gareth wrote:
Those who claim that there is no magnetic field in a feeder,
balanced or otherise, must have been playing truant on the
days that Maxwell's Equations were being taught.

What in the world are you bloviating about now?

The statement was there is an electric field but no ELECTROMAGNETIC
field in a "feeder", or more properly, a transmission line other than
in a waveguide.

You do understand that an electric field, a magnetic field, and an
electromagnetic field are three different things?

The purpose of a transmission line is move RF energy from one place
to another without creating an electromagnetic field.


--
Jim Pennino

On 02/11/2014 20:15, wrote:

The purpose of a transmission line is move RF energy from one place
to another without creating an electromagnetic field.

But a balanced transmission line creates two electromagnetic fields
which cancel one another, Shirley?

Jeefaw K. Effkay wrote:
On 02/11/2014 20:15, wrote:

The purpose of a transmission line is move RF energy from one place
to another without creating an electromagnetic field.

But a balanced transmission line creates two electromagnetic fields
which cancel one another, Shirley?

What is the value of a canceled check?

If a balanced transmission line created an electromagnetic field, there
would be losses in the line as the line is the only source of energy.

Again neglecting I^2R losses.

--
Jim Pennino

On 02/11/2014 22:03, wrote:
Jeefaw K. Effkay wrote:
On 02/11/2014 20:15, wrote:

The purpose of a transmission line is move RF energy from one place
to another without creating an electromagnetic field.

But a balanced transmission line creates two electromagnetic fields
which cancel one another, Shirley?

What is the value of a canceled check?

You mean a cancelled cheque? :-)

If a balanced transmission line created an electromagnetic field, there
would be losses in the line as the line is the only source of energy.

Again neglecting I^2R losses.

What about losses due to imbalances - for example, coupling into nearby
conductors due to poor installation, which presumeably derives from
either of the two electromagnetic fields which aren't generated? :-)

PS - sorry about the Subject line. I'm sure you know who's responsible
for that.

On 11/2/2014 5:03 PM, wrote:
Jeefaw K. Effkay wrote:
On 02/11/2014 20:15, wrote:

The purpose of a transmission line is move RF energy from one place
to another without creating an electromagnetic field.

But a balanced transmission line creates two electromagnetic fields
which cancel one another, Shirley?

What is the value of a canceled check?

If a balanced transmission line created an electromagnetic field, there
would be losses in the line as the line is the only source of energy.

Again neglecting I^2R losses.

Who ever said a balanced transmission line does not create an EM field?
Here is an illustration of the EM field of a transmission line...

https://rdl.train.army.mil/catalog-w...p3.htm#fig3-14

--

Rick

rickman wrote:
On 11/2/2014 5:03 PM, wrote:
Jeefaw K. Effkay wrote:
On 02/11/2014 20:15, wrote:

The purpose of a transmission line is move RF energy from one place
to another without creating an electromagnetic field.

But a balanced transmission line creates two electromagnetic fields
which cancel one another, Shirley?

What is the value of a canceled check?

If a balanced transmission line created an electromagnetic field, there
would be losses in the line as the line is the only source of energy.

Again neglecting I^2R losses.

Who ever said a balanced transmission line does not create an EM field?
Here is an illustration of the EM field of a transmission line...

https://rdl.train.army.mil/catalog-w...p3.htm#fig3-14


It is an illustration of **** poor wording. What is depicted is NOT an
electromagnetic field, i.e radio waves. It is an illustration of an
electric field and a magnetic field and is correct in that aspect.

It is also from a dumbed down US Army training publication and I can show
you lots of Army manuals that do not conform to accepted principals and
language usage left over from my days as an Army instructor.


--
Jim Pennino

wrote in message
news
It is an illustration of **** poor wording. What is depicted is NOT an
electromagnetic field, i.e radio waves.

And there we have it, encapsulated so neatly by those words of Alexander
Pope ...

"A little learning is a dangerous thing
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring"

gareth wrote:
wrote in message
news
It is an illustration of **** poor wording. What is depicted is NOT an
electromagnetic field, i.e radio waves.

And there we have it, encapsulated so neatly by those words of Alexander
Pope ...

"A little learning is a dangerous thing
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring"

What we have is yet more hot air from the resident gas bag who does
not understand the difference between an electric field, a magnetic
field and an electromagetic field nor an AC voltage and electromagnetic
radiation.



--
Jim Pennino

En el artículo ,
escribió:

Army manuals that do not conform to accepted principals

It would help if you spelt 'principles' correctly.

--
(\_/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artÃ*culo ,
escribió:

Army manuals that do not conform to accepted principals

It would help if you spelt 'principles' correctly.

The word is spelled correctly, it is just the wrong word but I'm not
sure what wheat has to do with anything...


--
Jim Pennino