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

On Tuesday, July 31, 2012 10:38:31 AM UTC-5, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Rather solitons.
Photons are the damped waves.

How do you explain their quantized, i.e. quantum particle nature?

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

"W5DXP" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On Tuesday, July 31, 2012 10:38:31 AM UTC-5, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Rather solitons.
Photons are the damped waves.

How do you explain their quantized, i.e. quantum particle nature?

Each portion is a quant. Only for children the light consists of particles.

CW means continuous waves. Damped waves consists of portions.
S*

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

On Wednesday, August 1, 2012 1:26:56 AM UTC-5, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Each portion is a quant.

Unfortunately for your argument, the fact that fields/waves are quantized proves that they are particles, even though they are a somewhat special kind of particle and capable of field/wave behavior. Hint: if you set up an experiment to look for a quantized photon particle, you will detect a quantized photon particle the energy of which is related by frequency to Planck's equation.

http://employees.oneonta.edu/viningw...quation_s.html

FYI, even one single Bucky-ball, known to consist of nothing but a large number of carbon atoms, is capable of wave behavior. How do you explain that one?
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

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

"W5DXP" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On Wednesday, August 1, 2012 1:26:56 AM UTC-5, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Each portion is a quant.

Unfortunately for your argument, the fact that fields/waves are quantized
proves that they are particles, even though they are a somewhat special
kind of particle and capable of field/wave behavior. Hint: if you set up an
experiment to look for a quantized photon particle, you will detect a
quantized photon particle the energy of which is related by frequency to
Planck's equation.

http://employees.oneonta.edu/viningw...quation_s.html

FYI, even one single Bucky-ball, known to consist of nothing but a large
number of carbon atoms, is capable of wave behavior. How do you explain
that one?

Each radio amateur is able to prove (and measure the net flow) that
electrons jump off from the transmitting antenna.
For what you need the new hiphothesis?
S*

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

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
...
| |
| Each radio amateur is able to prove (and measure the net flow) that
| electrons jump off from the transmitting antenna.
| For what you need the new hiphothesis?
| S*

Hello Szczepan. Are you now a radio amateur?
How about this for a holiday for you - https://www.emfcamp.org/ ?

Regards, Ian.

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

Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Each radio amateur is able to prove (and measure the net flow) that
electrons jump off from the transmitting antenna.

And determine that it is zero...

For what you need the new hiphothesis?

I think it is you that keeps coming up with nonconforming ideas about
how antennas operate. So we'll call your hypothesis "new" even though
you dig it out of 150 year old documents.

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

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

Each radio amateur is able to prove (and measure the net flow) that
electrons jump off from the transmitting antenna.
For what you need the new hiphothesis?

Wrong; all radio amateurs are able to show that there are NO electrons
jumping off the ends of the antennas.

Do you wear slip on shoes?

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

"Rob" wrote in message
...
| Szczepan Bialek wrote:
| Each radio amateur is able to prove (and measure the net flow) that
| electrons jump off from the transmitting antenna.
|
| And determine that it is zero...
|
| For what you need the new hiphothesis?
|
| I think it is you that keeps coming up with nonconforming ideas about
| how antennas operate. So we'll call your hypothesis "new" even though
| you dig it out of 150 year old documents.

Hello Rob.

As others have said, and a search confirms, Szczepan has been posting some
of his ideas for a year or more. Seems unable to read, understand and learn
whereas most children with a textbook are capable of reading, understanding
and learning.
I think I have worked with only one person who refused to learn new ideas
and techniques. His work involved using a new computer. I showed him how
to use it and then let him try to get on with the job. Eventually he did
become willing to have a go. He now seems progressive in comparison with
Szczepan.

73, Ian.

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

"Rob" napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Each radio amateur is able to prove (and measure the net flow) that
electrons jump off from the transmitting antenna.

And determine that it is zero...

For what you need the new hiphothesis?

I think it is you that keeps coming up with nonconforming ideas about
how antennas operate. So we'll call your hypothesis "new" even though
you dig it out of 150 year old documents.

All time the ideas are the same and are confirmed:

"It is found that an electron which seems to us to be moving
slowly, must actually have a very high frequency oscillatory motion of small
amplitude superposed on the regular motion which appears to us. As a result
of this oscillatory motion, the velocity of the electron at any time equals
the velocity of light." From:
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_priz...ac-lecture.pdf
S*

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

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

"Rob" napisa? w wiadomo?ci
...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Each radio amateur is able to prove (and measure the net flow) that
electrons jump off from the transmitting antenna.

And determine that it is zero...

For what you need the new hiphothesis?

I think it is you that keeps coming up with nonconforming ideas about
how antennas operate. So we'll call your hypothesis "new" even though
you dig it out of 150 year old documents.

All time the ideas are the same and are confirmed:

No, you are the only one in the world that currently believes electrons
jump off the end of an antenna.

"It is found that an electron which seems to us to be moving
slowly, must actually have a very high frequency oscillatory motion of small
amplitude superposed on the regular motion which appears to us. As a result
of this oscillatory motion, the velocity of the electron at any time equals
the velocity of light." From:
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_priz...ac-lecture.pdf

It was later shown and proved that it is impossible for an electron to
move at the speed of light under any conditions.

That's what you get when you only read ancient literature.

Do you wear slip on shoes?