Do you have a quote showing exactly what Tom said, in context?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Richard Harrison wrote:

Art Unwin wrote:
"What did he say that was wrong?"

Recently Tom argued with Yuri that loading coils must have the same
current in and out. Circuit theory does not directly apply in all cases
due to the possibility of a reflected wave on the coil and due to
radiation from a loading coil.

Did Tom ever admit that it`s possible that current into one end of the
coil does not necessarily equal the current at its other end?

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

I have a great deal of respect for Tom, W8JI. In fact, there are few
people I respect as much. I regard him as being exceptionally honest,
very analytical, and always seeking to find the truth and increase his
knowledge. Whenever his view of how things work have been shown to be
wrong, I've found him to readily accept the corrected view, and be
grateful of the opportunity to learn something new. I've also learned
from him on more than one occasion. One notable case is the idea of
using a balun at the input of a tuner to improve the balun's balancing
properties. I had believed it to work, but he showed me where I was
wrong, giving me the opportunity to increase my knowledge.

I find it contemptable and cowardly to attack him -- or anyone -- in a
forum where he's not a participant and isn't present to correct
misquotes, quotes taken out of context, and otherwise respond and defend
himself. People doing so should instead sign onto one of the election
campaigns or go on AM talk radio, where such gutless, dishonest, and
mean-spirited activity is the accepted norm.

I believe the Russians have a word for this kind of cowardly and
"uncultured" activity -- something like "nyekulturny". Maybe Yuri knows.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Roy Lewallen wrote:
One notable case is the idea of
using a balun at the input of a tuner to improve the balun's balancing
properties. I had believed it to work, but he showed me where I was
wrong, giving me the opportunity to increase my knowledge.

Over on eHam.net, he just admitted that a real world application
does not act like that perfect paper solution. He said:

"In real life, stray capacitances from the network to ground modify
the behavior of the system when the balun is moved ..."
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

W7EL wrote:

I have a great deal of respect for Tom, W8JI. In fact, there are few
people I respect as much. I regard him as being exceptionally honest,
very analytical, and always seeking to find the truth and increase his
knowledge. Whenever his view of how things work have been shown to be
wrong, I've found him to readily accept the corrected view, and be
grateful of the opportunity to learn something new. I've also learned
from him on more than one occasion.

That's fine, you are entitled to your opinion. I am sure Tom has also respect
for you (as I do) and he would think twice of pontificating at you than at
someone who is not so vocal or "famous" due to their status or postings on
Internet.
My experience is, as I mentioned it before ( I don't take crap for anybody)
that when I brought some correction to his fallacy or presented idea that did
not exactly jive with his "knowledge", he would in first posting come on the
high horse and pontificate and ridicule the person, rather than engage in the
discussion of pro or con and try to sort things out. That's what ****es me off,
when someone who is wrong resorts to personal attacks (like democrats) rather
than engaging in substantive discussion.
He thrives on reflectors where he is protected by the administrators that
worship him and will not allow discussions when he is on the losing side. He is
not on Amp reflector, mainly because R. Measures debunked some of his postings
proclaiming fallacies. Same was on TowerTalk with K7GCO, who called him "great
technical imposter". Been there, was done to me.
Again his modus operandi is, when he is wrong, he attacks person rather than
engages in discussion and admitting wrong. Then goes quiet for few months and
later corrected, emerges as a "guru" on the subject, like it is his own idea.
Never admitting or giving credit where is due.
I had about 6 situations like that with him, records are at the web sites,
anyone can look it up. I don't give a hoot about "reputation" among the hams, I
have a life outside of ham "world". It just burns me when I try with good
intentions to bring correction to some crap that is floating around, and for it
I get personally attacked and ridiculed.
I don't give a hoot who people want to worship, I have my God. I try to point
out some errors or problems, be it wrong information or crapy equipment.
If you want to find out who is gutless, dishonest and nyekulturny, go back to
some archives, I can supply you subjects and see for yourself.
I learned thing or two from Tom too, but I also see lot of textbook stuff on
his pages and even there are some misleading information. But I will not take
crap for saying that 2 + 2 = 4 is wrong.


I find it contemptable and cowardly to attack him -- or anyone -- in a
forum where he's not a participant and isn't present to correct
misquotes, quotes taken out of context, and otherwise respond and defend
himself.


The last thing is sentence about wire "losing" conductivity by laying on the
ground. That's what I brought up. I know what was the situation with dual wire
Beverages, but that sentence was wrong way to describe what is happening in the
system. If he is so smart, he should be more careful when describing technical
matters. Words mean things.

BTW Tom used EZnec to "prove" that current across the loading coil in the
loaded antenna is the same at both ends. When you replace that coil with same
inductance value loading stub, you find that current is (significantly)
different at the ends of the stub.
Have you corrected him how to use EZnec properly to model lumped inductance and
get results that jive with reality? Cecil showed and explained the stuff. In
his presentation at Dayton, Tom still propagated that nonsense.

Anyway, back to DR1, getting tired of arguing with "experts".

73 Yuri, K3BU

Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
BTW Tom used EZnec to "prove" that current across the loading coil in the
loaded antenna is the same at both ends. When you replace that coil with same
inductance value loading stub, you find that current is (significantly)
different at the ends of the stub.
Have you corrected him how to use EZnec properly to model lumped inductance and
get results that jive with reality? Cecil showed and explained the stuff. In
his presentation at Dayton, Tom still propagated that nonsense.

I'm going to add this to my web page. It's a mobile antenna with an 4'
bottom section, a loading coil, and an 4' whip. The loading coil is
made up of EZNEC segments with an octal shape. It is 4.5 turns in 0.9
foot length and one foot diameter. The feedpoint current is 1 amp.
The current in the first segment at the bottom of the coil is
0.9956 amps. The current in the last segment at the top of the the
coil is 0.5326 amps. The number of electrical degrees that the coil
occupies is about 50 degrees, more than half of the 90 degree antenna.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Cecil Moore wrote:
I'm going to add this to my web page. It's a mobile antenna with an 4'
bottom section, a loading coil, and an 4' whip. The loading coil is
made up of EZNEC segments with an octal shape. It is 4.5 turns in 0.9
foot length and one foot diameter. The feedpoint current is 1 amp.
The current in the first segment at the bottom of the coil is
0.9956 amps. The current in the last segment at the top of the the
coil is 0.5326 amps. The number of electrical degrees that the coil
occupies is about 50 degrees, more than half of the 90 degree antenna.

Darn, should have been:
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp/octcoil.gif



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

"On a different note Yuri, what's new with the transceiver??
Dale W4OP

Roy Lewallen wrote:
Do you have a quote showing exactly what Tom said, in context?

Here's one from his web page:

"What determines current distribution in a loading coil? The capacitance
to the outside world and the impedance above the loading coil. The current
in any inductor would be equal at each end except for displacement currents,
which are "imaginary currents" that flow through capacitance."

He completely ignores the fact that, for a standing-wave antenna, the net
current is the superposed phasor sum of the forward current and reflected
current and whatever phase shift occurs through the coil is doubled because
those two currents are traveling in opposite directions.

He is thinking lumped circuit model when he should be using a distributed
network model. What he says is reasonably accurate for a traveling-wave
antenna but certainly not for a standing-wave antenna.

EZNEC clearly illustrates the difference in the currents when the coil is
modeled as a coil of wire segments and not as a lumped inductor. Anyone who
would like a copy of the EZNEC file need only request it.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Cecil Moore wrote:
Roy Lewallen wrote:

Do you have a quote showing exactly what Tom said, in context?


Here's one from his web page:

"What determines current distribution in a loading coil? The capacitance
to the outside world and the impedance above the loading coil. The current
in any inductor would be equal at each end except for displacement
currents,
which are "imaginary currents" that flow through capacitance."

He completely ignores the fact that, for a standing-wave antenna, the net
current is the superposed phasor sum of the forward current and reflected
current and whatever phase shift occurs through the coil is doubled because
those two currents are traveling in opposite directions.

He is thinking lumped circuit model when he should be using a distributed
network model. What he says is reasonably accurate for a traveling-wave
antenna but certainly not for a standing-wave antenna.

EZNEC clearly illustrates the difference in the currents when the coil is
modeled as a coil of wire segments and not as a lumped inductor. Anyone who
would like a copy of the EZNEC file need only request it.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Current waves can travel in two directions at the same time. Charge
can't. For a guy who doesn't seem to be able to make the distinction,
you don't have any business criticizing Tom Rauch's understanding of
the situation.
73,
Tom Donaly KA6RUH

Tom Donaly wrote:
Current waves can travel in two directions at the same time. Charge
can't.

Quoting Kraus: "A coil can also act as a 180 degree phase
shifter ..." Exactly how does a coil act as a 180 degree
phase shifter if charge cannot travel in two directions?
Seems that you also don't comprehend the nature of a
distributed network such as a bugcatcher loading coil.

For a guy who doesn't seem to be able to make the distinction,
you don't have any business criticizing Tom Rauch's understanding of
the situation.

So you believe that charge density is constant throughout
an RF distributed network?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----