Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Furthe questions to the RF Photonists amongst you.
1. If your RF photons are merely a packet of energy for which it is
meaningless to talk about frequency, what is the difference between your RF photons when listening to a signal on 14.1 MHz and those of your RF photons when listening to a signal on 472 kHz? 2. If you claim that your RF photons are generated by the same intra-atomic processes that generate light, then why do we need the so many trillions of atoms that make for a half-wave dipole? 3. Also, if your RF photons are generated by that same intra-atomic process, then what must be the laser / maser like process that induces all the atoms in a half-wave dipole to produce the photons in the appropriate phase relationship? 4. When I listen to a single dit, the E of Morse (Really Vail?) Code, if the photon has no beginning, no end, and no am modulation to bring about such a beginning and end, then why do I not hear a continuous never-ending dit? 5. Why do some of you blithely quote URLs at me? Is it because you don't really understand matters yourselves and are thus incapable of joining in a gentlemanly discussion, whether you agree, or not, with what I propose? 6. To circumvent the decline of Usenet, is it not a good idea to foment discussion, for in the amateur radio club of my alma mater (G3UOE) it was commonplace to have such discussions. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Furthe questions to the RF Photonists amongst you.
"gareth" wrote in message
... 3. Also, if your RF photons are generated by that same intra-atomic process, then what must be the laser / maser like process that induces all the atoms in a half-wave dipole to produce the photons in the appropriate phase relationship? IN particular this question because of the unpredictable statistical nature of quantum physics, and the dipole radiaition is completely regular and predictable. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Furthe questions to the RF Photonists amongst you.
In rec.radio.amateur.antenna gareth wrote:
There is no such word as "Photonists". 1. If your RF photons are merely a packet of energy for which it is meaningless to talk about frequency, what is the difference between your RF photons when listening to a signal on 14.1 MHz and those of your RF photons when listening to a signal on 472 kHz? As the energy is equal to Plancks constant times frequency, you are starting off with a false premise. 2. If you claim that your RF photons are generated by the same intra-atomic processes that generate light, then why do we need the so many trillions of atoms that make for a half-wave dipole? Non sequitur. 3. Also, if your RF photons are generated by that same intra-atomic process, then what must be the laser / maser like process that induces all the atoms in a half-wave dipole to produce the photons in the appropriate phase relationship? Non sequitur. 4. When I listen to a single dit, the E of Morse (Really Vail?) Code, if the photon has no beginning, no end, and no am modulation to bring about such a beginning and end, then why do I not hear a continuous never-ending dit? Because you are stationary and the electromagnetic energy went past you at the speed of light. 5. Why do some of you blithely quote URLs at me? Is it because you don't really understand matters yourselves and are thus incapable of joining in a gentlemanly discussion, whether you agree, or not, with what I propose? Because no one wants to re-type in the pages of text that already exist. 6. To circumvent the decline of Usenet, is it not a good idea to foment discussion, for in the amateur radio club of my alma mater (G3UOE) it was commonplace to have such discussions. Discussion is great if based on a sound premise. Discussion is meaningless if based on a false premise. -- Jim Pennino |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Furthe questions to the RF Photonists amongst you.
In rec.radio.amateur.antenna gareth wrote:
"gareth" wrote in message ... 3. Also, if your RF photons are generated by that same intra-atomic process, then what must be the laser / maser like process that induces all the atoms in a half-wave dipole to produce the photons in the appropriate phase relationship? IN particular this question because of the unpredictable statistical nature of quantum physics, and the dipole radiaition is completely regular and predictable. The statistical nature of quantum physics makes it predictable at the macro level. -- Jim Pennino |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Furthe questions to the RF Photonists amongst you.
On 9/11/2015 6:50 AM, gareth wrote:
"gareth" wrote in message ... 3. Also, if your RF photons are generated by that same intra-atomic process, then what must be the laser / maser like process that induces all the atoms in a half-wave dipole to produce the photons in the appropriate phase relationship? IN particular this question because of the unpredictable statistical nature of quantum physics, and the dipole radiaition is completely regular and predictable. Statistical does not mean "unpredictable". The oceans are full of individual molecules of water, each moving in a seemingly random manner from thermal perturbations. But in aggregate they exhibit complex and beautiful movement of waves breaking on a jetty just as mandated by quantum mechanics. -- Rick |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Furthe questions to the RF Photonists amongst you.
"rickman" wrote in message
... On 9/11/2015 6:50 AM, gareth wrote: "gareth" wrote in message ... 3. Also, if your RF photons are generated by that same intra-atomic process, then what must be the laser / maser like process that induces all the atoms in a half-wave dipole to produce the photons in the appropriate phase relationship? IN particular this question because of the unpredictable statistical nature of quantum physics, and the dipole radiaition is completely regular and predictable. Statistical does not mean "unpredictable". The oceans are full of individual molecules of water, each moving in a seemingly random manner from thermal perturbations. But in aggregate they exhibit complex and beautiful movement of waves breaking on a jetty just as mandated by quantum mechanics. So, what is the aggregate mechanism in your dipole that has your RF photons all actin in synchronicity? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Furthe questions to the RF Photonists amongst you.
On 9/11/2015 6:44 AM, gareth wrote:
2. If you claim that your RF photons are generated by the same intra-atomic processes that generate light, then why do we need the so many trillions of atoms that make for a half-wave dipole? They aren't needed. We have already given you an example of RF radiation from an atom in the MRI. You say somehow that is related to "near-field", but that is meaningless in this context. -- Rick |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Furthe questions to the RF Photonists amongst you.
"rickman" wrote in message
... On 9/11/2015 6:44 AM, gareth wrote: 2. If you claim that your RF photons are generated by the same intra-atomic processes that generate light, then why do we need the so many trillions of atoms that make for a half-wave dipole? They aren't needed. So we could have antennae that are only one molecule high, do you mean? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Furthe questions to the RF Photonists amongst you.
On 9/11/2015 1:19 PM, gareth wrote:
"rickman" wrote in message ... On 9/11/2015 6:50 AM, gareth wrote: "gareth" wrote in message ... 3. Also, if your RF photons are generated by that same intra-atomic process, then what must be the laser / maser like process that induces all the atoms in a half-wave dipole to produce the photons in the appropriate phase relationship? IN particular this question because of the unpredictable statistical nature of quantum physics, and the dipole radiaition is completely regular and predictable. Statistical does not mean "unpredictable". The oceans are full of individual molecules of water, each moving in a seemingly random manner from thermal perturbations. But in aggregate they exhibit complex and beautiful movement of waves breaking on a jetty just as mandated by quantum mechanics. So, what is the aggregate mechanism in your dipole that has your RF photons all actin in synchronicity? Where does the "synchronicity" requirement come from? Antenna are not lasers. -- Rick |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Furthe questions to the RF Photonists amongst you.
On 9/11/2015 1:22 PM, gareth wrote:
"rickman" wrote in message ... On 9/11/2015 6:44 AM, gareth wrote: 2. If you claim that your RF photons are generated by the same intra-atomic processes that generate light, then why do we need the so many trillions of atoms that make for a half-wave dipole? They aren't needed. So we could have antennae that are only one molecule high, do you mean? It would be very hard to drive. I think the impedance would be phenomenally small. -- Rick |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
The RF photonists | Antenna | |||
A question for the RF Photonists amongst you | Antenna | |||
Question Guy's Questions Raises More Questions | Shortwave | |||
ATV questions | Equipment | |||
BEWARE SPENDING TIME ANSWERING QUESTIONS HERE (WAS Electronic Questions) | Antenna |