UK earthling - was: Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
...

"Electric currents that oscillate at radio frequencies have special
properties not shared by direct current or alternating current of lower
frequencies. S*

Hello Szczepan.
Your unattributed quote is vague and incorrect. Care to correct it?
Regards, Ian.

UK earthling - was: Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

"W5DXP" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On Saturday, July 28, 2012 2:59:06 AM UTC-5, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Light is not coherent.

On the contrary, any single frequency light, i.e. single color light, is
coherent. Most of the laser light in an interferometer is coherent.
Otherwise, steady-state interference could not be achieved.

All natural sources produce the damped waves. They are not coherent at all
frequences.
Only today radio transmitter and free electron laser are able to produce
undamped waves.
S*

UK earthling - was: Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

"W5DXP" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On Saturday, July 28, 2012 3:58:40 AM UTC-5, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
You assume that there no field electron emission. Why?

Please don't tell me what I am assuming because you are invariably wrong.
As I (and Richard Feynman) have told you before, the fields emitted by
electrons consist of photons. Electrons escaping a transmitting antenna are
a non-coherent corona discharge. Photons escaping a transmitting antenna
are coherent RF energy.

"Feynman has been called the "Great Explainer".[23] He gained a reputation
for taking great care when giving explanations to his students and for
making it a moral duty to make the topic accessible. His guiding principle
was that if a topic could not be explained in a freshman lecture, it was not
yet fully understood".

Back in the early 20th century when spark gap transmitters were being used,
the spark gap function, like lightning, generated non-coherent photons
which filled the RF spectrum.

It were the damped waves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ondes_amorties.jpg
For Planck and Einstein that wave packets were the portion of energy. The
name photon have many definitions.

Nowadays, a CW signal is mostly coherent with a small amount of
non-coherence associated with the transient rise and fall times.
Are in CW a photons?
S*

UK earthling - was: Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
...
Nowadays, a CW signal is mostly coherent with a small amount of
non-coherence associated with the transient rise and fall times.
Are in CW a photons?
S*

CW = Coherent Wave.

UK earthling - was: Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"W5DXP" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On Friday, July 27, 2012 12:50:32 PM UTC-5, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Are the voltages doubled at the ends?

The voltage doubling at the ends of a dipole is simple to understand. A
dipole is a standing wave antenna. When the forward wave from the feedpoint
encounters the open-circuit at the end of the dipole wire, a reflection
takes place where the reflected voltage is in phase with the forward
voltage and the reflected current is 180 degrees out of phase with the
forward current.

Exactly like with the sound waves.

No, not quite.

At the end of the dipole, |Vfor|=|Vref| and |Ifor|=|Iref|. So the total
voltage and total current at the ends of a dipole a

Vtot = Vfor + Vref = 2*Vfor = 2*Vref

Itot = Ifor - Iref = 0

And of course, no current is going to flow into the open-circuit at the end
of the dipole so the total energy in the magnetic field at that point is
zero.

You assume that there no field electron emission. Why?

Because there isn't any because field electron emission is caused by
an electrostatic field and antennas have electromagnetic fields.

You have been told this several times; why do you continue to ask the
stupid question?

All of the energy in the EM waves migrates to the electric field and that's
why we get a standing wave voltage maximum at the ends of a 1/2WL dipole.

Nobody know what the EM waves are. Write about electrons.

Everybody reading the news group except you knows what EM waves are.

Electrons have nothing to do with a propagating EM wave.

You have been told this several times; why do you continue to make this
stupid statement?

However, under certain corona conditions, when the impedance at the end of
the dipole conductor is much less than infinite, electrons actually migrate
from the antenna into the conductive air, e.g. salty fog on the coast. But
this is undesirable non-coherent behavior unless you are building a Tesla
coil.

They migrate if the voltage is:
"Field emission was explained by quantum tunneling of electrons in the late
1920s. This was one of the triumphs of the nascent quantum mechanics. The
theory of field emission from bulk metals was proposed by Ralph H. Fowler
and Lothar Wolfgang Nordheim.[1] A family of approximate equations,
"Fowler-Nordheim equations", is named after them."

This has nothing to do with antennas because field electron emission is
caused by an electrostatic field and antennas have electromagnetic fields.

I once saw a mobile antenna emitting a red corona glow in the fog on HWY 1
near Monterrey, CA. A traffic cop stopped him for having a "red light" that
could be seen by oncoming traffic.:)

Each your antennas are the electron emitter:

No, they are not.

"How would the ideal field emitter look like? It should be very long and
very thin, made of conductive material with high mechanical strength, be
robust, and cheap and easy to process". From:
http://ipn2.epfl.ch/CHBU/NTfieldemission1.htm

Not all antennas are either long or thin; loop antennas work just fine.

The voltage doubling is only theoretical. In reality the voltage is rising
to the level necessary for effective field emissions.
If no proper voltage no radiation.

This pure, babbling, nonsense.

You are an ignorant, babbling, ineducable idiot who knows absolutely
NOTHING about how anything works.

You don't even understand what an antenna is or the difference between
an electric field, a magnetic field, and an electromagnetic field.

Electrostatic and magnetostatic fields are created by DC.

An antenna is a device that converts the AC electrical energy at its
teminals into electromagnetic energy which radiates from the antenna
and also coverts the electromagnetic energy which antenna intercepts
into AC electrical energy at it's terminals.

That is ELECTROMAGNETIC energy, not magnetostatic nor electrostatic
energy.

How many antennas have you built in your lifetime?

Why do you refuse to answer the question?

Is it because you have built zero antennas and you are trying to say all
the people that have successfully built hundreds that they are all wrong
and you don't want to admit you are an ignorant, inducable, idiot?

Why can't you obtain and read a university level textbook on anything in
any language?

Is it because you are too stupid to be able to understand the material?

UK earthling - was: Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"W5DXP" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On Friday, July 27, 2012 11:57:54 AM UTC-5, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Why you do not like the electrons?

I don't dislike electrons and have a bunch of them in my body. Without free
electrons, antennas wouldn't be able to radiate photons.

For what you need the next " the equivalent of current flow".

Technically, current is defined as the movement of charged particles. Since
photons don't carry an electric charge, they technically don't meet the
definition. But since current flow implies energy transfer and photons are
capable of energy transfer, one can come up with the concept of "equivalent
current" corresponding to photon movement. Thus the "current flow" through
a capacitor is explained by photon flow rather than displacement current.

"Energy transfer": "Umov was the first who introduced in physics such basic
concepts as speed and direction of movement of energy,".
" In his first works of this period, Umov considered potential energy as
kinetic energy of some environments "imperceptible for us"."
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolay_Umov

And he was essentially wrong in the details as were most of the early
physicists.

Photons as the wave packet transfer the energy in the same way as the sound
waves.

No, it is not.

In radars are "pulses".

There is such a thing as CW radar which is not pulses, so you are wrong
yet again.

Light is not coherent.

Whether or not light is coherent depends on the source of the light;
sunlight and candles are not coherent but lasars are coherent.

It consists of pulses or
photons.

A pulse and and photon are two entirely different things.

Light may or may not be pulsed, but it is always photons.

The same is in sonars.

No, sonar is like radar only in very general terms.

For what you need the new "photons".

For what you need a new brain because the one you have doesn't work.

You are an ignorant, babbling, ineducable idiot who knows absolutely
NOTHING about how anything works.

UK earthling - was: Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"Ian" napisa? w wiadomo?ci
...
"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
...

Photons as the wave packet transfer the energy in the same way as the
sound waves.
S*
Good morning Szczepan.
Sound waves propagation through a gaseous medium. No medium - no sound
wave.

Light waves and radio waves can propagate without a gaseous medium.
Please get a textbook and read some theory. If you choose to say, once
again, that textbooks are for children then do remember that children can
learn and understand.

"Electric currents that oscillate at radio frequencies have special
properties not shared by direct current or alternating current of lower
frequencies. The energy in an RF current can radiate off a conductor into
space as electromagnetic waves (radio waves); this is the basis of radio
technology."

Wrong, AC at ANY frequency can radiate off a conductor into space as
electromagnetic waves.

As you see something radiate off a conductor into space. So the something
must be in the space.
Are such issue (special properties) for children?

None of that made any sense what so ever and was nothing but gibberish.

You are an ignorant, babbling, ineducable idiot who knows absolutely
NOTHING about how anything works.

UK earthling - was: Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"W5DXP" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On Saturday, July 28, 2012 2:59:06 AM UTC-5, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Light is not coherent.

On the contrary, any single frequency light, i.e. single color light, is
coherent. Most of the laser light in an interferometer is coherent.
Otherwise, steady-state interference could not be achieved.

All natural sources produce the damped waves. They are not coherent at all
frequences.

You have no clue what the word "damped" means, do you?

The Sun, which is a natural source, does not produce damped waves.

Being damped and being coherent are two independant properties.

Only today radio transmitter and free electron laser are able to produce
undamped waves.

Wrong again because you have no clue what the word "damped" means; almost
EVERYTHING produces undamped waves.

You are an ignorant, babbling, ineducable idiot who knows absolutely
NOTHING about how anything works.

Why can't you obtain and read a university level textbook on anything in
any language?

Is it because you are too stupid to be able to understand the material?

However, since you have no understanding of anything, you would be better
to start with a grade school textbook as your knowledge is that of a
five year old.

UK earthling - was: Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

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


"Electric currents that oscillate at radio frequencies have special
properties not shared by direct current or alternating current of lower
frequencies. The energy in an RF current can radiate off a conductor into
space as electromagnetic waves (radio waves); this is the basis of radio
technology."

Wrong, AC at ANY frequency can radiate off a conductor into space as
electromagnetic waves.

AC is in oscillating circuit (closed circuit). RF current is in an antenna
(open circuit).
S*

UK earthling - was: Dipole-2 different wire sizes?
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

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


"Electric currents that oscillate at radio frequencies have special
properties not shared by direct current or alternating current of lower
frequencies. The energy in an RF current can radiate off a conductor into
space as electromagnetic waves (radio waves); this is the basis of radio
technology."

Wrong, AC at ANY frequency can radiate off a conductor into space as
electromagnetic waves.

AC is in oscillating circuit (closed circuit). RF current is in an antenna
(open circuit).

Wrong again.