John Popelish wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
(snip)

Other multiple measurements by independent sources agree with
me and disagree with you, Tom. Wonder why you neglected to post
this reference from your own server?

http://lists.contesting.com/archives.../msg00540.html

It is a posting to TowerTalk by Jim Lux, W6RMK. I'll just extract
some excerpts.

"For closewound coils, with length to diameter ratios around 5:1, a
series of fairly careful measurements have been made with the coils
arranged vertically above a ground plane, fed at the base, with a
capacitive load on the other end, and the driving frequency arranged
to be at the resonant frequency of the whole assembly."

Sure sounds like your 100 uH 10"x2" coil installed in a mobile ham
radio antenna environment.

(snip)

The tantalizing part from my perspective is this:

"The measurements were made with carefully designed fiberoptic probes
that were specifically designed to avoid perturbing the magnetic and
electric fields."

I would like to read a full description of this instrumentation.


Like many others I don't know everything. In line with reducing my
ignorance could you amplify on how the phenomena is measured with a
"fiber optic probe". What type of transducer is used to convert energy
of an electrical nature to energy of an optical nature with out
"perturbing the magnetic and electric fields".


Dave WD9BDZ

David,

Could it be something as simple as the use of a fiber optic cable as an
alternative to a shielded coax cable? I suspect the "without perturbing
.. . ." part may be innocent overstatement. Wish I had a set of
high-frequency probes with fiber optic cables!

Chuck


David G. Nagel wrote:
John Popelish wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
(snip)

Other multiple measurements by independent sources agree with
me and disagree with you, Tom. Wonder why you neglected to post
this reference from your own server?

http://lists.contesting.com/archives.../msg00540.html


It is a posting to TowerTalk by Jim Lux, W6RMK. I'll just extract
some excerpts.

"For closewound coils, with length to diameter ratios around 5:1, a
series of fairly careful measurements have been made with the coils
arranged vertically above a ground plane, fed at the base, with a
capacitive load on the other end, and the driving frequency arranged
to be at the resonant frequency of the whole assembly."

Sure sounds like your 100 uH 10"x2" coil installed in a mobile ham
radio antenna environment.


(snip)

The tantalizing part from my perspective is this:

"The measurements were made with carefully designed fiberoptic probes
that were specifically designed to avoid perturbing the magnetic and
electric fields."

I would like to read a full description of this instrumentation.



Like many others I don't know everything. In line with reducing my
ignorance could you amplify on how the phenomena is measured with a
"fiber optic probe". What type of transducer is used to convert energy
of an electrical nature to energy of an optical nature with out
"perturbing the magnetic and electric fields".


Dave WD9BDZ

David G. Nagel wrote:
Like many others I don't know everything. In line with reducing my
ignorance could you amplify on how the phenomena is measured with a
"fiber optic probe". What type of transducer is used to convert energy
of an electrical nature to energy of an optical nature with out
"perturbing the magnetic and electric fields".

Like you (unlike W8JI) I don't know everything. :-) I have
hardly any idea how they used a "fiber optic probe" to make
their measurements. I suspect they superposed local RF phasors
and used a fiber optic system to report the results. That's
what I would do.

I have invited Jim, W6RMK, to join the discussion. Maybe
he can answer your questions.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil Moore wrote:
I have
hardly any idea how they used a "fiber optic probe" to make
their measurements. I suspect they superposed local RF phasors
and used a fiber optic system to report the results. That's
what I would do.

Make sure you set those "superposed local RF phasors" on stun before you
make the measurement. Otherwise you might hurt someone.

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Gene Fuller wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
I have
hardly any idea how they used a "fiber optic probe" to make
their measurements. I suspect they superposed local RF phasors
and used a fiber optic system to report the results. That's
what I would do.

Make sure you set those "superposed local RF phasors" on stun before you
make the measurement. Otherwise you might hurt someone.


The current measurements Roy and I independently made using different
equipment and antennas on resonant antennas aren't valid, according to
Cecil.

The measurements I made on multiple inductors on the test bench in a
non-resonant system terminated in a load resistor aren't valid either,
according to Cecil.

What do all these measurements have in common?

The phasors were on stun. ;-)

David G. Nagel wrote:
John Popelish wrote:

The tantalizing part from my perspective is this:

"The measurements were made with carefully designed fiberoptic probes
that were specifically designed to avoid perturbing the magnetic and
electric fields."

I would like to read a full description of this instrumentation.



Like many others I don't know everything. In line with reducing my
ignorance could you amplify on how the phenomena is measured with a
"fiber optic probe". What type of transducer is used to convert energy
of an electrical nature to energy of an optical nature with out
"perturbing the magnetic and electric fields".

I wish I could, but this is the first I have heard of such
instrumentation. That is why I would like to read more about it.

It's my policy to keep all email confidential.

However, Cecil persists in sending me unwelcome email. I've requested
several times, first politely then bluntly, that he stop sending it, but
he ignores my requests and persists. I assume this is driven by the same
compulsion that keeps him promoting his alternate theories.

Because this email comes after repeated requests that it not be sent, I
don't feel bound to give it the same level of privilege as all other
email and keep it private. I believe it's relevant to the discussion at
hand on this group, so I'll share it here, verbatim and without editing.
The subject is "Can't resist".

---- Beginning of quote ----

Sorry, Roy, I forgot to delete your email address from
my email address file.

When your house of cards based on out and out lying comes
tumbling down, exactly how are you going to handle the
obvious deliberate attempt at misinformation that you
and Tom have been distributing to the unwashed masses
for so many years? Did you think you would never get
caught in your lies during your lifetime or what? After
20 years of evidence to the contrary, you can hardly
plead ignorance.
--
no 73 for the "gobbledygook" guy, Cecil, W5DXP

---- End of quote ----

This is from the person who so loudly complains about people making
personal attacks in place of reasoned arguments. I've done my best to
explain basic theory, and even spent a day carefully constructing and
making measurements and honestly reporting the results. I'll continue to
do my best to present factual information in spite of these juvenile
attacks, and will try my best to remain objective, although it's awfully
hard sometimes in an environment that brings responses like this email
typifies. Anyone who doesn't want to read what I post should add me to
his newsgroup reader filter, as I did Cecil to mine two years ago. Those
who do read what I post should know that I have absolutely no reason nor
desire to mislead anyone in any way.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Roy Lewallen wrote:
It's my policy to keep all email confidential.

Apparently not. That was a private email. Publishing it
in public without my permission is unethical but seems you
and Tom will seemingly stop at nothing to keep promoting
your myths.

You have, over and over, rejected the distributed network
model even though you know it is a superset of the lumped-
circuit model. Would you agree with me that after all this
time, you cannot possibly plead ignorance?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Roy Lewallen wrote:
I believe it's relevant to the discussion at
hand on this group, so I'll share it here, ...

So you believe my personal feelings about you are relevant
to a technical discussion???? Exactly which technical
parameters are affected by my feelings about you?

Every time this subject comes up, more and more people
realize that the r.r.a.a gurus are not omniscient.

Here's a smattering of the email I've received over
the past week. Unlike you, I won't mention any names.

"I hope ... that [X and Y] will acknowledge the validity
of your approach." [X and Y are posters to r.r.a.a]

"You are moving pretty fast, but nothing that you are saying
sounds like there are any glaring errors."

"Distributed constants not lumped constants prevail."

"I, too, am skeptical of that 3 ns delay."

" ...your Corum reference certainly ends the debate."

"I want to let you know your dedication to principle and rational
analysis ... are inspiring to many of us."

"The unwillingness of the "gurus" to answer specific technical
questions is pretty disappointing."

Roy, are you listening to that last comment?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil and Roy, Please stop Ad Hominem.

Keep to the subject where we can disagree or agree. Hopefully, some of
us will learn.

Cecil Moore wrote:

Roy Lewallen wrote:

I believe it's relevant to the discussion at hand on this group, so
I'll share it here, ...


So you believe my personal feelings about you are relevant
to a technical discussion???? Exactly which technical
parameters are affected by my feelings about you?