Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
The fact that superconductors have zero resistance above DC isn't a
limitation of today's technology (although technology limitations cause current high-temperature superconductors to have resistivity greater than theoretically possible), but a fundamental property of the nature of superconductors. What I'm saying is that a "truly superconducting", "hypothetical perfect" superconductor has finite resistance at any frequeny above DC. Imagining a material that has zero resistivity at frequencies above DC requires imagining something other than a superconductor. Roy Lewallen, w7EL Dave Platt wrote: . . . Let's assume that you could find a superconductor which would be truly superconducting even at RF frequencies (which today's superconductors are not, I gather). So, you could cut the loss resistance of the antenna to precisely zero, in this hypothetical case. . . . Using the hypothetical perfect superconductor (which may be impossible) you might reduce this dipole resistance to zero. Great reduction in loss, right? . . . |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Roy Lewallen wrote: The fact that superconductors have zero resistance above DC isn't a limitation of today's technology (although technology limitations cause current high-temperature superconductors to have resistivity greater than theoretically possible), but a fundamental property of the nature of superconductors. What I'm saying is that a "truly superconducting", "hypothetical perfect" superconductor has finite resistance at any frequeny above DC. Imagining a material that has zero resistivity at frequencies above DC requires imagining something other than a superconductor. Roy Lewallen, w7EL Dave Platt wrote: . . . Let's assume that you could find a superconductor which would be truly superconducting even at RF frequencies (which today's superconductors are not, I gather). So, you could cut the loss resistance of the antenna to precisely zero, in this hypothetical case. . . . Using the hypothetical perfect superconductor (which may be impossible) you might reduce this dipole resistance to zero. Great reduction in loss, right? . . . well seems everyone is 'strictly' (narrow) focused on the antenna's resistence loss, i mentined it as the starting point as that is first thing i think of when it goes critical... however one the resistance drops, other effects take place no? both in the material and in respect to other forces aside from just resistance, once it reaches near 0 and begins being a superconductor guess i won't know until i build it and mesure it i wanted to try 10m really but 2m might be easier to keep chilly(0) and i am looking foward to rig it i've got most of the stuff i think i need so far i'd also like to build a superconductie ocilator, i'd suspect that i could power it using a truly small ammount of power? |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Inverted ground plane antenna: compared with normal GP and low dipole. | Antenna | |||
Yaesu FT-857D questions | Equipment | |||
Mobile Ant L match ? | Antenna | |||
EH Antenna Revisited | Antenna | |||
Poor quality low + High TV channels? How much dB in Preamp? | Antenna |