The Google Hypothesis of Guru Elevation - The Guroogle
 

On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 16:23:47 GMT, "Tom Donaly"
wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:

Tom Donaly wrote:

Besides, if Cecil can't demonstrate the validity of his
views experimentally, even if there are some sources that agree
with him, he's just parroting the old wives.


Please describe your experiments for proving Maxwell's equations.

Maxwell thought up Maxwell's equations, Cecil, you didn't. Heinrich
Hertz, Farady, and others did the experimentation. Besides, you only
have to turn on your radio to prove the equations valid. Even Maxwell
knew that without experimental proof, his fine mathematics was only
idle speculation.

C'Mon Tom,

Cecil's objective is NOT about technical discourse, it is about having
more posts than others and seeing his name responded to as hits. Of
the last 212 posts, 87 are his and there are 13 other posters to share
barely an average of 10 each.

You are responding to Cecil's usual forced expectation of others
proving a body of science before he proceeds to measure something he
maintains is commonly observable. His demands:fulfillments far exceed
his 9:1 posting frequency.

So, as this is actually nothing new, it remains that his postings
serve only the purpose of entertainment. Those that confuse them with
insight or balanced correspondence (or believe in quantity = quality)
are beyond hope.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Noise level between two ant types
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
y.net...
Gene Fuller wrote:
How do you know there is no corona discharge?

Because under passive fairweather conditions, corona
requires 13 magnitudes more current than is available
in nature. Please see my other posting.

And just a comment on your seeming innocent question
above. You seem to be asking me to prove that there
is no corona discharge when proving a negative is
impossible. The onus of proof is upon the one(s) who
assert(s) the positive position.

W8JI asserted that there is a corona discharge and
you agreed with him. Therefore, the onus of proof
is upon you. Please prove that corona can exist
on a receiving antenna under passive fairweather
conditions.

People are free to assert negatives at any time
without any proof. For instance, if I assert that
you cannot dunk a basketball, my assertion will
remain true until you prove that you can dunk
a basketball.

you can restate most negatives as positives. an example of this is a
logical statement, in which case the contrapositive is always true. if P,
then Q. if not Q, then not P. another example is Demorgan's theorem in set
theory and electronics.

if you say that general relativity is wrong, the burden is on you to prove
otherwise.

if the corona discharge theory is held by 90% of physicists and engineers,
then anyone with a charged particle theory (a minority viewpoint) must do
experimental verification or formulate a theoretical model.

in this case, i think that both Cecil and others should cite peer reviewed
articles.

Gravity

Noise level between two ant types
 

Tom Donaly wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Please describe your experiments for proving Maxwell's equations.

Maxwell thought up Maxwell's equations, Cecil, you didn't.

Aha, so you don't even follow your own advice. I quote
conventional wisdom from the last 100 years of physics
research and you ask me to to prove it experimentally.

Why do you try to hold me to a higher standard than the
one to which you hold W8JI and yourself? Everything I
have reported is old hat to competent physicists and
competent engineers who know anything at all about
atmospheric physics.

What you and others have asserted goes against 100 years
of conventional wisdom and thousands of experiments in
the field of atmospheric physics during those 100 years.

In fact, the only way to win your argument now is to
prove that a Corona God really exists and is in control
of fairweather fields.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Noise level between two ant types
 

gravity wrote:
if the corona discharge theory is held by 90% of physicists and engineers,
then anyone with a charged particle theory (a minority viewpoint) must do
experimental verification or formulate a theoretical model.

100% of physicists and engineers hold the corona discharge
theory. 0.1% of posters to r.r.a.a seem to hold that corona
discharge is the only force at work in the entire universe
and caused the big bang. :-)

99.9% of competent physicists and competent
engineers know that corona is not the only cause of RF
noise. Unfortunately, r.r.a.a. has more than its fair share
of people who deny the past 100 years of scientific experimentation
and research into atmospheric physics and stick with their Corona
God religion.

Other assertions by that same new-world anti-conventional
wisdom crowd:

Reflected waves contain zero energy and are not the cause
of standing waves.

Standing-wave energy just sloshes from side to side in a
transmission line.

The distributed network model is gobbledygook.

Lumped-circuit analysis never fails.

There is zero delay through a real-world 75m bugcatcher coil.

Charged particle RF noise doesn't exist.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

The Google Hypothesis of Guru Elevation - The Guroogle
 

Richard Clark wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 16:23:47 GMT, "Tom Donaly"
wrote:


Cecil Moore wrote:


Tom Donaly wrote:


Besides, if Cecil can't demonstrate the validity of his
views experimentally, even if there are some sources that agree
with him, he's just parroting the old wives.


Please describe your experiments for proving Maxwell's equations.

Maxwell thought up Maxwell's equations, Cecil, you didn't. Heinrich
Hertz, Farady, and others did the experimentation. Besides, you only
have to turn on your radio to prove the equations valid. Even Maxwell
knew that without experimental proof, his fine mathematics was only
idle speculation.


C'Mon Tom,

Cecil's objective is NOT about technical discourse, it is about having
more posts than others and seeing his name responded to as hits. Of
the last 212 posts, 87 are his and there are 13 other posters to share
barely an average of 10 each.

You are responding to Cecil's usual forced expectation of others
proving a body of science before he proceeds to measure something he
maintains is commonly observable. His demands:fulfillments far exceed
his 9:1 posting frequency.

So, as this is actually nothing new, it remains that his postings
serve only the purpose of entertainment. Those that confuse them with
insight or balanced correspondence (or believe in quantity = quality)
are beyond hope.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

You're absolutely right, Richard. Of course, if he can use all of
his rural debate tricks to get people who disagree with him
into abandoning the thread, then he thinks he can claim victory
as being the only combatant left on the field of honor. Notice how
he used the Mensa Society post to destroy the discourse? Cecil isn't
really serious, as you point out, and his posts are only valuable for
their entertainment value, as you also point out, but there are,
alas, people who are soft-minded enough not only to take him seriously,
but to agree with him as well. I think Roy had the right idea when
he plonked him. The rest of us should probably follow Roy's example.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Noise level between two ant types
 

Cecil Moore wrote:


Cecil claims that corona cannot exist in "fairweather" conditions,
although there is no reason given.

Again, obviously a false statement based on wishful thinking.
As proved by my references, the existence of corona requires
~100 uA per cm^2. Quoting from the previous NASA web page, for
the fairweather field, "the current is 10^-12 amps per square
meter."

Requirement for corona to exist:

100 uA per cm^2 = 10 amps per square meter

Available current during fairweather conditions:

10^-12 amps per square meter

Conclusion: During fairweather conditions, the current is
13 magnitudes too low for corona to exist.



Cecil,

That's a good one. I believe the fairweather reference relates to the
average current density over the entire earth. The corona reference
(which does not even come close to being a "requirement") applies to a
very localized environment. If the average current density over the
entire earth increased to 100 uA per cm^2 I think it might be best to
live far underground.

I have not measured currents, fields, or corona in the atmosphere, but I
have some experience with high voltage equipment in laboratory
environments. I can assure you that corona can occur even when there are
no preexisting fields or currents in the surrounding air. High voltage
and sharp emission points are quite adequate.

The fairweather current and the corona current are completely unrelated.

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Noise level between two ant types
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
How do you know there is no corona discharge?

Because under passive fairweather conditions, corona
requires 13 magnitudes more current than is available
in nature. Please see my other posting.

And just a comment on your seeming innocent question
above. You seem to be asking me to prove that there
is no corona discharge when proving a negative is
impossible. The onus of proof is upon the one(s) who
assert(s) the positive position.

W8JI asserted that there is a corona discharge and
you agreed with him. Therefore, the onus of proof
is upon you. Please prove that corona can exist
on a receiving antenna under passive fairweather
conditions.


Cecil,

I have not said that I agree with W8JI or that corona is a necessary
condition for radio noise.

What I have said is that I disagree with your half-baked fractured
physics explanations.

Corona does not require ANY preexisting current, and certainly not the
global "fairweather" current. The high fields near a sharp point will
create all the corona current necessary.

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Noise level between two ant types
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
. com...
gravity wrote:
if the corona discharge theory is held by 90% of physicists and
engineers,
then anyone with a charged particle theory (a minority viewpoint) must
do
experimental verification or formulate a theoretical model.

100% of physicists and engineers hold the corona discharge
theory. 0.1% of posters to r.r.a.a seem to hold that corona
discharge is the only force at work in the entire universe
and caused the big bang. :-)

99.9% of competent physicists and competent
engineers know that corona is not the only cause of RF
noise. Unfortunately, r.r.a.a. has more than its fair share
of people who deny the past 100 years of scientific experimentation
and research into atmospheric physics and stick with their Corona
God religion.

Other assertions by that same new-world anti-conventional
wisdom crowd:

Reflected waves contain zero energy and are not the cause
of standing waves.

Standing-wave energy just sloshes from side to side in a
transmission line.

The distributed network model is gobbledygook.

Lumped-circuit analysis never fails.

There is zero delay through a real-world 75m bugcatcher coil.

Charged particle RF noise doesn't exist.

LMAO. i enjoyed reading this.

Gravity

--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

The Google Hypothesis of Guru Elevation - The Guroogle
 

On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 17:50:31 GMT, "Tom Donaly"
wrote:

Notice how he used the Mensa Society post to destroy the discourse?

Hi Tom,

I notice past membership is one of those unprovable positive facts.

there are,
alas, people who are soft-minded enough not only to take him seriously,
but to agree with him as well.

So rare so that Cecil has to offer they support him in secret email.
Even this is about hit counts when your thumb is on the scale. ;-)

I think Roy had the right idea when
he plonked him. The rest of us should probably follow Roy's example.

What's the fun in that? Pick one point and drill down; ignore the
side topics and drill down; discard the tailored citations and drill
down. Everyone of these drillings leads to a dry hole.
win-lose (classic American competition)

And yes, Mike, busting on Cecil is one pursuit here, we will leave it
to you to judge if it is indiscriminant and across the board, or fits
to threads dominated 9:1 by your Rodney King of the antennas.

Gimme another baton! I broke mine!
(classic American entertainment)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Noise level between two ant types
 

gravity wrote:
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
y.net...

Gene Fuller wrote:

How do you know there is no corona discharge?

Because under passive fairweather conditions, corona
requires 13 magnitudes more current than is available
in nature. Please see my other posting.

And just a comment on your seeming innocent question
above. You seem to be asking me to prove that there
is no corona discharge when proving a negative is
impossible. The onus of proof is upon the one(s) who
assert(s) the positive position.

W8JI asserted that there is a corona discharge and
you agreed with him. Therefore, the onus of proof
is upon you. Please prove that corona can exist
on a receiving antenna under passive fairweather
conditions.

People are free to assert negatives at any time
without any proof. For instance, if I assert that
you cannot dunk a basketball, my assertion will
remain true until you prove that you can dunk
a basketball.


you can restate most negatives as positives. an example of this is a
logical statement, in which case the contrapositive is always true. if P,
then Q. if not Q, then not P. another example is Demorgan's theorem in set
theory and electronics.

if you say that general relativity is wrong, the burden is on you to prove
otherwise.

if the corona discharge theory is held by 90% of physicists and engineers,
then anyone with a charged particle theory (a minority viewpoint) must do
experimental verification or formulate a theoretical model.

in this case, i think that both Cecil and others should cite peer reviewed
articles.

Gravity



Don't be an ass, Gravity.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH