OK
Your loss...................
Look up Synchrotron Radiation.
Classically, which describes HF radio, the acceleration perpendicular to
motion DOES NO WORK.
73
H.
" wrote in message
news:SDQUc.11864$Fg5.8480@attbi_s53...
Hi, I do not smoke ,drink or swear but it boggles my mind that this 3 GIG
laptop has script the size of a pinhead. I must find time to set this
thing
up as I want it
Art
"H. Adam Stevens, NQ5H" wrote in message
...
Art
Try bourbon, it lets you keep spelling longer.
73
H.

O.K. I am curious.
"Acceleration perpendicular to motion does no work".
That's an odd statement. What caused that to come to mind on this thread?
Best regards
Art


"H. Adam Stevens, NQ5H" wrote in message
...
OK
Your loss...................
Look up Synchrotron Radiation.
Classically, which describes HF radio, the acceleration perpendicular to
motion DOES NO WORK.
73
H.
" wrote in
message
news:SDQUc.11864$Fg5.8480@attbi_s53...
Hi, I do not smoke ,drink or swear but it boggles my mind that this 3
GIG
laptop has script the size of a pinhead. I must find time to set this
thing
up as I want it
Art
"H. Adam Stevens, NQ5H" wrote in message
...
Art
Try bourbon, it lets you keep spelling longer.
73
H.

" wrote in message
news:GkQUc.184782$eM2.169464@attbi_s51...
Steve I thank you for your response and I am beginning to see and have
confidence in what I am saying alss I believe I over explained things
which
really created problems.

Art, [short version: We're going to get nowhere unless we have a common
terminology. The words you use clearly do not mean the same thing to you as
what most others have come to accept.]

Could you, perhaps, tell me in simple terms, just what it is you hope to
accomplish or prove, or achieve with all this? What is your goal? When it
is built and working per your ideas, what is this stack of "open loops"
going to do, or not do [that other antennas don't do, or do] ???


Long version...
I don't think you over explain, I believe you are using the terminology
in unconventional ways and therefore I am unable to understand what the
underlying concept is to which you refer. You use "Phase change" in a way
that I can not understand.

I am unable to get past what you are trying to say he

In a straight member the current under goes a phase change at all times
thus
from one direction the current varies according to I Cos Phi i.e.

[ If I understand what you refer to ] The proper way to describe this is
to say that the "current" goes through an "amplitude" or "magnitude" change
(a result of the AC sine wave nature of the generator) That is to say-as we
know, the current builds up to a maximum, then falls to zero rapidly, then
reversing direction and building to that same magnitude in the opposite
direction whereupon it falls back to zero and repeats ad nausium. This, of
course, is a standard sine wave of current we also call AC or RF.
The "phase", on the other hand, is a term we use to refer to the _whole
cycle_ -- all parts of the cyclic variation we call AC or a sine wave. This
_whole thing_ can be compared to another sine wave of the same frequency and
we can then talk about the relative phase of one to the other. These two
can also be the reative phase of currents in differnt parts of a circuit or
different parts of an antenna.

The problem is that if there truly is a "phase change" in a sine wave,
there must also be a frequency change for a short time until the phase stops
changing and arrives at the new value of phase (relative to whatever we
choose to be the reference.

A synonym for phase is "time". The time at which a given part of a wave
form occurs detrermines its phase. Teo waves are in phase when they are in
"time step" or occur at the same time. When they occur at different times,
then they are at different phases.


accellerating in value and decellerating in value.

They are accelerated at various rates, thus change in velocity (which we
equate to current)

It "increases" and "decreases" in value. The change in magnitude is
accompanied by the requisite accelerations of the electrons, this is true.
[note that "deceleration" is simply another way of stating the
mathematically accurate negative acceleration]


Now comes the choker...

When the same electric current follows a coiled load there is no phase
change

Here's where I choke! I can not, for the life of me, figure out what
you mean by "no phase change".
In commonly accepted terminology this means that the frequency of the
signal is constant, and it is as far as I am concerned in the in-coiled,
straight wire version as well!.
However, in light of your previous use, which appears to mean that the
current is varying, this makes no sense, since the current sinewave is still
present.

It doesn't make any sense to continue to discuss trying to remove "rising
inductance and capacitance ", your "1/2 corregated copper transmission
lines", Why you feel the need to NOT have a closed loop, what an "open loop
is", or the rest without a common language which allows you to transfer the
concepts you which to present.
Could you, perhaps, tell me in simple terms, just what it is you hope to
accomplish or prove, or achieve with all this? What is your goal?

Sorry Art.

Hi Hal
I'LL be happy to explain where I am coming from but this time I will try to
explain my thoughts
in a non technical way which may be seen as folksy which may well bring some
caustic comments
but I do owe it to all since I asked for help.
First
My aiim is to negate the onslaught of inductance and capacitance to ward
off rapid changes in
impedances
Secondly
I want to see what changes occur by using corregated material as radiators
compared to smooth surfaces..
Now I will rerlate how my thought processes work even tho they may be
totally out of whack
but it will help to explain the terms I use.

If one looks at an A.C. generator it can be seen that the shaft rotates at a
constant speed and
it helps to see this by attaching a ball on a string and tieing it to the
shaft. The circular motion when looking at the shaft endwise
makes the circular pattern very obvios. If however, you look at the shaft
side ways on what you will see is a ball going up and down
either siode of the shaft. If one moves the generator a short distance as
the ball takes one revolution
a sinosoidal; trace will be apparent arount the shaft axis which can be
interprete by some as showing acceleration and deceleration of current
even tho that hwich generates this trace or graph is rotating at a constant
spoeed
( This being important because it may be synonamous to some as compared to
the speed of light)
Now let us look at another version of movement in that the generator instead
of moving in a linear motion takes on a circular motion
and where the rotary speed of the shaft still revolves at a constant speed.
From this. we can say that the speed of energy along the radiator is still
the same as in the first example ,but what is different?
If the generator was moved forward in the fiirst instance there was an equal
and opposite reaction force which can be seen
as a cloud of dust as a car accelerates forward. In the second instance the
car traveling around a circular course showers dust in a continual
fashon away from the track even though it is proceding at a constant speed.
If we try to generate a graph of current versus time the dust generated on
a circular track is a constant i.e. then also the current
level on the graph must also be a constant value.
Now let us look at a current flow on a load on a antenna such as a coil
which is hellicaly wound.
We know that the phase will be constant around the first loop but in this
case we have added inductance and capacitance by virtue
of the close proximity of the next coil and the next coil e.t.c which varies
the impedance along the wire and thus rapidly effects
a movement away from a purely resistive impedance. This lead me into
separating the coils from each other by juxtaposition
so that inductances were not additive ( I reversed the coil direction as
well as positioning them apart.)
Since all these coils are connected in series one must hope for a
intercoupling effect will bring the current down on these
vertical portions in the event that radiation from them are of the correct
choice, either additive or detractive.
Thus the project is repeated from what I have done in the past only this
time I am using numourus loops in the event that
resulting antenna height will be eye opening as well as very broad banded.
As a follow up the corregations on the loops will be
removed by laying on the surfaces a flat adhesived back aluminum tape(Ihave
no copper tape) To try and ascertain what changes
occur by having a smooth surface radiator
Well Hal there you have it, possibly to long, possibly everything is wrong
and again possibly hopeless to understand
but it the best I can do
Regards
Art






"Hal Rosser" wrote in message
...
Ok, so the acceleration is in the phase-shifting between the adjacent
coils
?
If I interpret that correctly, then its not a 'real' acceleration, but a
simulated acceleration - much like using pulsating DC to generate
simulated
AC.
If you could describe it in terms a normal dummy like myself could
understand or at least draw a better picture, your theory may be taken
more
seriously.
You say Roy's word is not good enough - But Roy has demonstrated his
expertise in this area time and time again.
I come here to learn from folks like Roy - and to inject some of my own
thoughts from time to time.
You come to the group asking for comments - and you got them.
You did not speak in terms of technical details - so a reply using
technical
details may not be deserved.
There is no disgrace in asking questions (like you said) - but rejecting
expert opinions can be seen as a disgrace in some instances.


" wrote in
message
news:dJeUc.269797$%_6.33856@attbi_s01...
Hi Hal, nice to meet you
What I have is not really a prposition or a legitimate theory, it is
just

" wrote in message
news:KgtUc.2113$Fg5.1658@attbi_s53...
Jimmy I know what the cuurent curve shows on a radiating element and I
suspect that you do also.
Now show me an equivalent current curve for a circle so I can see the
differences in area under the current curve.
Are they different or are they the same?. If you know where such a
comparison is shown and they are different
you are then positioned to inform me why.
By the same token if they are the same which is how most people see it
then
I will be better able to
resolve my conundrum for myself.
Art
"Jimmie" wrote in message
r.com...

" wrote in
message
news:VH6Uc.324209$XM6.205186@attbi_s53...
Gentlemen
I have in the past alluded not only radiation from a straight element
but
snipNot knowing how you came to your conclusion no one can tell you why
you
are
wrong.. My uncle used to have a paint and body shop with a 57 Chevy up
on
a
pole in front of his shop. While the car would make an awful antenna it
would be futile to try to explain why. In another way of saying it would
be
like explaining to a student how he missed a math problem when all he
shows
is an answer. The best the instructor can do is tell him he is right or
wrong. In your case the instructor would not even be sure which problem
he
had done.





When used in an antenna coils have approximately the current distibution
characteristics as the part of the antenna they are substituting for. Yuri
has an excellent article on this and there has been much discussion about
his on the NG. However taken this in the context of the rest of what you
have said during this string I dont think this is what yiu are looking for.
What you are looking for does not exist.

I'll just take a guess.

If you take a half-wave dipole and gradually bend it into a circle, then,
for a constant current, the field set up at a distance will crudely reduce
in proportion to the direct distance between its ends.

The greatest distance between its ends is when it is just a straight wire.
---
Reg.