On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 11:16:05 -0500, (Richard
Harrison) wrote:

Same with antennas. A battery connected to an antenna sends no signal. A
varying field is required to produce a signal in an antenna.

Hi Richard,

As much as the practical consequence is supported by this statement,
it is not literally true.

The battery (which requires no attachment, but neither does it suffer
one) does send a signal. It happens to be a static polar field. Any
charge within the vicinity (and arguably that is out to the edge of
the cosmos) will perceive its presence, OR its absence. Hence it
contains at least binary information. If we know the polarity of the
charge, then it contains at least quadratic information.

Within the dynamics and scope of life, there are many static charge
signals that hinge upon these 2 bits of information. Now, given I
used the terms dynamic and static in the same breath....

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Harry wrote:

What does it mean by "when the pulse is *differentiated* by the
transmitting antenna" ?

Mathematically it means to take the derivitive, or evaluate the slope of
a time varying quantity. Electronically it means the antenna acts as a
high pass filter - effectively blocking DC and attenuating low frequency
signals.

jk

Cecil Moore wrote:

It means that steady-state DC is incapable of generating photons.

You forgot about the flashlight again, didn't ya Cecil. Photons are
generated when the steady state DC source is applied to the light bulb
inside. They are allowed to escape through the clear part in the front
of the flashlight. :-)

By the way, my nephew just graduated from UCSD with a bachelors in
Photonics Engineering. He told me that the photonics engineering
discipline is virtually all applied wave mechanics.

ac6xg

Joseph Henry, a professor at Albany Academy in New York was
independently making the same observations at the same time as Faraday.
When Henry got news of Faraday`s discoveries, he made no effort to claim
credit for his own work but often referred to Faraday`s discovery.

It was the change in the magnetic field which induced electricity
without a direct connection, not the value of the steady magnetic field
itself.

Slight correction: it is the change in the magnetic flux that gives
induced EMF. You can get an induced current from a constant
magnetic field if the circuit loop moves in or out of the field,
changing the flux throught the loop.

Tor
N4OGW

Cecil Moore wrote:

I didn't realize that a UWB pulse involved flashlights
but I learn strange new things from you all the time.

You didn't learn that from me. What you should have learned is that DC
can generate photons, contrary to your repeated assertions.

ac6xg

Jim Kelley wrote:
You forgot about the flashlight again, didn't ya Cecil.

I didn't realize that a UWB pulse involved flashlights
but I learn strange new things from you all the time.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Jim Kelley wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
I didn't realize that a UWB pulse involved flashlights
but I learn strange new things from you all the time.

You didn't learn that from me. What you should have learned is that DC
can generate photons, contrary to your repeated assertions.

My repeated assertions are about the *SUBJECT* of this thread,
i.e. UWB pulses. Do I need to quote the meaning of the word,
"context", for you?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 20:54:39 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote:
My repeated assertions are about the *SUBJECT* of this thread,
i.e. UWB pulses. Do I need to quote the meaning of the word,
"context", for you?
On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 14:36:28 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote:
It means that steady-state DC is incapable of generating photons.
We can guess which dictionary changes the meanings.

Richard Clark wrote:
On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 14:36:28 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote:
It means that steady-state DC is incapable of generating photons.

We can guess which dictionary changes the meanings.

I'm obviously, in context, referring to coherent photons, Richard.
Would you care to explain the physics behind coherent DC photons?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 23:45:13 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote:
Would you care to explain the physics behind coherent DC photons?
DC gozinta
Photon comesoutta

Jim Kelley wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
I didn't realize that a UWB pulse involved flashlights
but I learn strange new things from you all the time.

You didn't learn that from me. What you should have learned is that DC
can generate photons, contrary to your repeated assertions.

Just in case someone doesn't understand your silly humor, Jim, here's
the original posting:

"It is said that a transmitted UWB pulse should not have any DC because
of the transmitting antenna:"

Antennas emit coherent photons. As far as I know, there's no such thing
as a DC coherent photon, but if I'm wrong, please enlighten us. It's obvious
that I was talking about coherent photons but just for you I will repeat with
the context included this time:

Steady-state DC is incapable of generating coherent photons from an antenna.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp