Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Roy Lewallen wrote:
In the steady state, there is no test which can be devised that can distinguish an antenna (including feedline, if desired) from a black box containing lumped components -- a lumped component circuit(*). You can't distinguish between a resonant 1/2WL dipole and a dummy load using a field strength meter? :-) You can't distinguish between a dummy load impedor and a resonant dipole impedance? How about just looking to see if a physical impedor exists? Those two impedances even have different definitions in the IEEE Dictionary. Cecil, if you feel a need to expound yet more on your theories, please do so in one of the many threads you've come to dominate already, start a new one, or concentrate your efforts on your forthcoming QEX article. I hope you'll let us try and make an objective and hopefully helpful contribution from time to time on this newsgroup without your constantly attempting to steer the discussion to your theories. Their not my theories, Roy. For instance, the IEEE Dictionary distinguishes between the (virtual) feedpoint impedance of a resonant antenna and the impedance of an impedor, e.g. a dummy load. Those two impedances have *different* definitions. A dummy load impedor is the *cause* of the load V/I ratio. The resistance of a resonant 50 ohm antenna is the *effect* of the feedpoint (superposed-V/superposed-I) ratio. Isn't it past time for completely ignoring cause and effect? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|