"gareth" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
news
By that logic you could simply spin a permanent magnet and generate
an electromagnetic field, but you can't.
If you spin your permanent magnet at frequencies such that the
associated wavelength is a million metres, or thereabouts, then it
would be such a short antenna that there would not be enough radiation
from it to be detectable, (remeber that short antennae are poor radiators,
qv)

But, if you were to spin it at 1000 revs per sec (60,000 revs per minute)
then it would be a different matter.

As I was driving away this morning, I realised that I'd typoed, and then
misled myself about
the possibilty of using a jet engine. Nobody's perfect!

I had meant o say to spin at 1000MHz, or 1,000,000 revs per sec, for the
example.

Apologies.

"gareth" wrote in message
...
"gareth" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
news
By that logic you could simply spin a permanent magnet and generate
an electromagnetic field, but you can't.
If you spin your permanent magnet at frequencies such that the
associated wavelength is a million metres, or thereabouts, then it
would be such a short antenna that there would not be enough radiation
from it to be detectable, (remeber that short antennae are poor
radiators, qv)

But, if you were to spin it at 1000 revs per sec (60,000 revs per minute)
then it would be a different matter.

As I was driving away this morning, I realised that I'd typoed, and then
misled myself about
the possibilty of using a jet engine. Nobody's perfect!

I had meant o say to spin at 1000MHz, or 1,000,000 revs per sec, for the
example.

For god's sake!!!! or 1,000,000,000 revs per sec!!!!!!!!!

On Mon, 03 Nov 2014 14:14:52 +0000, gareth wrote:

"gareth" wrote in message
...

As I was driving away this morning, I realised that I'd typoed, and
then misled myself about the possibilty of using a jet engine. Nobody's
perfect!

I had meant o say to spin at 1000MHz, or 1,000,000 revs per sec, for
the example.

For god's sake!!!! or 1,000,000,000 revs per sec!!!!!!!!!

When you're trying to hold water in a colander, is there really any point
in just plugging one or two holes?

On 2014-11-03 16:11:14 +0000, Bernie said:

On Mon, 03 Nov 2014 14:14:52 +0000, gareth wrote:

"gareth" wrote in message
...

As I was driving away this morning, I realised that I'd typoed, and
then misled myself about the possibilty of using a jet engine. Nobody's
perfect!

I had meant o say to spin at 1000MHz, or 1,000,000 revs per sec, for
the example.

For god's sake!!!! or 1,000,000,000 revs per sec!!!!!!!!!

When you're trying to hold water in a colander, is there really any point
in just plugging one or two holes?

After all, rotary machines to produce LF power (but not LF em waves!)
were used in the early days of WT, so the rpm x poles must be
reasonably achievable.

--

Percy Picacity

gareth wrote:
"gareth" wrote in message
...
"gareth" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
news By that logic you could simply spin a permanent magnet and generate
an electromagnetic field, but you can't.
If you spin your permanent magnet at frequencies such that the
associated wavelength is a million metres, or thereabouts, then it
would be such a short antenna that there would not be enough radiation
from it to be detectable, (remeber that short antennae are poor
radiators, qv)

But, if you were to spin it at 1000 revs per sec (60,000 revs per minute)
then it would be a different matter.

As I was driving away this morning, I realised that I'd typoed, and then
misled myself about
the possibilty of using a jet engine. Nobody's perfect!

I had meant o say to spin at 1000MHz, or 1,000,000 revs per sec, for the
example.

For god's sake!!!! or 1,000,000,000 revs per sec!!!!!!!!!

All of your posts are babbling nonsense which just show once again you
have no clue that an electric field, a magnetic field, and an electromagnetic
field are three different things.



--
Jim Pennino