Relationship:: Now Hertz
 

"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 08:44:27 +0000, Ian Jackson
wrote:

'Hertz' requires more breath than 'cycles', so prior to saying it, you
often pause for a momentary intake of air.

Well, let's see if that's true. I just tried it on myself and did not
exactly get the desired effect. For volume, I just hung a piece of
paper in front of my mouth and looked for deflection. The trick is to
say the various words at a constant volume or the results are
worthless. I used a vu meter display on my smartphone to insure that
I was talking at the same level. From the paper deflection, I would
estimate that I move more air saying cycles because of the two

For a true test stick your finger in a light socket and see if you say Hertz
or cycles.

You may even say ouch or a few other choice words.



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

Relationship Between Antenna Efficiency and Received Signal Strength
 

On 1/27/2014 12:31 PM, Jeff wrote:
On 27/01/2014 13:37, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/27/2014 2:40 AM, Jeff wrote:
Jeff

Try getting your EE degree along with the math, physics and electrical
theory. Then maybe we can discuss this intelligently.


I am offering to discuss this intelligently by asking you to explain and
enlighten me as to how a Smith chart shows what "goes on inside a bit of
coax" on a Smith chart, or how to show the efficiency of an antenna from
a Smith chart, but you are the one coming back with (incorrect) personal
insults!!

Jeff

When you get the sufficient background in electronics, math and physics,
we can discuss this intelligently. Until then, it's like teaching a pig
to sing.


You really are a very rude person.

Jeff

Oh, because I won't give you a the equivalent of a four-year degree for
free on usenet?

You really are a troll.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================

Relationship Between Antenna Efficiency and Received Signal Strength
 

On Sun, 26 Jan 2014 13:20:29 -0500, "Ralph Mowery"
wrote:

The Boonton you have is the AM modle.

Yep. AM only. Someone modified it to look like the Motorola T1034 or
T1035. I found some info and schematics on that series of generators:
http://www.repeater-builder.com/motorola/test-equipment/moto-test-equip-index.html
Search for the T-1034 section. We had three of the Measurements Model
80 generators. One for the service van, one for the shop, and one for
spare parts.

The one I have is the FM modle and
the number is T1035B. From the pix you had it, at first glance it looked
like a differant modle as part of it was hidden.

Sorry. I'll see if I can find a better photo of the shop.

Mine works through the 450
mhz reagon. It does have a scale for something between 800 to 900 mhz that
is not calibrated. Also there is another oscillator that is not calibrated,
but adjustiable that covers some low frequencies of between maybe 3 to 30
mhz.

I hadn't seen any that did that. All the Measurements generators that
we had were AM only.

I think that is the one or maybe a later transistorised version that
is shown in some of the old GE Mastr ll books.

I'll look in my pile of MSTR II manuals tonite.

Drivel: I just found a box of Motorola Buyers Guides from the 1970's
in the office. Office closet archaeology is so much fun.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Relationship Between Antenna Efficiency and Received Signal Strength
 

On 1/28/2014 2:38 AM, Jeff wrote:

When you get the sufficient background in electronics, math and
physics,
we can discuss this intelligently. Until then, it's like teaching a
pig
to sing.


You really are a very rude person.

Jeff

Oh, because I won't give you a the equivalent of a four-year degree for
free on usenet?

You really are a troll.


No, because when challenged to prove the assertions that you made you
evade answering by using rude personal remarks.

Jeff

Yes, because I'm not going to give you the equivalent of a four-year
degree for free on usenet.

You get sufficient background to discuss this intelligently and we can
continue, troll.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle

==================

Relationship Between Antenna Efficiency and Received Signal Strength
 

On 1/28/2014 11:26 AM, Jeff wrote:

No, because when challenged to prove the assertions that you made you
evade answering by using rude personal remarks.

Jeff

Yes, because I'm not going to give you the equivalent of a four-year
degree for free on usenet.

You get sufficient background to discuss this intelligently and we can
continue, troll.


No need for a degree course just simple explanations from you as to how
a Smith Chart can show the efficiency of an antenna, and how one can
show what goes on *inside* a piece of coax, which is what you maintained.

Bur of course you won't/can't so I will expect more rude comments from you.

Jeff

When you get the necessary background to understand how it works, then
we can discuss it intelligently.

But you even think a smith chart can't be used for antennas. So much
for your knowledge.

And also please point out exactly where I said a smith chart could be
used to show the efficiency of an antenna, or what goes on inside a
piece of coax. But you can't - trolls are good at twisting words and
coming up with unsubstantiated claims.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle

==================

Relationship Between Antenna Efficiency and Received Signal Strength
 

On 1/28/2014 2:25 PM, Jeff wrote:

Bur of course you won't/can't so I will expect more rude comments from
you.

Jeff

When you get the necessary background to understand how it works, then
we can discuss it intelligently.

But you even think a smith chart can't be used for antennas. So much
for your knowledge.

And also please point out exactly where I said a smith chart could be
used to show the efficiency of an antenna, or what goes on inside a
piece of coax. But you can't - trolls are good at twisting words and
coming up with unsubstantiated claims.


AS I expected more rude personal comments and no real response. It would
appear that anyone who disagrees with you is a troll. I think that you
have show yourself for what you are in this and other threads, and are
incapable of rational discussion. It is you who are the troll. I have
nothing more to say as you do not wish to justify your arguments.

Jeff

If you understood ANYTHING about Smith Charts, you would understand they
are the graphical representation of the results of mathematical
forumulae. And you obviously don't have the background to understand
the math, so any intelligent discussion is not possible.

And just like a troll, you don't respond to my comments. They were REAL
responses - but ones you can't answer.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================

Relationship Between Antenna Efficiency and Received Signal Strength
 

Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/28/2014 2:25 PM, Jeff wrote:

Bur of course you won't/can't so I will expect more rude comments from
you.

Jeff

When you get the necessary background to understand how it works, then
we can discuss it intelligently.

But you even think a smith chart can't be used for antennas. So much
for your knowledge.

And also please point out exactly where I said a smith chart could be
used to show the efficiency of an antenna, or what goes on inside a
piece of coax. But you can't - trolls are good at twisting words and
coming up with unsubstantiated claims.


AS I expected more rude personal comments and no real response. It would
appear that anyone who disagrees with you is a troll. I think that you
have show yourself for what you are in this and other threads, and are
incapable of rational discussion. It is you who are the troll. I have
nothing more to say as you do not wish to justify your arguments.

Jeff

If you understood ANYTHING about Smith Charts, you would understand they
are the graphical representation of the results of mathematical
forumulae. And you obviously don't have the background to understand
the math, so any intelligent discussion is not possible.

Not quite; a Smith chart is a nomgraph of complex impedance usually
noralized to one.

The data could come from "mathematical forumulae" but usually comes
from measured data in which case the "mathematical forumulae" amounts
to normalizing the impedance to one.

From a Smith chart, one can obtain impedances, admittances, reflection
coefficients, scattering parameters, noise figure circles, constant gain
contours and regions for unconditional stability.



--
Jim Pennino

Relationship Between Antenna Efficiency and Received Signal Strength
 

On 1/28/2014 5:10 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/28/2014 2:25 PM, Jeff wrote:

Bur of course you won't/can't so I will expect more rude comments from
you.

Jeff

When you get the necessary background to understand how it works, then
we can discuss it intelligently.

But you even think a smith chart can't be used for antennas. So much
for your knowledge.

And also please point out exactly where I said a smith chart could be
used to show the efficiency of an antenna, or what goes on inside a
piece of coax. But you can't - trolls are good at twisting words and
coming up with unsubstantiated claims.


AS I expected more rude personal comments and no real response. It would
appear that anyone who disagrees with you is a troll. I think that you
have show yourself for what you are in this and other threads, and are
incapable of rational discussion. It is you who are the troll. I have
nothing more to say as you do not wish to justify your arguments.

Jeff

If you understood ANYTHING about Smith Charts, you would understand they
are the graphical representation of the results of mathematical
forumulae. And you obviously don't have the background to understand
the math, so any intelligent discussion is not possible.

Not quite; a Smith chart is a nomgraph of complex impedance usually
noralized to one.

The data could come from "mathematical forumulae" but usually comes
from measured data in which case the "mathematical forumulae" amounts
to normalizing the impedance to one.

From a Smith chart, one can obtain impedances, admittances, reflection
coefficients, scattering parameters, noise figure circles, constant gain
contours and regions for unconditional stability.




I KNOW what a Smith Chart is. But unlike you, I UNDERSTAND the math
behind it.

It's all about the math.


--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle

==================

Relationship Between Antenna Efficiency and Received Signal Strength
 

Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/28/2014 5:10 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/28/2014 2:25 PM, Jeff wrote:

Bur of course you won't/can't so I will expect more rude comments from
you.

Jeff

When you get the necessary background to understand how it works, then
we can discuss it intelligently.

But you even think a smith chart can't be used for antennas. So much
for your knowledge.

And also please point out exactly where I said a smith chart could be
used to show the efficiency of an antenna, or what goes on inside a
piece of coax. But you can't - trolls are good at twisting words and
coming up with unsubstantiated claims.


AS I expected more rude personal comments and no real response. It would
appear that anyone who disagrees with you is a troll. I think that you
have show yourself for what you are in this and other threads, and are
incapable of rational discussion. It is you who are the troll. I have
nothing more to say as you do not wish to justify your arguments.

Jeff

If you understood ANYTHING about Smith Charts, you would understand they
are the graphical representation of the results of mathematical
forumulae. And you obviously don't have the background to understand
the math, so any intelligent discussion is not possible.

Not quite; a Smith chart is a nomgraph of complex impedance usually
noralized to one.

The data could come from "mathematical forumulae" but usually comes
from measured data in which case the "mathematical forumulae" amounts
to normalizing the impedance to one.

From a Smith chart, one can obtain impedances, admittances, reflection
coefficients, scattering parameters, noise figure circles, constant gain
contours and regions for unconditional stability.




I KNOW what a Smith Chart is. But unlike you, I UNDERSTAND the math
behind it.

It's all about the math.

Actually a Smith chart is all about AVOIDING the math which was very
difficult and time consuming to do in the pre-computer days.



--
Jim Pennino

Relationship Between Antenna Efficiency and Received Signal Strength
 

On 1/28/2014 7:40 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/28/2014 5:10 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/28/2014 2:25 PM, Jeff wrote:

Bur of course you won't/can't so I will expect more rude comments from
you.

Jeff

When you get the necessary background to understand how it works, then
we can discuss it intelligently.

But you even think a smith chart can't be used for antennas. So much
for your knowledge.

And also please point out exactly where I said a smith chart could be
used to show the efficiency of an antenna, or what goes on inside a
piece of coax. But you can't - trolls are good at twisting words and
coming up with unsubstantiated claims.


AS I expected more rude personal comments and no real response. It would
appear that anyone who disagrees with you is a troll. I think that you
have show yourself for what you are in this and other threads, and are
incapable of rational discussion. It is you who are the troll. I have
nothing more to say as you do not wish to justify your arguments.

Jeff

If you understood ANYTHING about Smith Charts, you would understand they
are the graphical representation of the results of mathematical
forumulae. And you obviously don't have the background to understand
the math, so any intelligent discussion is not possible.

Not quite; a Smith chart is a nomgraph of complex impedance usually
noralized to one.

The data could come from "mathematical forumulae" but usually comes
from measured data in which case the "mathematical forumulae" amounts
to normalizing the impedance to one.

From a Smith chart, one can obtain impedances, admittances, reflection
coefficients, scattering parameters, noise figure circles, constant gain
contours and regions for unconditional stability.




I KNOW what a Smith Chart is. But unlike you, I UNDERSTAND the math
behind it.

It's all about the math.

Actually a Smith chart is all about AVOIDING the math which was very
difficult and time consuming to do in the pre-computer days.


It's all based on the math. And if you understand the math, you can use
a Smith Chart much more effectively.

And it wasn't all THAT time consuming - we had to do it with a
slipstick, paper and pencil. No PC's (or even calculators) in those days.


--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle

==================