Is this a proper defenition?
 

On 8/25/2012 8:59 AM, W5DXP wrote:
On Friday, August 24, 2012 12:25:23 PM UTC-5, John S wrote:
You used a fixed 100V source.

Let's modify the definition until you agree with it. How about?

resonant antenna [′res·ən·ənt an ′ten·ə] (electromagnetism)
An antenna in which there is a peak in the standing wave energy on the antenna at a certain frequency during receive when configured as an unloaded parasitic element using a constant power, variable frequency source for the incident RF fields.

Would you agree that that energy peak indicates antenna resonance?
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com


I'm sure you've heard the saying "Never mud wrestle with a pig..."

Is this a proper defenition?
 

On Fri, 24 Aug 2012 05:20:25 -0700 (PDT), W5DXP
wrote:


Seems that these conditions would also exist for any conjugately matched non-resonant standing-wave antenna.
I hope I am never foolish enough to challenge your wisdom Cecil!
de W8CCW
John Ferrell W8CCW

Is this a proper defenition?
 

On Saturday, August 25, 2012 2:04:58 PM UTC-5, John Ferrell wrote:
I hope I am never foolish enough to challenge your wisdom Cecil!

Just paraphrasing Walter Maxwell, w2du (SK).
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

Is this a proper defenition?
 

On 8/25/2012 8:59 AM, W5DXP wrote:
On Friday, August 24, 2012 12:25:23 PM UTC-5, John S wrote:
You used a fixed 100V source.

Let's modify the definition until you agree with it. How about?

resonant antenna [′res·ən·ənt an ′ten·ə] (electromagnetism)
An antenna in which there is a peak in the standing wave energy on the antenna at a certain frequency during receive when configured as an unloaded parasitic element using a constant power, variable frequency source for the incident RF fields.

Would you agree that that energy peak indicates antenna resonance?
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com


Would you agree that my previous statements are correct?

Is this a proper defenition?
 

On Sunday, August 26, 2012 4:46:16 PM UTC-5, John S wrote:
Would you agree that my previous statements are correct?

Going back how many years?:)
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

Is this a proper defenition?
 

On 8/26/2012 5:51 PM, W5DXP wrote:
On Sunday, August 26, 2012 4:46:16 PM UTC-5, John S wrote:
Would you agree that my previous statements are correct?

Going back how many years?:)
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

If you have to ask, then you are just being an asshole as usual. You
always want to have an argument whether you are right or wrong. That's
why I referred to wrestling a pig. Go screw with somebody else, pig.

Is this a proper defenition?
 

On Sunday, August 26, 2012 8:32:23 PM UTC-5, John S wrote:
On 8/26/2012 5:51 PM, W5DXP wrote:

Would you agree that my previous statements are correct?

Only a perfect person never makes an incorrect statement.

I gave an example where that definition applies to a conjugately matched non-resonant antenna. Of course, all conjugately matched antenna *systems* are resonant whether the antenna is a resonant or non-resonant length. Seems that definition has the same flaw as in Reflections, by Walter Maxwell (SK).. Where he said, "My antenna tuner really does tune my antenna", he probably should have said, "My antenna tuner really does tune my antenna system." The definition should IMO also eliminate the word "sharp" from the definition. A resonant 1/2WL dipole does have a peak but it isn't sharp because of the broad bandwidth.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

Is this a proper defenition?
 

I don't see why both definitions can't be 'true'. One doesn't exclude the other.
- Paul
---------------------

On Wednesday, August 22, 2012 7:47:07 PM UTC-5, amdx wrote:
resonant antenna [′res·ən·ənt an ′ten·ə]

(electromagnetism)

An antenna for which there is a sharp peak in the power radiated or

intercepted by the antenna at a certain frequency, at which electric

currents in the antenna form a standing-wave pattern.



McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific & Technical Terms, 6E, Copyright ©

2003 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.





I thought a resonant antenna was resistive without any reactance.

Mikek

Is this a proper defenition?
 

On Tuesday, August 28, 2012 5:22:46 AM UTC-5, (unknown) wrote:
I don't see why both definitions can't be 'true'. One doesn't exclude the other.

The definition of a "resonant antenna" *should* exclude non-resonant antennas just as the definition of a "red car" should exclude non-red cars. A non-resonant antenna that is conjugately matched meets the definition of a resonant antenna. That seems to be ambiguous at best and at worst, a contradiction. Updating the definition:

resonant antenna (also applies to a conjugately matched non-resonant antenna) -
An antenna for which there is a peak in the power radiated or intercepted by the antenna at a certain frequency, at which electric currents in the antenna form a maximum current standing-wave pattern

So much for the myth that resonant antennas radiate better than non-resonant antennas. Consider the following two examples without transmission lines.

50 ohm Source---50 ohm load

100+j100 ohm Source---100-j100 ohm load

Which system has the most efficient power transfer efficiency?

Has anyone ever considered that if the coax is disconnected from a center-fed half-wavelength antenna, the antenna is no longer resonant and could instead be used for a non-resonant guy wire at that frequency?
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com