Jimmie D wrote:
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
. ..
This thread is started to allow anyone who believes
in "waves of average power" to say so and explain
why they believe such.

Couldnt that be considered an oxymoron.

The word "believe" seems to have some religious
connotation so please replace "believe" with
the word "support" above. I didn't think anyone
supported the concept of "Waves of average power"
but apparently I was wrong. I personally support
the concept of RF energy waves associated with
ExB RMS watts just as most technical textbooks do.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Jimmie D wrote:
If Art was correct you could generate RF just by passing DC through a 1
wavelength loop. Gee wouldnt that make building a transmitter easy.

It would also mean that electrons are flowing into
the antenna and not returning to the source through
the transmission line.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
ExB RMS watts just as most technical textbooks do.

Sorry, should have been "RMS ExB = watts".
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On 29 Oct, 04:19, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

ups.com...





On 28 Oct, 17:27, Cecil Moore wrote:
art wrote:
Where is the information that backs that statement as I need to check
that out?

Isn't it obvious that since RF waves travel at the speed
of light and it is impossible for an electron to travel
at the speed of light, that RF waves are made up of
something other than electrons?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

We may be getting confused with nomenclature here.
I think most people have had to brush off from their clothing
electrostatic
particles. So I will call it a static particle without reference to an
electron.
That static particle can rest on a diagmatic material asd copper and
aluminum,
gold, silver etc is in that class. It is also this class of material
that
is used for antennas no less!
So static particles are allowed to rest on an antenna.
Now a antenna is a tank circuit where the distributed constants of
inductance
and capacitance are energy storage containers. Now is that hard to
understand?
And the L,C ratio to each other is very much a constant in antenna
mathematics.
Do we have anything else? Yes we have resistance. All in all just
three
distributed components
With a tank curcuit the energy containers release their energy in
pulsatic
form just like the voltage on the Tesla coil .
In the case of a radiator a spark is not produced as the power goes to
the
capacitor which later on will release its stored power which goes
back to
the inductance.
Now if resistance is not present then we would have a loss less system
right?
Unfortunately there is a litle resistance present but it will act for
some
time in pendulum style using very little energy.
When a pulse of energy is released down stream to the other end any
static
particles will be projected away from the surface where it acts as a
radio
communication carrier.
So call this static partical at rest on the radiator surface what you
want
it certainly does not produce a photon.
As there is no explanation available as to what radiation is I am
content to
stay
with what I have deduced from adding a time variAnce to Gauss's static
law
encompassed by an arbitary field which conformes with Maxwells laws as
used
to determine characteristics of a radiator via computor programs now
in existance.
Now getting back to electrons static forms ofcourse, what a
coincidence that we
make our antennas od a diagmatic material which by chance or
coincidence or
luck of the draw is the only type of material that will allow a
accumullation
of static particles upon its surface.
Now there are sonme other materials which will allow a small amount of
static
accumulation on the surface such as some types of steel e.t.c which
make
poor radiators.
Why? Because they are not fully populated with static particles or
what some
call free electons.
Now this explanation fits very well together so I consider it a
suitable
explanation of radiation in the absence of any other explanation.
FIND FAULT WITH IT IF YOU CAN AND LET ME KNOW SO I CAN AMMEND IT.
Good luck and best regards
Art Unwin KB9MZ.......xg

ah, this explains a lot... Art is an aetherist... seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether
the mysterious 'static particles' that aren't bound to the material and
carry the electromagnetic energy can only be the aether. since it is well
known how much energy is needed to free an electron from a metalic surface,
and as was pointed out that if it was really electrons that were leaving the
surface it would require a DC component in addition to the RF to replace
them or the antenna would become charged,

Get your mind back to the physics mode. Consider the basicvs infolved
with a field
in equilibrium as in Gauss's ,law of statics.
This method to explain things is used by physicists every day
In a short moment in time a DC pilse enters the field which breaks the
internal equilibrium where the boundary has a rapid change in contour
and fractures.
The DC blast removes the surface particles and in this moment where
equilibrium does not exist the static particles are projected beyond
the boundary before the boundary shape
is repaired. Have you got your mind in the thinking mode yet?Now what
does the blast consist of when energy is released nfrom a capacitor
bearing in mind that the capacitor plates are made of a diagmatic
material? Remember that for this method of deduction all "flux" must
pass thru the field so what is it that is stored on the surface plates
on the capacitor? Sice some particles are ejected from the field it
must bve the same type particles that leave a capacitor where some
replace those that are ejected.
Art Unwin KB9MZ....XG










it must be aether particles that
art is talking about. They would satisfy the massless speed of light
particles stuck on the surface and other crud that art is dreaming about in
his crude attempt to explain electromagnetics.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On 29 Oct, 04:56, Cecil Moore wrote:
Stefan Wolfe wrote:
This is where I plateau in terms of
physics comprehension; I am not able to tell the difference between a wave
and a particle, understanding as well that there may be none.

If you test expecting to find a wave, you will.
If you test expecting to find a particle, you will. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil
The Masters did not have computors so they tried deduction removing
all that did not meet empirical or mathematical tests before they
expoused them to the World.
In this case they meet empirical tests, they meet mathematical tests,
they abide by Maxwells laws and for those who demand more get an
optimiser computor program and without tying it to a planar mode the
antenna program will come back automatically with a non planar mode of
radiator, a radiator of any size or shape or elevation that is in a
state of equilibrium in singular or group form. The Masters found that
when working along side nature you have to walk in natures shoes but
never, never mess with mother nature.
Cecil, people have stopped calling me a blithering idiot! Are they
beginning to think that on this newsgroup I operate under a psuedo
name then who am I? Should we test QST and ask them to publish this
instead of mobile antenna guff? Where is the person who can clinically
disembowel this model and what University does he teach in? Is the
World correct in allowing computors to machinate the numbers
mathematically first and then allowing scientists to collect those
that look O.K. and then play with them, or did the Masters have the
right idea of turning that approach around for gaining advances?
Your friend
Art

"art" wrote in message
ups.com...
The DC blast removes the surface particles and in this moment where
equilibrium does not exist the static particles are projected beyond
the boundary before the boundary shape
is repaired. Have you got your mind in the thinking mode yet?Now what
does the blast consist of when energy is released nfrom a capacitor
bearing in mind that the capacitor plates are made of a diagmatic
material? Remember that for this method of deduction all "flux" must
pass thru the field so what is it that is stored on the surface plates
on the capacitor? Sice some particles are ejected from the field it
must bve the same type particles that leave a capacitor where some
replace those that are ejected.
Art Unwin KB9MZ....XG

ah, a blast removes the particles... you know how much of a 'blast' is
required to create corona on a wire the way you describe? what electric
field strength at the surface of a conductor is required to create that type
of breakdown in air? how much in vaccuum? define your terms and show all
work or you will lose points on the final grade.

what happens if i build a capacitor with ferromagnetic material??? does it
not work? what about if i use paramagnetic material?

On 29 Oct, 08:08, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

ups.com...

The DC blast removes the surface particles and in this moment where
equilibrium does not exist the static particles are projected beyond
the boundary before the boundary shape
is repaired. Have you got your mind in the thinking mode yet?Now what
does the blast consist of when energy is released nfrom a capacitor
bearing in mind that the capacitor plates are made of a diagmatic
material? Remember that for this method of deduction all "flux" must
pass thru the field so what is it that is stored on the surface plates
on the capacitor? Sice some particles are ejected from the field it
must bve the same type particles that leave a capacitor where some
replace those that are ejected.
Art Unwin KB9MZ....XG

ah, a blast removes the particles... you know how much of a 'blast' is
required to create corona on a wire the way you describe? what electric
field strength at the surface of a conductor is required to create that type
of breakdown in air?

A battery, a flyback transformer etc etc
how much in vaccuum?

Does not require a vacuum. Remember the old days of spark plug
transmissions?

define your terms and show all
work or you will lose points on the final grade.

what happens if i build a capacitor with ferromagnetic material??? does it
not work?

No

what about if I use paramagnetic material?

Yes

David turn your attention to antenna computor programs
When made they made assumptions which is a no, no with laws.
The same computor program produces verification of the model!
So why not think about whether computor programs are incorrectly based
or Maxwells laws has some errors. Start your investigation from a
rock
hard surface and not sand which has a habit of drifting in time and
determine
or verify again Maxwells laws and computor programming basics.
Is science back to the poll taking days for verification?
Stop floundaring and get down to serious thinking since memorising
stuff is not getting the job done as it did in college.
Art KB9MZ.....XG

On 29 Oct, 05:31, Cecil Moore wrote:
Jimmie D wrote:
If Art was correct you could generate RF just by passing DC through a 1
wavelength loop. Gee wouldnt that make building a transmitter easy.

It would also mean that electrons are flowing into
the antenna and not returning to the source through
the transmission line.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Static particles are discharged from the antenna, not flowing!
What returns to the scource is the result of resistance
being present
Art

"art" wrote in message
ups.com...
On 29 Oct, 08:08, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

ups.com...

The DC blast removes the surface particles and in this moment where
equilibrium does not exist the static particles are projected beyond
the boundary before the boundary shape
is repaired. Have you got your mind in the thinking mode yet?Now what
does the blast consist of when energy is released nfrom a capacitor
bearing in mind that the capacitor plates are made of a diagmatic
material? Remember that for this method of deduction all "flux" must
pass thru the field so what is it that is stored on the surface plates
on the capacitor? Sice some particles are ejected from the field it
must bve the same type particles that leave a capacitor where some
replace those that are ejected.
Art Unwin KB9MZ....XG

ah, a blast removes the particles... you know how much of a 'blast' is
required to create corona on a wire the way you describe? what electric
field strength at the surface of a conductor is required to create that
type
of breakdown in air?

A battery, a flyback transformer etc etc
how much in vaccuum?

Does not require a vacuum. Remember the old days of spark plug
transmissions?

define your terms and show all
work or you will lose points on the final grade.

what happens if i build a capacitor with ferromagnetic material??? does
it
not work?

No

what about if I use paramagnetic material?

Yes

David turn your attention to antenna computor programs
When made they made assumptions which is a no, no with laws.
The same computor program produces verification of the model!
So why not think about whether computor programs are incorrectly based
or Maxwells laws has some errors. Start your investigation from a
rock
hard surface and not sand which has a habit of drifting in time and
determine
or verify again Maxwells laws and computor programming basics.
Is science back to the poll taking days for verification?
Stop floundaring and get down to serious thinking since memorising
stuff is not getting the job done as it did in college.
Art KB9MZ.....XG



why should i believe you, you just said that a capacitor with iron plates
can't work which is provably wrong. your understanding of computer modeling
of antennas is similarly flawed.

On Oct 29, 8:31 am, art wrote:

Cecil, people have stopped calling me a blithering idiot!

After a while it gets boring... :/
MK