On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 23:24:39 -0500, (Richard
Harrison) wrote:

The lower ammeter clearly shows more current than the upper. That`s
exactly as should be expected.

Hi Richard,

And it is EXACTLY how it is forecasted through modeling. The real
story here is how to mis-use modeling to contrive a different answer
to this shaggy dog story.

The last gasp through this stale wheeze had us waiting for the snows
to melt so Yuri could replicate the measurements of fish tank
thermometers - as the skies darken yet again for another winter's
snow, how long will this take to resolve? NOTHING new has been added
to the subject and it seems this discussion has devolved to the level
of a bunch of hoary denizens sitting around the fire and spitting into
it for entertainment.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:
"And it is EXACTLY how it is forcasted through modeling."

Yuri, K3BU has declared victory in the "current drop" argument. It`s in
a new thread: "Current in loading coil, EZNEC-helix", after measuring
current in and out of a loading coil again.

I am reassured when math and models agree with measurements.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Richard Harrison wrote:
Richard Clark wrote:
"And it is EXACTLY how it is forcasted through modeling."

Yuri, K3BU has declared victory in the "current drop" argument. It`s in
a new thread: "Current in loading coil, EZNEC-helix", after measuring
current in and out of a loading coil again.

I am reassured when math and models agree with measurements.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI


There is no such thing as a "current drop." As for Yuri declaring
victory, that's easy enough to do since the person he's declaring
victory over, Tom Rauch, isn't bothering to refute him on this
newsgroup.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH