www.qsl.net/n7ws

Follow the links.

Wes,
Do you really think that it makes ~that~ much
difference?
'Doc

On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 00:27:15 -0600, 'Doc wrote:

|
|
|Wes,
| Do you really think that it makes ~that~ much
|difference?
| 'Doc

Yes... or no... or maybe, depending on what "it" is and how much
difference "it" does or does not make.


Regards,

Wes

On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 05:43:07 -0700, Wes Stewart
wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 00:27:15 -0600, 'Doc wrote:
|
|
|Wes,
| Do you really think that it makes ~that~ much
|difference?
| 'Doc

Yes... or no... or maybe, depending on what "it" is and how much
difference "it" does or does not make.
Regards,
Wes

Hi Wes,

The difference in your examination satisfyingly amounts to:
1.) the absence of ego towering over the problem;
1a.) the corresponding lack of sneer review that
reduces the argument to "you won't change my mind";
2.) the presence of clear unequivocal study of the problem;
3.) less than 1dB.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:44:50 GMT, Richard Clark
wrote:

|On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 05:43:07 -0700, Wes Stewart
|wrote:
|On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 00:27:15 -0600, 'Doc wrote:
||
||
||Wes,
|| Do you really think that it makes ~that~ much
||difference?
|| 'Doc
|
|Yes... or no... or maybe, depending on what "it" is and how much
|difference "it" does or does not make.
|Regards,
|Wes
|
|Hi Wes,
|
|The difference in your examination satisfyingly amounts to:
|1.) the absence of ego towering over the problem;
|1a.) the corresponding lack of sneer review that
| reduces the argument to "you won't change my mind";
|2.) the presence of clear unequivocal study of the problem;
|3.) less than 1dB.

Thanks!

Wes

Nothing on that post

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 05:43:07 -0700, Wes Stewart
wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 00:27:15 -0600, 'Doc wrote:
|
|
|Wes,
| Do you really think that it makes ~that~ much
|difference?
| 'Doc

Yes... or no... or maybe, depending on what "it" is and how much
difference "it" does or does not make.
Regards,
Wes

Hi Wes,

The difference in your examination satisfyingly amounts to:
1.) the absence of ego towering over the problem;
1a.) the corresponding lack of sneer review that
reduces the argument to "you won't change my mind";
2.) the presence of clear unequivocal study of the problem;
3.) less than 1dB.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 23:13:26 GMT, " Art Unwin KB9MZ"
wrote:

Nothing on that post
Hi Wes,

The difference in your examination satisfyingly amounts to:
1.) the absence of ego towering over the problem;
1a.) the corresponding lack of sneer review that
reduces the argument to "you won't change my mind";
2.) the presence of clear unequivocal study of the problem;
3.) less than 1dB.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Still less than 1 dB

Wes wrote,
Message-id:

www.qsl.net/n7ws

Follow the links.


Very good, but what is "current moment?"
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

It's more of a math term than an antenna term. I believe this refers to the
'method of moments' used to calculate the far field. Take the currents in
all the little sections of the antenna and sum the contributions of each for
the total field...like what happens in real life.
Steve N.

"Tdonaly" wrote in message
...
Wes wrote,
Message-id:

www.qsl.net/n7ws

Follow the links.


Very good, but what is "current moment?"
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Steve wrote,

It's more of a math term than an antenna term. I believe this refers to the
'method of moments' used to calculate the far field. Take the currents in
all the little sections of the antenna and sum the contributions of each for
the total field...like what happens in real life.
Steve N.


Thanks Steve. The way the fellow used it it sounded like a single
quantity the square of which was proportional to the radiation
resistance. People who write articles for journals sometimes
get a bit fanciful in their terminology.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH