On 8/7/2015 12:02 PM, rickman wrote:
On 8/7/2015 11:26 AM, John S wrote:
On 8/6/2015 11:33 AM, rickman wrote:

I asked that we not consider baluns and I did not ask that we consider
antenna patterns. Your comments seem to be designed to undermine the
discussion.

John, I find your reply to be rather bizarre. In the message you
replied to, I didn't mention antenna patterns at all. I only mentioned
the balun as an example of how current can be equal on both terminals,
but the device can be either balanced or unbalanced.

That is an outright lie. Did you or did you not write...

But you
have added a wire which will load the generator and serve as an
element
of the antenna changing the radiation pattern. How significantly the
pattern will change depends on the orientation of the wire and
what it
connects to, if anything.

And I wrote...

Please disregard the radiation pattern in this thread.

Did you or did you not write (as shown above)...

I only mentioned
the balun as an example of how current can be equal on both terminals,
but the device can be either balanced or unbalanced.

and in my OP did I or did I not write...

"I propose that we not discuss baluns, but concentrate on antenna
balance and coax attachment."

And then later, did I or did I not write (shown above)...

I asked that we not consider baluns...

It does not matter WHY you brought up baluns again. If you cannot
discuss this without patterns and baluns as requested, then we cannot
have a meeting of the minds. If you require such crutches, then your
analytical abilities are weak.