Les Moxon
 

Les who is in his late nineties has finally relented and
has moved to a nursing home.
Had the privelege one of have a hour long discussion
at his home on antennas. I suppose before he came along
the old saying of "every thing is known about antennas"
was probably banded about today as it was in his early days
and in part may be true except a lot of what is already known
has not been used to advantage. For that we need a person
of personal vision who is a do'r and not just a follower.
Happy holidays to all and that includes you Cecil.
Stick to your guns and what you believe in or be content
in just being a follower. Doing that does not prevent
true questioning people from 'getting along'
despite of differences.


Art

Art Unwin KB9MZ wrote:
Happy holidays to all and that includes you Cecil.
Stick to your guns and what you believe in or be content
in just being a follower. Doing that does not prevent
true questioning people from 'getting along'
despite of differences.

And Happy Holidays to you and all people of good will
everywhere (presumably, that excludes SH and OBL :-).

I have a bad habit that I am trying to break - I treat
a person the way he/she treats me. I tend to retaliate
in kind when someone insults my intelligence, education,
or experience. Unfortunately, that makes me completely
incompatible with people like me. :-)
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP

Art,
The statement, "every thing is known about antennas", was no
more true in Mr. Moxon's day, as it is now. I seriously doubt
if you will find anyone on this NG that thinks "every thing is
known about antennas". It's an opinion, and it's yours.
Happy Holidays...
'Doc

Cecil Moore wrote in message ...
Art Unwin KB9MZ wrote:
Happy holidays to all and that includes you Cecil.
Stick to your guns and what you believe in or be content
in just being a follower. Doing that does not prevent
true questioning people from 'getting along'
despite of differences.

And Happy Holidays to you and all people of good will
everywhere (presumably, that excludes SH and OBL :-).

I have a bad habit that I am trying to break - I treat
a person the way he/she treats me. I tend to retaliate
in kind when someone insults my intelligence, education,
or experience. Unfortunately, that makes me completely
incompatible with people like me. :-)



Why try to break it? Such people obviously want to
comunicate in a agressive and unsettling manner, so
you respond the same way or remain silent.
What really surprises me is some of the acrid statements
made by some experts to innocent non experts who then
fall apart when the table turns !
By the way, on the subject of lumped inductances, have you
found or know of a method to model link coupling ?
My tests using non linked coupled circuits sort of agreed
with computor programs ( lumped spaced inductances) but
unfortunately that where it ends.
I sure would like to model a variometer which is a link
coupling but I don't see a way to do it.
Regards
Art

Regards
Art

Art Unwin KB9MZ wrote:
By the way, on the subject of lumped inductances, have you
found or know of a method to model link coupling ?
My tests using non linked coupled circuits sort of agreed
with computor programs ( lumped spaced inductances) but
unfortunately that where it ends.
I sure would like to model a variometer which is a link
coupling but I don't see a way to do it.

Cebik's web page has a pretty good treatment of mutual
(link) coupling at http://www.cebik.com/link/link0.html
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Hello,

I must ask - WHO?

"Art Unwin KB9MZ" wrote in message
m...
Les who is in his late nineties has finally relented and
has moved to a nursing home.
Had the privelege one of have a hour long discussion
at his home on antennas. I suppose before he came along
the old saying of "every thing is known about antennas"
was probably banded about today as it was in his early days
and in part may be true except a lot of what is already known
has not been used to advantage. For that we need a person
of personal vision who is a do'r and not just a follower.
Happy holidays to all and that includes you Cecil.
Stick to your guns and what you believe in or be content
in just being a follower. Doing that does not prevent
true questioning people from 'getting along'
despite of differences.


Art

Hello,

Whoever this person is, does he know anything about "CFA" antennas then?

"'Doc" wrote in message ...


Art,
The statement, "every thing is known about antennas", was no
more true in Mr. Moxon's day, as it is now. I seriously doubt
if you will find anyone on this NG that thinks "every thing is
known about antennas". It's an opinion, and it's yours.
Happy Holidays...
'Doc

'Doc wrote in message ...
Art,
The statement, "every thing is known about antennas", was no
more true in Mr. Moxon's day, as it is now. I seriously doubt
if you will find anyone on this NG that thinks "every thing is
known about antennas". It's an opinion, and it's yours.
Happy Holidays...
'Doc

That statement was given to Hately by a University professor
when he presented the CFA. I have noticed since that most experts
on antennas appear to have the same attitude. Either that or
because of so many fake claims over the years feel it is a
safe bet to denounce or ridicule anything new.
I have spent the last ten years working on antennas and as you know
have written some up and even tho they are "new" they are pushed aside.
What it takes nowadays is for somebody to raise a lot of hoopla in
the press, make enticing claims and then put a price on it knowing
that people prefer to buy.
It is sad but it does seem that with an overload of written material
on antennas hams unconciously really feel that way
If I hear you on the top band I will give you a call on my
rotatable dipole which is not new.
Art.

Cecil Moore wrote in message ...
Art Unwin KB9MZ wrote:
By the way, on the subject of lumped inductances, have you
found or know of a method to model link coupling ?
My tests using non linked coupled circuits sort of agreed
with computor programs ( lumped spaced inductances) but
unfortunately that where it ends.
I sure would like to model a variometer which is a link
coupling but I don't see a way to do it.

Cebik's web page has a pretty good treatment of mutual
(link) coupling at http://www.cebik.com/link/link0.html

Yes, I pointed out Cebik link tutorial earlier this week
on another thread but it doesn't help with the computor modeling.
Art

Art Unwin KB9MZ wrote:

That statement was given to Hately by a University professor
when he presented the CFA. I have noticed since that most experts
on antennas appear to have the same attitude. Either that or
because of so many fake claims over the years feel it is a
safe bet to denounce or ridicule anything new.

But we aren't talking about Hartely and the CFA antenna, and
the
only one who has made the statement, "every thing is known about
antennas",
on this NG is you.
There's another alternative in addition to the two 'reasons'
this
statement was made. That is, Mr. Hartely couldn't, or wouldn't
explain
his claims in a way acceptible and understandable to his
audience. The
audience's 'job' is to try to pick it apart, to find any 'holes'
in the
claim Mr. Hartely made. That's the usual and normal process for
proving,
or disproving 'new' ideas, it isn't criticism.
The same thing is true for your 'new' ideas (or anyone
else's). If you
can't or won't explain the process of how you got to your claim,
then you
haven't proved anything. You're only making assumptions and
want people
to accept them without proof.
You have three choices, quit, or prove your assumptions, or
continue
making unsupported claims.
'Doc

And lest we forget, the "miracle antenna" of the 90's the FRACTAL. I am
working on a co-phased fractal CFA that will be all the rage on 11 meters.

"Mike" wrote in message
...
Hello,

Whoever this person is, does he know anything about "CFA" antennas then?

"'Doc" wrote in message ...


Art,
The statement, "every thing is known about antennas", was no
more true in Mr. Moxon's day, as it is now. I seriously doubt
if you will find anyone on this NG that thinks "every thing is
known about antennas". It's an opinion, and it's yours.
Happy Holidays...
'Doc

Art, all of our conversations have been cordial, with that in mind may I
respectfully suggest the following:

Nay Sayers - Screw em all but 7, six for pallbearers and 1 for a cadence
caller.

Build the antenna, write up a paper on it and send it to all the pubs. Those
that are the biggest critics never get on the air anyway, so they would
never buy one.

Set a price and offer them for sale, explaining that a production run will
commence with order X and if it is not reached the money will be returned.

Donate one to the next DX expedition to Lower Slobovia , you can then claim
that it received nothing less than a 5/9 world wide. If all else fails,
scale it to 11 meters and sell it as a 96dB gain "skip talking" antenna.

Find a local shop that will be willing to work with you on building it.
Point out you need a good price on the low number of units, and if they give
it to you, you will stick with them on production runs.

Spend time marketing the antenna instead of arguing with the so called
genius crowd in this news group. Your ulcer will calm down, you can then
make enough money to hire someone to take the newsgroup abuse for you. Good
luck in 2004 with your antenna.

73 Fred W4JLE

"Art Unwin KB9MZ" wrote in message
m...
That statement was given to Hately by a University professor
when he presented the CFA. I have noticed since that most experts
on antennas appear to have the same attitude. Either that or
because of so many fake claims over the years feel it is a
safe bet to denounce or ridicule anything new.
I have spent the last ten years working on antennas and as you know
have written some up and even tho they are "new" they are pushed aside.
What it takes nowadays is for somebody to raise a lot of hoopla in
the press, make enticing claims and then put a price on it knowing
that people prefer to buy.
It is sad but it does seem that with an overload of written material
on antennas hams unconciously really feel that way
If I hear you on the top band I will give you a call on my
rotatable dipole which is not new.
Art.

Fred:

[snip]
"w4jle" W4JLE(remove this to wrote in message
...
:
:
Spend time marketing the antenna instead of arguing with the so called
genius crowd in this news group. Your ulcer will calm down, you can then
make enough money to hire someone to take the newsgroup abuse for you.
Good
luck in 2004 with your antenna.

73 Fred W4JLE
[snip]

Touche'

The *only* validation of a new idea occurs when someone *buys* it.

If you can't sell it, an idea or invention ain't worth nothing!

Proslytising on a USENET NG, as Art continues to do, proves nothing and will
not gain him
or anyone else anything!

If Art can *sell* his patented invention to someone, *anyone*, then it's
valuable and worthwhile,
otherwise it's just so much shxx like 98% of all patented inventions.

Invention and discovery are *nothing*, *zilch*, *nada*, if no one buys!

Art is just a whiner and complainer, he will never *sell* his ideas or
inventions by
crying... sheesh... what a loser! He just can't or... won't sell!

--
Peter K1PO
Indialantic By-the-Sea, FL