Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/2/2014 3:58 PM, wrote: Lostgallifreyan wrote: wrote in : Apples and oranges; we already know what will happen if one were to build an antenna from a superconductor. Fire up EZNEC and set material loss to zero; done. Yeah, anyone with a map could say a great deal about the shape of West Africa based on ocean travel. Again, apples and oranges as we know EXACTLY and in DETAIL what would happen. My point isn't so much about antennas, as about exploring the easy availability of cold environments for superconductors in space. Easy availability measured in thousands of dollars an ounce to get stuff there. Not having to lug heavy coolers up there might be an offer someone cannot refuse, and that someone might come back with all kinds of discoveries, things no models or predictions are going out there to find. The only thing that makes a superconductor different is the lack of resistance. We already know exactly what that means and what we would do with them if room temperature superconcductors were available. Here are a couple of things: electric motors and generators that would be very close to 100% efficient, small, light, and lossless power transmission lines, lossless transformers, big honking magnets. It's a little more than just no resistance. For instance, superconductors will "reflect" (for lack of a better word) a magnetic field. That's now a superconducting disk will levitate over a magnetic field. So just setting the resistance to zero doesn't necessarily cut it. There are other things to consider which EZNIC may not handle properly. Such as? In regards to magnetic levitation, a super conductor is a perfect diamagnet due to the Meissner effect. None of that has anything to do with antennas. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...ds/maglev.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_levitation -- Jim Pennino |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 11/2/2014 6:11 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 11/2/2014 3:58 PM, wrote: Lostgallifreyan wrote: wrote in : Apples and oranges; we already know what will happen if one were to build an antenna from a superconductor. Fire up EZNEC and set material loss to zero; done. Yeah, anyone with a map could say a great deal about the shape of West Africa based on ocean travel. Again, apples and oranges as we know EXACTLY and in DETAIL what would happen. My point isn't so much about antennas, as about exploring the easy availability of cold environments for superconductors in space. Easy availability measured in thousands of dollars an ounce to get stuff there. Not having to lug heavy coolers up there might be an offer someone cannot refuse, and that someone might come back with all kinds of discoveries, things no models or predictions are going out there to find. The only thing that makes a superconductor different is the lack of resistance. We already know exactly what that means and what we would do with them if room temperature superconcductors were available. Here are a couple of things: electric motors and generators that would be very close to 100% efficient, small, light, and lossless power transmission lines, lossless transformers, big honking magnets. It's a little more than just no resistance. For instance, superconductors will "reflect" (for lack of a better word) a magnetic field. That's now a superconducting disk will levitate over a magnetic field. So just setting the resistance to zero doesn't necessarily cut it. There are other things to consider which EZNIC may not handle properly. Such as? In regards to magnetic levitation, a super conductor is a perfect diamagnet due to the Meissner effect. None of that has anything to do with antennas. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...ds/maglev.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_levitation Are you sure? I haven't seen anything one way or the other on it - although I'm sure it's been studied. Can you point at some studies to that effect? -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 11/2/2014 6:11 PM, wrote: Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 11/2/2014 3:58 PM, wrote: Lostgallifreyan wrote: wrote in : Apples and oranges; we already know what will happen if one were to build an antenna from a superconductor. Fire up EZNEC and set material loss to zero; done. Yeah, anyone with a map could say a great deal about the shape of West Africa based on ocean travel. Again, apples and oranges as we know EXACTLY and in DETAIL what would happen. My point isn't so much about antennas, as about exploring the easy availability of cold environments for superconductors in space. Easy availability measured in thousands of dollars an ounce to get stuff there. Not having to lug heavy coolers up there might be an offer someone cannot refuse, and that someone might come back with all kinds of discoveries, things no models or predictions are going out there to find. The only thing that makes a superconductor different is the lack of resistance. We already know exactly what that means and what we would do with them if room temperature superconcductors were available. Here are a couple of things: electric motors and generators that would be very close to 100% efficient, small, light, and lossless power transmission lines, lossless transformers, big honking magnets. It's a little more than just no resistance. For instance, superconductors will "reflect" (for lack of a better word) a magnetic field. That's now a superconducting disk will levitate over a magnetic field. So just setting the resistance to zero doesn't necessarily cut it. There are other things to consider which EZNIC may not handle properly. Such as? In regards to magnetic levitation, a super conductor is a perfect diamagnet due to the Meissner effect. None of that has anything to do with antennas. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...ds/maglev.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_levitation Are you sure? I haven't seen anything one way or the other on it - although I'm sure it's been studied. Can you point at some studies to that effect? Start with the two links, follow the internal links. -- Jim Pennino |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 11/3/2014 12:37 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 11/2/2014 6:11 PM, wrote: Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 11/2/2014 3:58 PM, wrote: Lostgallifreyan wrote: wrote in : Apples and oranges; we already know what will happen if one were to build an antenna from a superconductor. Fire up EZNEC and set material loss to zero; done. Yeah, anyone with a map could say a great deal about the shape of West Africa based on ocean travel. Again, apples and oranges as we know EXACTLY and in DETAIL what would happen. My point isn't so much about antennas, as about exploring the easy availability of cold environments for superconductors in space. Easy availability measured in thousands of dollars an ounce to get stuff there. Not having to lug heavy coolers up there might be an offer someone cannot refuse, and that someone might come back with all kinds of discoveries, things no models or predictions are going out there to find. The only thing that makes a superconductor different is the lack of resistance. We already know exactly what that means and what we would do with them if room temperature superconcductors were available. Here are a couple of things: electric motors and generators that would be very close to 100% efficient, small, light, and lossless power transmission lines, lossless transformers, big honking magnets. It's a little more than just no resistance. For instance, superconductors will "reflect" (for lack of a better word) a magnetic field. That's now a superconducting disk will levitate over a magnetic field. So just setting the resistance to zero doesn't necessarily cut it. There are other things to consider which EZNIC may not handle properly. Such as? In regards to magnetic levitation, a super conductor is a perfect diamagnet due to the Meissner effect. None of that has anything to do with antennas. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...ds/maglev.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_levitation Are you sure? I haven't seen anything one way or the other on it - although I'm sure it's been studied. Can you point at some studies to that effect? Start with the two links, follow the internal links. I didn't see a lot on antennas and EM fields in your references or their links. However, I did fine another very interesting link: http://ecjones.org/hightc.html A good article, and not too long. But if you want the gist, scroll down to where he built a 2 foot antenna for 160 meters in paragraph II.5. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
The inefficiency of short antennae compared to long antennae, as previously discussed. | Antenna | |||
Reductio ad absurdum - short antennae do not radiate well | Antenna | |||
Radiate Power Question ? | Antenna | |||
How much does a counterpoise radiate? | Antenna | |||
Antennae base | Homebrew |