Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
Until the gurus take the time to understand the nature of
standing waves in standing waves antennas, they will keep
committing the same mental blunders over and over.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


More astonishing than that, Until the "gurus" put their finger on the coil,
or aquarium thermometer, or RF ammeter, or infrared scope and see that the
loading coil (in a typical quarter wave resonant whip) is heating up at the
bottom, being the reality that defies their "scientwific theories why it
shouldn't" - they will keep committing the same mental blunders over and
over.

What's next? There is less current in a wire (coil) where wire (coil) gets
hotter?
Let the games begin!

Thermometers don't lie, meters don't lie, even EZNEC shows it! So wasaaaaap?

If you're looking for an argument, you're looking in the wrong place.

Nobody denies the raw evidence, like the fact that some loading coils
get hotter at the bottom than at the top... and the fact that some other
coils don't (or nowhere near as much).

There are good explanations for everything you see. But the only valid
explanations are the ones that account for *all* the facts about *all*
types of loading coils.

The argument is specifically about Cecil's attempts to explain the
evidence, using his own particular ideas about "standing wave antennas".
He makes it kinda work for the cases he wants to think about, but in
other cases it gets things fundamentally wrong - and that isn't good
enough.



--
73 from Ian GM3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek

Ian White GM3SEK wrote:
The argument is specifically about Cecil's attempts to explain the
evidence, using his own particular ideas about "standing wave antennas".
He makes it kinda work for the cases he wants to think about, but in
other cases it gets things fundamentally wrong - and that isn't good
enough.

That's just not true, Ian. If the distributed network model agrees
with the lumped circuit model, then the lumped circuit model is
being used in an appropriate situation. If the distributed network
model disagrees with the lumped circuit model, then the lumped
circuit model is being used in an inappropriate situation. The
distributed network model is always right when it disagrees with
the lumped circuit model. The distributed network model is a
*superset* of the lumped circuit model. To quote Dr. Corum:

"Distributed theory encompasses lumped circuits and always applies."

And before you dismiss Dr. Corum as a "crackpot", as others have,
please pay attention to the references for his peer-reviewed
paper published by the IEEE: Kraus, Terman, Ryder, Ramo & Whinnery,
Born & Wolf.

The problem is that the lumped circuit model is being used in
inappropriate situations because you and others do not understand
how standing wave current in standing wave antennas differs from
traveling wave current in traveling wave antennas. To compound
the error, none of you are willing to discuss it from a technical
standpoint. That unwillingness reeks of religion, not science.

Someone we both know and respect wonders why you are so closed
minded. I suggested he contact you by email.

If you, or anyone else, were willing to discuss the nature of
standing waves from a technical standpoint, most of the present
argument would be resolved by that discussion. I'm willing to
discuss it. Why aren't you?

It is entirely possible that I am abusing the distributed network
model, but nobody will be able to prove it unless they engage in
a discussion of standing waves.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

"Ian White GM3SEK" wrote in message
...
Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
Until the gurus take the time to understand the nature of
standing waves in standing waves antennas, they will keep
committing the same mental blunders over and over.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


More astonishing than that, Until the "gurus" put their finger on the
coil,
or aquarium thermometer, or RF ammeter, or infrared scope and see that the
loading coil (in a typical quarter wave resonant whip) is heating up at
the
bottom, being the reality that defies their "scientwific theories why it
shouldn't" - they will keep committing the same mental blunders over and
over.

What's next? There is less current in a wire (coil) where wire (coil) gets
hotter?
Let the games begin!

Thermometers don't lie, meters don't lie, even EZNEC shows it! So
wasaaaaap?

If you're looking for an argument, you're looking in the wrong place.

Nobody denies the raw evidence, like the fact that some loading coils get
hotter at the bottom than at the top... and the fact that some other coils
don't (or nowhere near as much).


So what is the reason? Isn't the higher current through the same resistance
wire cause of more heat development? We now why and Cecil explained it.
Depends where the coil is placed in the antenna and its place on the cosine
current distribution curve. It has been shown epxerimentally and also by
EZNEC when modeled properly as solenoid or loading stub. Yea, the "other"
zero size coils don't show that, EZNEC confirms that.

There are good explanations for everything you see. But the only valid
explanations are the ones that account for *all* the facts about *all*
types of loading coils.

We are talking about typical loading coils in typical antennas, no need to
go to "all" that would skew that and "prove" it ain't so.

The argument is specifically about Cecil's attempts to explain the
evidence, using his own particular ideas about "standing wave antennas".
He makes it kinda work for the cases he wants to think about, but in other
cases it gets things fundamentally wrong - and that isn't good enough.


As far as I see, it is not just Cecil's own idea or discovery, he attempted
to explain the obvious effect and in the process found that there is more
support and standing wave theory by others. So we have an effect, and (close
enough) explanation and way of modeling it (close enough), but have a bunch
of people that cling to "she's flat".

Yuri, K3BU/m


--
73 from Ian GM3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek

On Sun, 2 Apr 2006 12:07:38 -0400, "Yuri Blanarovich"
wrote:

Thermometers don't lie, meters don't lie, even EZNEC shows it! So wasaaaaap?

Hi Yuri,

That's a good question. The last you had to say, two years ago, was
you were waiting for the snow to melt to provide a better measure.

It must have been a particularly long and cold winter these two years.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 2 Apr 2006 12:07:38 -0400, "Yuri Blanarovich"
wrote:

Thermometers don't lie, meters don't lie, even EZNEC shows it! So
wasaaaaap?

Hi Yuri,

That's a good question. The last you had to say, two years ago, was
you were waiting for the snow to melt to provide a better measure.

It must have been a particularly long and cold winter these two years.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

No, but I got cut off the NG by AOL's dropping NGs and therefore lost touch
with the severity of the problem. Also got too busy with real life, which I
considered more important and didn't even dream that this still would be the
problem.
I though that some of the unbelievers would by now done it, saw it, realized
they were wrong and confessed. Apparently not. So I am glad to be still
around and will try to either get educated or contribute to setting the
record straight and correct the fallacies that are out there.
Sooo, nobody would try to do the experiment and SEE it, but rather keep
chasing the gay electron phasors charged with Kirchoffs through three way
intersections and blame Bush for it?

Yuri, K3BU.us

Reg Edwards wrote:
To satisfy demands for disclosure of the source code of my programs I
have made the source code of program TRANCO_1 available from my
website.

It may be of interest to antagonists in the "current through coils"
civil war.

The source code text, which is almost readable using non-proportional
spaced text readers, can be found in "Download Pascal source code from
here" section on the Index page.
----
.................................................. .........
Regards from Reg, G4FGQ
For Free Radio Design Software go to
http://www.btinternet.com/~g4fgq.regp
.................................................. .........


There is no "Download Pascal source code from here" section on the Index
page. There is a "Get Pascal source code from here" section which lists the
following:

GRNDWAV3.pas * Groundwave propagation vs frequency, distance and terrain.

TOPHAT2.pas * Performance of top-capacitance loaded vertical.

PADMATCH.pas * T and Pi resistive-matching and minimum loss pads.


I do not see the TRANCO_1 source code listed.

73
John

On Sun, 2 Apr 2006 09:02:46 +0100, "Reg Edwards"
wrote:

The source code text, which is almost readable using non-proportional
spaced text readers, can be found in "Download Pascal source code from
here" section on the Index page.

Hi Reggie,

A fine example of coding.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC