On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 22:41:56 -0500, rickman wrote:

I guess this group is just done for.

Not so fast. The two postings on your 60KHz loop question by Wim
(PA3DJS) were well worth reading and certainly informative. I had no
idea how to calculate the H field until he provided an example. Don't
throw out the few good answers just because you dislike having to wade
through a mountain of garbage.


"At the bottom of every dumpster is a gem. It's only a question of
how much garbage you're willing to sift through trying to find it".
(Me about 1995).
--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
...
I had no
idea how to calculate the H field until he provided an example.

And there is the ignorance declared, the ignorance that resulted
in ad hominem comments elsewhere.

On 11/5/2014 12:11 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 22:41:56 -0500, rickman wrote:

I guess this group is just done for.

Not so fast. The two postings on your 60KHz loop question by Wim
(PA3DJS) were well worth reading and certainly informative. I had no
idea how to calculate the H field until he provided an example. Don't
throw out the few good answers just because you dislike having to wade
through a mountain of garbage.


"At the bottom of every dumpster is a gem. It's only a question of
how much garbage you're willing to sift through trying to find it".
(Me about 1995).

You come up with some gems now and then, like this one, lol. No, I'm
not willing to wade through a mountain of crap to find one or two good
posts. But maybe I am a bit shell shocked. I post on the s.e.d group
and there are a fair number of true a-holes who would rather insult you
than to answer one legitimate question.

In response to your comment on the 60 kHz thread, I have done some spice
simulation, mostly to estimate the Q of the antenna. I would be happy
to post some info if you ask about it there.

--

Rick

On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 13:11:31 -0500, rickman wrote:

On 11/5/2014 12:11 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 22:41:56 -0500, rickman wrote:

I guess this group is just done for.

Not so fast. The two postings on your 60KHz loop question by Wim
(PA3DJS) were well worth reading and certainly informative. I had no
idea how to calculate the H field until he provided an example. Don't
throw out the few good answers just because you dislike having to wade
through a mountain of garbage.


"At the bottom of every dumpster is a gem. It's only a question of
how much garbage you're willing to sift through trying to find it".
(Me about 1995).

You come up with some gems now and then, like this one, lol.

Thanks. I pickup such things on the well beaten path to
enlightenment. I threw the following together last night to deal with
a case of over-planning:
"Those that only live in the past are never disappointed by
the future because they make no plans. Those that live only
for the promises of the future tend to forget the lessons of
the past, and soon repeat them. Those that live only in the
present have both problems."
It looks like wisdom but it's really just a philosophy formula. take
two diametrically opposed observations and follow them with a self
contradictory conclusion. Once you know the trick, it's easy.

Now, if I could only fix my crappy arithmetic.

No, I'm
not willing to wade through a mountain of crap to find one or two good
posts.

Well, that's fine. I tolerate considerable abuse before giving up.
Many years ago, I was working as a 2way radio tech. My boss was a
compulsive liar and somewhat of a crook. Most of what he told me had
to be double checked before acting on it. However, I tolerated it
because the few gems at the bottom of this dumpster were well worth my
paying attention. It was low efficiency operation, but I was willing
to pay the price.

But maybe I am a bit shell shocked. I post on the s.e.d group
and there are a fair number of true a-holes who would rather insult you
than to answer one legitimate question.

Again, don't pass judgment on the person if the information is
worthwhile. Phil Allison in s.e.d is a good example. With few
exceptions, his opinions and info are quite good and accurate. He can
often see what others have missed or have ignored. I value that, even
when it arrives mixed with personal abuse, denunciations, profanity,
and character assassinations.

In response to your comment on the 60 kHz thread, I have done some spice
simulation, mostly to estimate the Q of the antenna. I would be happy
to post some info if you ask about it there.

A new WWVB shielded magnetic loop is certainly on my agenda and I do
plan to ask questions. However, I'll probably do it on the Time-Nuts
mailing list, which has more RF people.

Incidentally, I don't believe using a high impedance loop and amp are
good ideas. While there are benefits, my experiences from the marine
radio biz convinced me that high voltage is an invitation to problems
from condensation, salt fog, and PCB leakage. In other words, it
works on the bench, but craps out in the field. I'll probably end up
with a large high Q loop, and a separate low-Z coupling loop (i.e. a
step down xformer).

ok, back to work...

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

On 06/11/2014 01:29, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Now, if I could only fix my crappy arithmetic.

Try this... :-)


From: "G \"Guglielmo\" Evans G4SDW"
Newsgroups: uk.radio.amateur
Subject: Difficulty with maths?
Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 12:47:45 +0100
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines: 115
Message-ID:
NNTP-Posting-Host: Z3IpgFh83JnnDIiU15n1gQ.user.aioe.org
X-Complaints-To:
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal

For those who claim an interest going back several
years, (in one case 50 years!) and who have still not
yet managed the M3/CB Fools' Licence hurdle that
is set for 6-year-olds, here is Lesson 1 of a maths
lecture course that I prepared some years ago.

Practising school teachers who say that maths is hard
should also start here.

-----ooooo-----

Copyright (C) 1999 G.A.Evans All Rights Reserved.

So, you're a CBer and you want a Ham Radio licence?
Good on you.
Well, let's consider the differences.....

CB is a social facility for those with no technical
qualification nor competence. You must use type-
approved equipment which you are NOT allowed
to modify. You are restricted to one band, and to
a very low output power. (More power, in fact, than
your GSM phone, but still very low)

Ham Radio is related, but not closely. Ham Radio
is also a social facility, but with a difference. You are
allowed to construct your own transmitting gear and
use it on a multitude of bands, and at very high
powers. With such privileges comes responsibility.
You must demonstrate that you have a minimum of
technical know-how, and for this purpose you must pass
an examination, The Radio Amateur's Examination.

This is not a difficult examination, It is easier than a
GCSE, and when you consider that youngsters doing
their GCSE's study and pass 10 at a time, then the RAE
on it's own is a simple matter.

To indulge in this technical activity, you must enjoy solving
puzzles. You must thrive on finding out how things
work and inventing things for yourself. If this doesn't
describe you, then perhaps Ham Radio is not for you?

Now, you will need a jargon to discuss and explain
your new-found technical excitement. As a CBer, you
may have said things like, "You're showing five
cherries". All very amusing, but hardly technical. As
a Radio Ham you will be expected to use and understand
such phrases as, "S9 plus 20 dB". The jargon that you will
use is known as "Mathematics". Now, "Hold On!", I hear
you gasp, you were hopeless at mathematics (or, "Maths")
at school.

Well, let me let you into a secret. The problem with maths
did not lie with you, but with the incompetence of your
teachers. Maths is really quite straightforward, and the
knowledge you need is no more than that which school
children of 12 possess. You're not going to tell me that
a child of 12 is better than you? Of course not!

That's all very well and glib, but it cannot be denied
that some of you have found maths to be difficult, and
based upon the scorn heaped upon you by your incompetent
teachers, some of you will have formed mental blocks that
prevent you from making any progress.

Well, what I am going to do, is to prepare some elementary
lessons for you, which you can do in the privacy of
your own home, where no-one will look over your shoulder
or laugh at you.

How am I going to do this when you already have a mental
block? Well, what I will do is take you right back to
square one, right back to where you were before you got
that block, when you were perhaps five years old, and
there was absolutely no difference between you and the
other pupils in the playground, and bring you on in
a spirit of confidence.
(You may find the first lessons to be trivial, but please
bear with me. The principles laid down will assist you
throughout the course).

The first, and most important thing which I will stress
time and time again is this.......quite often you will
come across some new maths which confuses you, but which
more often than not, is a new way of writing down
SOMETHING WHICH YOU ALREADY KNOW, something which is
a shorthand to make life easy.

-----OOOOO-----

So, let's make a very easy start, illustrating this
principle. Let us suppose that we are counting eggs,
and if you'll pardon the weak pun, let's count "X's".

X; one, obviously.
XX; two,
XXX; three,
XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXX; One Hundred and Twenty Three!

So, here is that first and most important principle...
instead of having that tedious way of counting, we use
a shorthand... "1", "2", "3" and "123". Now, as I said,
this isn't any new or clever maths, IT'S JUST AN EASY
WAY OF WRITING DOWN SOMETHING WHICH YOU ALREADY KNOW.

Right, that's enough for an introduction. Yes, it's
trivially simple, but then so is maths, as you will
see in subsequent lessons. Who knows, in a short
time you'll get that Ham Radio license!

On 11/6/2014 4:05 PM, Jeefaw K. Effkay wrote:
On 06/11/2014 01:29, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Now, if I could only fix my crappy arithmetic.

Try this... :-)

snip

Why give the idiot any more publicity than he gets himself? The whole
post is as full of crap as he is.

The best thing to do is ignore him - it will make him madder, but the
lack of attention will drive him crazy.

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

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

Jerry Stuckle wrote in news:m3h6rc$871$1@dont-
email.me:

The best thing to do is ignore him - it will make him madder, but the
lack of attention will drive him crazy.


If he's on BT he'll have to get another ISP. Same goes for Demon who have
already cancelled Usenet as BT are about to do. UK ISP's seem to be dropping
Usenet like a ton of ****, without advance warning of any worth, and maybe
all within a very few weeks of they haven't already done it. It seems to me
that maybe the recent rush of govt demands that they clean up the piracy uses
of Usenet, combined with ever increasing surveillance of ordinary people
means that the only cheap safe way for an ISP to avoid looking like it's
antagonistic to the new secret-policing style of UK government is to drop,
IMMEDIATELY, all subsystems that might make them look bad.

There may be more innocent explanations, like Usenet going to the dogs
generally, public perception genrally favouring forums on the web. Judging by
the recent squabbles here that is not hard to exaplain. Recent;ly, one night,
I say one silly thing ina post otherwise reasonable, and TWO people try to
jump down my throat. For a fleeting moment I was daft enough to think it
might be about me, but no, I just went silent, looked the next morning, and
those two people were at each other for most of the night in my absence!

Anyway, I won't be paying for Usenet, so I'll be out of those people's hair.
I'll jump before I'm pushed. If I can get an ISP with decent web hosting for
no greater cost than I am paying to BT now for a heavily capped service with
no web host, and very soon, no Usenet, I'll go as soon as I can.

It's been helpful to me to have access easily to some knowledgeable people
willing to post thoughts rapidly, in direct response to things I ask, and
I'll miss that. On the other hand, some of those people have pointed out that
good texts usually get a better guide to someone wanting an answer, if not as
immediately. Usually I just trawl the web and look for multiple sources
before whittling down to the best that works for me.

It looks like the net's good times are over, it's likely to get harder after
being easy for about ten years. I'm not going to try to speculate about why,
but I know that if Usenet is no longer possible without a lot of additional
expense equivalent to a new utility service, then I'm out.

On 2014-11-07 10:58:18 +0000, Lostgallifreyan said:

Jerry Stuckle wrote in news:m3h6rc$871$1@dont-
email.me:

The best thing to do is ignore him - it will make him madder, but the
lack of attention will drive him crazy.


If he's on BT he'll have to get another ISP. Same goes for Demon who have
already cancelled Usenet as BT are about to do. UK ISP's seem to be dropping
Usenet like a ton of ****, without advance warning of any worth, and maybe
all within a very few weeks of they haven't already done it. It seems to me
that maybe the recent rush of govt demands that they clean up the piracy uses
of Usenet, combined with ever increasing surveillance of ordinary people
means that the only cheap safe way for an ISP to avoid looking like it's
antagonistic to the new secret-policing style of UK government is to drop,
IMMEDIATELY, all subsystems that might make them look bad.

There may be more innocent explanations, like Usenet going to the dogs
generally, public perception genrally favouring forums on the web. Judging by
the recent squabbles here that is not hard to exaplain. Recent;ly, one night,
I say one silly thing ina post otherwise reasonable, and TWO people try to
jump down my throat. For a fleeting moment I was daft enough to think it
might be about me, but no, I just went silent, looked the next morning, and
those two people were at each other for most of the night in my absence!

Anyway, I won't be paying for Usenet, so I'll be out of those people's hair.
I'll jump before I'm pushed. If I can get an ISP with decent web hosting for
no greater cost than I am paying to BT now for a heavily capped service with
no web host, and very soon, no Usenet, I'll go as soon as I can.

It's been helpful to me to have access easily to some knowledgeable people
willing to post thoughts rapidly, in direct response to things I ask, and
I'll miss that. On the other hand, some of those people have pointed out that
good texts usually get a better guide to someone wanting an answer, if not as
immediately. Usually I just trawl the web and look for multiple sources
before whittling down to the best that works for me.

It looks like the net's good times are over, it's likely to get harder after
being easy for about ten years. I'm not going to try to speculate about why,
but I know that if Usenet is no longer possible without a lot of additional
expense equivalent to a new utility service, then I'm out.

There are a number of good free text group newsservers, such as Eternal
September, and at least one paid-for one with a good reputation that
only costs 10GBP a year (news.individual.net). So I hope we don't have
to lose you.

--

Percy Picacity

On Friday, November 7, 2014 4:58:19 AM UTC-6, Lostgallifreyan wrote:

There may be more innocent explanations, like Usenet going to the dogs
generally, public perception genrally favouring forums on the web.

Many ISP's did that in the US a long time ago. The main reason being it's
a pain and $$$ for them to maintain usenet, and I suppose the cost and hassle
is not worth it for them vs the fairly low amount of their users that actually
use usenet. In other words it's mainly about money. Or at least here in the
states. Comcast dropped it a few years ago. So I just use google groups, which
I had for a backup. I've actually got used to google groups and actually prefer
it to using a usenet server and a reader, which is T-bird in my case.
It's easier and faster to read the posts, where I can see all in a thread with
one click, without having to click through each post individually.

I also see all old archived posts in a thread, like the one's Gmailers often
reply to a decade or more after the original posts.. :|
I don't know what it is that provokes Gmailers to reply to posts so old it's
often a crapshoot if the OP is still alive or not, much less still active. :/
But if you some loon replying to a 15 year old post, it's almost certainly
a Gmailer, which I don't use.

Now I use aioe as a backup in case GG craps out, which they do every once
in a while. aioe is free same as ES.

BTW, I got my revenge on Comcast recently. I had triple play and movie
channels which the price kept going up, up, up, and I got tired of having
to renegotiate a new price every year, as I refused to pay their full bloated
prices.
So 3 months ago, I canceled everything but internet. My bill went from $165
a month to about $64 a month. It can be even cheaper if I dump their now $10 a
month gateway modem, and buy my own, which I plan to do when I get around to it.
It was $8 a month until 2 months ago.. :/

My speed is now slower from my previous appx 58 mbps, to my current 7.2 mbps,
or 15 mbps if I go in the unsecured xfinity back door using my laptop and
wi-fi, but even 7 mbps is fast enough for most of my uses. It's only been
three months, and I've already saved over $300.. Will save over $1200 a year.
That's what they get for provoking me with once a year greediness and price
scheme mayhem, which drove me up the wall every fall. :+

"Lostgallifreyan" wrote in message
. ..

Once again a wall of text that has no relevance to amateur radio.