Radium hath wroth:

Radio waves are made up of electric and magnetic fields.

Yep.

Couldn't the Spin Exchange Relaxation Free Magnetometer receive the
magnetic portions of AM radio waves at the carrier frequencies I
described? If not, why?

Nope.

1. The range of the magnetic field is limited. For example, you're
not going to bounce (errr... refract) a magnetic fields off the
ionosphere.

2. Magentometers use very big coils. Very big coils have lots of
inductance. Resonant circuits with lots of inductance tend to
resonate at very low frequencies. Figure on maybe 30Hz being the
highest frequency detectable by a magnetometer. Most roll off even
earlier to avoid 60Hz power line pickup.

3. Magnetometers are expensive. You're proposing using one as a
replacement for a 5 cent silicon diode detector. If the technology
doesn't get to you, the accountants will.

Agreed, static magnetic fields tend to decay rapidly as you move away
from them. However, alternating magnetic fields continue to propogate
by generating alternating electric fields of the same frequency. These
alternating electric fields, in turn, generate alternating magnetic
fields. The cycle keeps repeating.

Rubbish.
--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 5 Jul, 22:25, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Radium hath wroth:

Radio waves are made up of electric and magnetic fields.

Yep.

Couldn't the Spin Exchange Relaxation Free Magnetometer receive the
magnetic portions of AM radio waves at the carrier frequencies I
described? If not, why?

Nope.

1. The range of the magnetic field is limited. For example, you're
not going to bounce (errr... refract) a magnetic fields off the
ionosphere.

2. Magentometers use very big coils. Very big coils have lots of
inductance. Resonant circuits with lots of inductance tend to
resonate at very low frequencies. Figure on maybe 30Hz being the
highest frequency detectable by a magnetometer. Most roll off even
earlier to avoid 60Hz power line pickup.

3. Magnetometers are expensive. You're proposing using one as a
replacement for a 5 cent silicon diode detector. If the technology
doesn't get to you, the accountants will.

Agreed, static magnetic fields tend to decay rapidly as you move away
from them. However, alternating magnetic fields continue to propogate
by generating alternating electric fields of the same frequency. These
alternating electric fields, in turn, generate alternating magnetic
fields. The cycle keeps repeating.

Rubbish.
--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

I believe that the standard example of radiation referred to above
is in error.
I do not believe that radiation consists of fields of any sort
but consists of ejected static particles in form of a swarm.
I have asked the Eham forum to wade in on that one since it
appears they have more scientifically molecular inclined members.
The only cycle that repeates in radiation is the tank circuit of a
diagmagnetic material which is resonant i.e. equal capacitance and
inductance. Seems like the posts are relying on propagating fields
which to me is an error.
Regards
Art

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna art wrote:
On 5 Jul, 22:25, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Radium hath wroth:

Radio waves are made up of electric and magnetic fields.

Yep.

Couldn't the Spin Exchange Relaxation Free Magnetometer receive the
magnetic portions of AM radio waves at the carrier frequencies I
described? If not, why?

Nope.

1. The range of the magnetic field is limited. For example, you're
not going to bounce (errr... refract) a magnetic fields off the
ionosphere.

2. Magentometers use very big coils. Very big coils have lots of
inductance. Resonant circuits with lots of inductance tend to
resonate at very low frequencies. Figure on maybe 30Hz being the
highest frequency detectable by a magnetometer. Most roll off even
earlier to avoid 60Hz power line pickup.

3. Magnetometers are expensive. You're proposing using one as a
replacement for a 5 cent silicon diode detector. If the technology
doesn't get to you, the accountants will.

Agreed, static magnetic fields tend to decay rapidly as you move away
from them. However, alternating magnetic fields continue to propogate
by generating alternating electric fields of the same frequency. These
alternating electric fields, in turn, generate alternating magnetic
fields. The cycle keeps repeating.

Rubbish.
--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

I believe that the standard example of radiation referred to above
is in error.

Belief doesn't make reality.

I do not believe that radiation consists of fields of any sort
but consists of ejected static particles in form of a swarm.

A hundred years or so of experments say that's utter, babbling,
nonsense.

I have asked the Eham forum to wade in on that one since it
appears they have more scientifically molecular inclined members.

Right.

The only cycle that repeates in radiation is the tank circuit of a
diagmagnetic material which is resonant i.e. equal capacitance and
inductance. Seems like the posts are relying on propagating fields
which to me is an error.

I'd suggest fluphenazine and haloperidol.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On 6 Jul, 20:15, wrote:
In rec.radio.amateur.antenna art wrote:





On 5 Jul, 22:25, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Radium hath wroth:

Radio waves are made up of electric and magnetic fields.

Yep.

Couldn't the Spin Exchange Relaxation Free Magnetometer receive the
magnetic portions of AM radio waves at the carrier frequencies I
described? If not, why?

Nope.

1. The range of the magnetic field is limited. For example, you're
not going to bounce (errr... refract) a magnetic fields off the
ionosphere.

2. Magentometers use very big coils. Very big coils have lots of
inductance. Resonant circuits with lots of inductance tend to
resonate at very low frequencies. Figure on maybe 30Hz being the
highest frequency detectable by a magnetometer. Most roll off even
earlier to avoid 60Hz power line pickup.

3. Magnetometers are expensive. You're proposing using one as a
replacement for a 5 cent silicon diode detector. If the technology
doesn't get to you, the accountants will.

Agreed, static magnetic fields tend to decay rapidly as you move away
from them. However, alternating magnetic fields continue to propogate
by generating alternating electric fields of the same frequency. These
alternating electric fields, in turn, generate alternating magnetic
fields. The cycle keeps repeating.

Rubbish.
--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
I believe that the standard example of radiation referred to above
is in error.

Belief doesn't make reality.

I do not believe that radiation consists of fields of any sort
but consists of ejected static particles in form of a swarm.

A hundred years or so of experments say that's utter, babbling,
nonsense.

I have asked the Eham forum to wade in on that one since it
appears they have more scientifically molecular inclined members.

Right.

The only cycle that repeates in radiation is the tank circuit of a
diagmagnetic material which is resonant i.e. equal capacitance and
inductance. Seems like the posts are relying on propagating fields
which to me is an error.

I'd suggest fluphenazine and haloperidol.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Jim, In the past you have shown that you are not that smart
and I see of no evidence of any change.
Suggest you review "particles" in nuclear physics,
tho I suppose some could see a swarm of particles as a "wave"
tho certainly not in the electrical sense.
Seems like you take comfort in harrassing people with
statements that have no reality. I have the strong suspicion
that you are also short in stature and thus have a macho
feeling in hiding. I personally have proved that radiation
is in particle form where you do not have the ability
to prove anything.

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna art wrote:
On 6 Jul, 20:15, wrote:
In rec.radio.amateur.antenna art wrote:





On 5 Jul, 22:25, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Radium hath wroth:

Radio waves are made up of electric and magnetic fields.

Yep.

Couldn't the Spin Exchange Relaxation Free Magnetometer receive the
magnetic portions of AM radio waves at the carrier frequencies I
described? If not, why?

Nope.

1. The range of the magnetic field is limited. For example, you're
not going to bounce (errr... refract) a magnetic fields off the
ionosphere.

2. Magentometers use very big coils. Very big coils have lots of
inductance. Resonant circuits with lots of inductance tend to
resonate at very low frequencies. Figure on maybe 30Hz being the
highest frequency detectable by a magnetometer. Most roll off even
earlier to avoid 60Hz power line pickup.

3. Magnetometers are expensive. You're proposing using one as a
replacement for a 5 cent silicon diode detector. If the technology
doesn't get to you, the accountants will.

Agreed, static magnetic fields tend to decay rapidly as you move away
from them. However, alternating magnetic fields continue to propogate
by generating alternating electric fields of the same frequency. These
alternating electric fields, in turn, generate alternating magnetic
fields. The cycle keeps repeating.

Rubbish.
--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
I believe that the standard example of radiation referred to above
is in error.

Belief doesn't make reality.

I do not believe that radiation consists of fields of any sort
but consists of ejected static particles in form of a swarm.

A hundred years or so of experments say that's utter, babbling,
nonsense.

I have asked the Eham forum to wade in on that one since it
appears they have more scientifically molecular inclined members.

Right.

The only cycle that repeates in radiation is the tank circuit of a
diagmagnetic material which is resonant i.e. equal capacitance and
inductance. Seems like the posts are relying on propagating fields
which to me is an error.

I'd suggest fluphenazine and haloperidol.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Jim, In the past you have shown that you are not that smart
and I see of no evidence of any change.
Suggest you review "particles" in nuclear physics,
tho I suppose some could see a swarm of particles as a "wave"
tho certainly not in the electrical sense.
Seems like you take comfort in harrassing people with
statements that have no reality. I have the strong suspicion
that you are also short in stature and thus have a macho
feeling in hiding. I personally have proved that radiation
is in particle form where you do not have the ability
to prove anything.

Babbling, delusional nonsense.

Seek help.

There are drugs that may help your condition if you are treated
early enough.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

wrote in message
news
In rec.radio.amateur.antenna art wrote:

Babbling, delusional nonsense.

Seek help.

There are drugs that may help your condition if you are treated
early enough.

--
Jim Pennino

let them go jim... art and radium were made for each other.

On 7 Jul, 04:10, "Dave" wrote:
wrote in message

news
In rec.radio.amateur.antenna art wrote:

Babbling, delusional nonsense.

Seek help.

There are drugs that may help your condition if you are treated
early enough.

--
Jim Pennino

let them go jim... art and radium were made for each other.

David, you had every opportunity to debate the issue
as everybody else did on this newsgroup. Unfortuately
this newsgroup is not monitored which allows movement
from civil and scientific debate.
Thus in the quest of true scientific and civil debate
I have for the moment engaged in debate with Tom W8TI who
is extremely skilled in the art of antennas and certainly
regarded as a man of repute which excels that of resident
members of this group. I suggest that you both follow
that debate which is being held in a gentlemanly fashion
and compare it to the tack often taken on this newsgroup.
Art

On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 06:52:24 -0700, art wrote:

Unfortuately
this newsgroup is not monitored which allows movement
from civil and scientific debate.

My, my, my, Arthur!

If a monitored forum for your amateur radio theories was that
IMPORTANT; then you would submit them to a monitored forum instead of
here. Given you find this is such a poor venue (oddly your choice of
forum), it follows that the poor quality of your work can only survive
here, doesn't it?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

In rec.radio.amateur.antenna Dave wrote:

wrote in message
news
In rec.radio.amateur.antenna art wrote:

Babbling, delusional nonsense.

Seek help.

There are drugs that may help your condition if you are treated
early enough.

--
Jim Pennino

let them go jim... art and radium were made for each other.

Radium is a silly-ass, ignorant child.

Art reminds me of my mother-in-law in the very early stage of her
dementia when no one wanted to talk about it or admit there was a
problem.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On 7 Jul, 07:27, Richard Clark wrote:
On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 06:52:24 -0700, art wrote:
Unfortuately
this newsgroup is not monitored which allows movement
from civil and scientific debate.

My, my, my, Arthur!

If a monitored forum for your amateur radio theories was that
IMPORTANT; then you would submit them to a monitored forum instead of
here. Given you find this is such a poor venue (oddly your choice of
forum), it follows that the poor quality of your work can only survive
here, doesn't it?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard,
watch the debate on Eham that is held in gentlemany fashion
and with a proponent of knoweledge to which you aspire to
and have failed miserably7 Tom is only one of many that
have moved to E ham because of the discusting and rude behaviour
of you and many others. Experts see no reason to discuss radio
with such an ignoramous as you and leave. I am engaging him in debate
about radiation on a point by point scientific manner and to
achieve such a debate I have followed him to the E ham forum
so such a debate could occur. For the lemmings that follow you I
suggest you review the advisability of the continuance of your
choice of leader. Please excuse my absence from this thread
for a short while while I am away enjoying a debate regarding
ham radio with an expert in a areana of experts. Ofcourse I will
return to watch your writhing in agony.
Art Unwin KB9MZ........XG (uk)