Looking thru various antenna pages on the web and I continually find
reference
to inductance CANCELLING capacitance.
The operative word should be BALANCING and the difference is important
.. In all cases the capapicitor is still there and operative
as is the inductance.One cannot say they are cancelled so they can be
disregarded.
You cannot make either of them inoperative or of no consequence even
in the case where a clockwise
wound inductance is in series with a counterclockwise inductance since
by definition
both are energy containers. When you have a resistive impedance for
a full wavelength without a reactive component per se what it means is
that the energy contained in each of the energy containers are equal
thus allowing for symetry as in a loss less pendulum. If on does not
have a full wave length you can still have equal energy sinks but
their release of energy is not synonymous with each other thus there
is no symetry.
So concentrate on the word "balance" or "equilibrium" when maximum
efficiency is required.
Best regards
Art Unwin....KB9MZ......xg

"art" wrote
Looking thru various antenna pages on the web and I continually
find reference to inductance CANCELLING capacitance.
The operative word should be BALANCING and the difference is
important. In all cases the capapicitor is still there and operative
as is the inductance. One cannot say they are cancelled so they can be
disregarded. etc etc
__________

No matter what one calls it, equal inductive and capacitive reactance at the
input terminals of an antenna system (eg, resonance) is important only in
achieving the most efficient power transfer from a source connected to those
input terminals having an impedance matching the remaining pure
(non-reactive) resistance of the antenna system

== Antenna system reactance neither absorbs source power nor radiates,
whether such reactance is capacitive, inductive, or in "balance /
equilibrium." ==

Only pure radiation resistance will do so, and that is set by the natural
radiation resistance of the antenna conductor(s), which in turn is related
to the mechanical and electrical configuration of the radiating structure,
and the operating frequency.

Setting up equal inductive and capacitive reactance values at the antenna
system input terminals means that the real radiating structure of the
antenna will receive the maximum power possible from a matched transmission
line, which will maximize the fields that the system can produce from the
net power available from the transmitter.

RF

Looking thru various antenna pages on the web and I continually find
reference
to inductance CANCELLING capacitance.
The operative word should be BALANCING and the difference is important
. In all cases the capapicitor is still there and operative
as is the inductance.One cannot say they are cancelled so they can be
disregarded.
You cannot make either of them inoperative or of no consequence even
in the case where a clockwise
wound inductance is in series with a counterclockwise inductance since
by definition
both are energy containers. When you have a resistive impedance for
a full wavelength without a reactive component per se what it means is
that the energy contained in each of the energy containers are equal
thus allowing for symetry as in a loss less pendulum. If on does not
have a full wave length you can still have equal energy sinks but
their release of energy is not synonymous with each other thus there
is no symetry.
So concentrate on the word "balance" or "equilibrium" when maximum
efficiency is required.
Best regards
Art Unwin....KB9MZ......xg


I see your point, but I think the issue you are having with
"balance" vs. "cancel" is more semantics than functional. It is easier
to perceive the issue as a cancellation when making calculations and
design, I think.

Ed K7AAT

On 20 Oct, 15:12, Ed G wrote:
Looking thru various antenna pages on the web and I continually find
reference
to inductance CANCELLING capacitance.
The operative word should be BALANCING and the difference is important
. In all cases the capapicitor is still there and operative
as is the inductance.One cannot say they are cancelled so they can be
disregarded.
You cannot make either of them inoperative or of no consequence even
in the case where a clockwise
wound inductance is in series with a counterclockwise inductance since
by definition
both are energy containers. When you have a resistive impedance for
a full wavelength without a reactive component per se what it means is
that the energy contained in each of the energy containers are equal
thus allowing for symetry as in a loss less pendulum. If on does not
have a full wave length you can still have equal energy sinks but
their release of energy is not synonymous with each other thus there
is no symetry.
So concentrate on the word "balance" or "equilibrium" when maximum
efficiency is required.
Best regards
Art Unwin....KB9MZ......xg

I see your point, but I think the issue you are having with
"balance" vs. "cancel" is more semantics than functional. It is easier
to perceive the issue as a cancellation when making calculations and
design, I think.

Ed K7AAT- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes that may be true but with the increasing reliance on mathematics
and computors
the gimmicks that come with mathematics are distorting things. Tho an
inductance
may be "cancelled" out it is still there which created a magnetic
field which may
or may not be affected by an alternately counter wound inductance
since energy is still
being used to create a magnetic field amoungst other things. I would
imagine if
the inductances were used for storing energy mathematically that fact
would be
hidden leading research into a incorrect direction.
For me who is working around the LC ratio with respect to antennas
Ithere are advantages
for maximum capacitance and inductance vessels for max time varience
of energy discharge
while at the same time keeping to the required LC ratio at point of
feed since the
larger the storage vessel the faster the energy release or explosion
which then means
a higher velocity for free electrons to carry communication.
Note with respect to the H bomb tests in the Pacific where the more
powerfull explosion
wiped out the Honolulu electrical grid which had not happened before
thus the velocity
of the explosion or release had a direct relationship with radiation.
Best regards
Art

"art" wrote
For me who is working around the LC ratio with respect to antennas there
are advantages for maximum capacitance and inductance vessels for max time
varience of energy discharge while at the same time keeping to the
required LC ratio at point of
feed since the larger the storage vessel the faster the energy release or
explosion which then means a higher velocity for free electrons to carry
communication.
_________

Attention:"art"

You have posted your concepts and beliefs here, but your posts on this
topic are not supported or proven by physical science, and field results
going back some 60+ years.

Why do you persist in posting such claims?

RF

--
------------------------------------------------------
Antonio Vernucci, I0JX US call: K0JX
50-MHz beacon: 50.004 KHz FSK 10W 5/8 vertical antenna
reference
to inductance CANCELLING capacitance.
The operative word should be BALANCING and the difference is important

"inductance cancelling capacitance" is evidently an abbreviation for "cancelling
the effect of capacitance"

Your post reminds me of a guy who, when asked a glass of water, answered: but
there no glasses made of water....

73

Tony I0JX

In article ,
"Antonio Vernucci" wrote:

Your post reminds me of a guy who, when asked a glass of water, answered: but
there no glasses made of water....

Obviously you have never seen "Stiff Water"...... You can make a Glass,
or any other container out of Stiff Water....you just need to keep them
below 0C.........

Obviously you have never seen "Stiff Water"...... You can make a Glass,
or any other container out of Stiff Water....you just need to keep them
below 0C.......

You are wrong, as I know "Stiff Water" better than you do! As a matter of fact
you only know one method for stiffening water, that is freezing it. I also know
a second method: to drop a pill of Viagra into it!

73

Tony I0JX

In article ,
"Antonio Vernucci" wrote:

Obviously you have never seen "Stiff Water"...... You can make a Glass,
or any other container out of Stiff Water....you just need to keep them
below 0C.......

You are wrong, as I know "Stiff Water" better than you do! As a matter of
fact
you only know one method for stiffening water, that is freezing it. I also
know
a second method: to drop a pill of Viagra into it!

73

Tony I0JX


Not likely Bozo, us alaskans are the original source of Stiff Water.....

Art, KB9MZ wrote:
"You cannot make either of them (L or C) inoperative or of no
consequence----."

Perhaps when L is said to cancel C, it is a short way of saying the
reactances offset and the net is ithe difference of the two.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI