On 29 Oct, 09:32, wrote:
On Oct 29, 8:31 am, art wrote:

Cecil, people have stopped calling me a blithering idiot!

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

Stick to making loads and top hats for mobile anttenas.
You are out of your league on this one
Art

On 29 Oct, 08:45, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

ups.com...





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

roups.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.
David you have now found something to invest in

With the sky rocketing costs of aluminium and copper e.t.c
now is the time to get in on ferrite capacitors.
Now that you have approved of its use for capacitor
you can reap your just rewards



your understanding of computer modeling
of antennas is similarly flawed.- Hide quoted text -

I just buy the commercial programs on the assumption
they are not selling me junk. If the results are in
accordance with Maxwells laws then that is fineby me.
Art KB9MZ......XG



- Show quoted text -

"art" wrote in message
ups.com...
On 29 Oct, 08:45, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

ups.com...





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

roups.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.
David you have now found something to invest in

With the sky rocketing costs of aluminium and copper e.t.c
now is the time to get in on ferrite capacitors.
Now that you have approved of its use for capacitor
you can reap your just rewards



your understanding of computer modeling
of antennas is similarly flawed.- Hide quoted text -

I just buy the commercial programs on the assumption
they are not selling me junk. If the results are in
accordance with Maxwells laws then that is fineby me.
Art KB9MZ......XG



- Show quoted text -



ok, so where in maxwells laws does the magnetic properties of the capacitor
plates affect how it works?

On Oct 29, 11:20 am, art wrote:
On 29 Oct, 09:32, wrote:

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

Cecil, people have stopped calling me a blithering idiot!

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

Stick to making loads and top hats for mobile anttenas.
You are out of your league on this one
Art

You got that right... :/
MK

On 29 Oct, 11:10, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

ups.com...





On 29 Oct, 08:45, "Dave" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

roups.com...

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

roups.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.
David you have now found something to invest in

With the sky rocketing costs of aluminium and copper e.t.c
now is the time to get in on ferrite capacitors.
Now that you have approved of its use for capacitor
you can reap your just rewards

your understanding of computer modeling
of antennas is similarly flawed.- Hide quoted text -

I just buy the commercial programs on the assumption
they are not selling me junk. If the results are in
accordance with Maxwells laws then that is fineby me.
Art KB9MZ......XG

- Show quoted text -

ok, so where in maxwells laws does the magnetic properties of the capacitor
plates affect how it works?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

David,
Your questions go on and on as if you have never taken physics!
To get up to speed you need to take some classes and maybe ask
your lecturer some of the questions that you are asking of me.
Until then start a business making ferrite capacitors which you
say work instead of high priced aluminum. Perhaps start an IPO
and get your money up front since you have proof you can make
it work.Why not join your buddy KB9.... and get on his thread
then overnight you will become an expert, relative that is to
those that you join
Art Unwin KB9MZ...xg

"art" wrote (but not to me):
Your questions go on and on as if you have never taken physics!
To get up to speed you need to take some classes and maybe ask
your lecturer some of the questions that you are asking of me.
__________

Art --

If you believe that either physics or accumulated field experience supports
your belief that "efficient" antennas need to be "tank circuits" where
"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," etc etc, then
please post proven mathematical support for your concepts -- whether
your own, or that of others. Your intuition alone is not sufficient.

And if you can't, then would you not agree that you should NOT be
posting such concepts as proven reality, whilst abusing others who
doubt and/or ask for proof of your concepts, and misleading those
who might believe what you post, without proof of its accuracy?

RF

On 29 Oct, 15:10, "Richard Fry" wrote:
"art" wrote (but not to me): Your questions go on and on as if you have never taken physics!
To get up to speed you need to take some classes and maybe ask
your lecturer some of the questions that you are asking of me.

__________

Art --

If you believe that either physics or accumulated field experience supports
your belief that "efficient" antennas need to be "tank circuits" where
"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," etc etc, then
please post proven mathematical support for your concepts -- whether
your own, or that of others. Your intuition alone is not sufficient.

And if you can't, then would you not agree that you should NOT be
posting such concepts as proven reality, whilst abusing others who
doubt and/or ask for proof of your concepts, and misleading those
who might believe what you post, without proof of its accuracy?

RF

Just read the archives to get what you want instead of
getting personal attention. I am certainly not going to
start at the beginning again just for you.
The mathematical support is all there.
If you don't understand the math then you should
not jump to conclusions about who is misleading who.
Just get off my back .

"art" wrote
in message ups.com...
Just read the archives to get what you want instead of
getting personal attention. I am certainly not going to
start at the beginning again just for you.
The mathematical support is all there.
_________

Wrong. I've read your archives.

The mathematical PROOFS of the beliefs you espouse are not to be found
or linked there -- either from your direct efforts, or those of any other
source.

RF

"art" wrote in message
oups.com...

David,
Your questions go on and on as if you have never taken physics!
To get up to speed you need to take some classes and maybe ask
your lecturer some of the questions that you are asking of me.
Until then start a business making ferrite capacitors which you
say work instead of high priced aluminum. Perhaps start an IPO
and get your money up front since you have proof you can make
it work.Why not join your buddy KB9.... and get on his thread
then overnight you will become an expert, relative that is to
those that you join
Art Unwin KB9MZ...xg


again you show your ignorance and try to twist words... i said nothing about
'ferrite' in capacitors, i asked you how to explain why ferromagnetic
material as capacitor plates wouldn't work, then asked for the equation
reference to show where that effect existed in maxwells laws... which you
like to say are correct, but then insist on adding other effects to them
that aren't needed nor correct.

On 29 Oct, 20:00, "Stefan Wolfe" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

oups.com...

On 28 Oct, 20:03, "Stefan Wolfe" wrote:
Please take note that Maxwells equations verify this model
I suggest you look up in the archives my research on Gauss
since you are new to the group before you next want to invalidate
Maxwell!!
Regards
Art

Art, I am not certain *physically* as to what happens when the RF energy,
stored as AC discreet electrons in your tank circuit, is converted to the RF
wave/photon energy in the EM wave emitted from your antenna. Maxwell
describes "what" happens, not physically "how" it happens. You claim to
describe physically "how" it happens and claim that your theory does not
disagree with Maxwell. I can say that a supreme being from Xenu causes a
rock to fall when I drop it from a cliff and that may not conflict with
Newton. But the emission of electrons from any antenna of whatever magnetic
properties, assuming it is even a conductor, does not meet basic science
unless you are referring to corona which we are not. You have probably read
that one can even construct a crude transmitter by rubbing a ping-pong ball
on a carpet to induce a static charge on it and then move the resulting
E-field it up and down. In that case we have a non-magnetic/non-metallic
antenna producing an ELF EM radiowave of about 30 millions meters in
wavelength. I do know that EM waves are composed of fields, not discreet
electrons moving in space (whether we describe the phenomenon in terms of
waves or photons). In response to your post, Maxwells equations are all
about *fields*. These EM fields move at the speed of light. Electrons do not
move at c. They cannot; it is physically improssible as you know. The
electrons involved in creating the EM field are hardly even displaced along
the length/surface of your antenna. I submit that, when your equipment
generates an EM wave, the finite number of electrons that your tank
circuit can hold, although extremely high, can in no way begin to approach
the infinite number of receiving "antennas" (much less the number of
"electrons" they could each "receive") in the whole universe that can and do
receive your signal.

You have said a lot but it appears that for what ever reason you
reject what I submit.
So I give you one morsel to ponder upon. When you apply a time vary
field to a gaussian
static field the result is an equation that matches Maxwell( read
archives for the discussion on that)
Since static particles are in no way in planar form but it still
conforms to Maxwell
one should be able to insert into a antenna computor program with an
optimiser a radiator of some length
at an angle to the earths surface and ask for max vertical or
horizontal gain.
I did that and gave the optimizer response to this group for
verification by any computor program
they want to use. It was verified using NEC 4 and is in the archives.
So disregarding any "how radiation works" I will leave you and anybody
else to explain
1 When a time varying field is applied to a static field the resultant
equation is the same as Maxwells
2 when a non planar radiator as in a static field is inserted in a
program based on Maxwell's laws
it produces a result that is not planar and verified by other antenna
programs.
I welcome any response that explains why such a thing could happen
using established theory.
Forget the hand waving and address those two basic statements in a
scietific manner.
For starters, all of this group stated that you cannot add time to
both sides of the static
equation which put them all in opposition to anything that followed,
despite intervention
from a Doctor at MIT showing that I was correct in detailed
mathematical form
Why? Well it is just because...........no reasons given, just
because.
Your move
Art Unwin KB9MZ.....XG