanically symmetrical.
It can works as the monopole or as the dipole. It depends on electrical
connections.

It seems you are using theories that apply to DC electronics (like
"it is connected to ground so it has zero voltage") to HF.

This is wrong. Even when you feed a dipole with a coax, there still
is almost symmetrical voltage on the two connections, even though the
braid is connected to one pole and the other end of the braid may be
grounded.
The result is that there is voltage on the outside of the braid, the
coax becomes part of the antenna and the radiation pattern changes.

But it will not be a monopole. If anything, it is a tripole.

Of course, nobody in their right mind would to that. Use a balun.