Education
 

The absolute confusion eminated by Americans regarding 'Standing" and
"travelling" cannot be used as a absolute condemnation of American
education.Freedom of speech is a basic right, the downside of which it
is that it reveals the speakers level of education.However, the
confusion alluded to is primarily that of old ,unemployed or retired
people. In all of these cases a resume can be expanded way beyond that
knoweledge level when the resume is overseen by an employer but with
the excuse of advancing age and poor recall of memory the resume can
be expanded to reflect the perceived expertise that the owner feels
that he has attained by using a transmitter. If a employer were to
review the resumes of these self esteamed applicants they can be
excused in their efforts to find suitable applicants overseas. But
this newsgroup is the world of old people, so one must constantly
remind themseves that this world is not representitive of the new
generation who may well be able to accept change but also posses a
level of inquisitivenes.
True, the quest for offshore employees by the present day
employer may well reflect that the old also represent the young which
if accepted, point to a nation in decline where advances in science
can be purchased and its inhabitants can be ignored. Brings back
memories of Japan and the Yagi antenna. Only after the war did it
recognise the value of home built advances ala the antenna
invention,while other nations pounced on science as a mechanism to
achieve a better life for their own natives. It is noble to supply
education to all that pursue such, but when educators dumb down the
education for personal monetory reasons they trade a country for
momentary rewards.
What goes around comes around the same way as did perceived empires of
old.
Best regards
Art Unwin KB9MZ

Education
 

Art,
Face it, you are getting old too. I only know of one way of not
getting any older, not presenting the normal characteristics of
getting old(er). Dress it up anyway you want, that fact still holds
true, I don't care if you wear "baggies" or not. If you're gonna wear
them baggies just remember that them boxers are required too. Only
alternative is an 8" piece of duck-tape applied vertically and
centrally, posteriorly. Otherwise, you just show your ass like in
that last post. Unless you present the 'other side' of the
conversation you seem to be having, it just ain't gonna make much
sense.
- 'Doc

Education
 

On 12 Jan, 07:09, Christopher Cox
wrote:
It must upset you something fierce then to know that the founders of the
major Ivy league schools and some of the most wealthy and influential
people today all have a common trait, they do not hold a collage diploma.

In answer to your condescending posts that I have ignored to this point
I reply "do something". This is not meant to be combative, but an
observation of fact. Some people lose sight of what a education is, a
tool. They simply marvel at the tool without putting it to good use.

If your ideas are superior to the current art, why not put them to good
use to the betterment of mankind? This will make you much more sought
after than a bitter old man taking jabs at passers by.

I look forward to a useful application of your ideas.

Regards,

Chris
Gentlemen and Radio hams

I had no idea that standing and travelling waves was reserved for post
doctorial studies in America, where offshore it is considered as an
early part of the education curriculum. There are also physicists,
consultants, sailors,naval instructors, NASA Reps cb ers and lecturers
on this group argueing vehemently over the subject as if it is the
cusp of modern day research. Each discipline having the benefit of
being educated in such in a manner suitable for the class content.
Considering the heated debate on mathematics on its misuse by a doctor
working on space research at MIT I really should not be that
surprised. It would appear that there is not a true foreign professor
around to consult or to request some teachings from so this debate of
several years could have closure. Reminds me of the 'O' ring debate in
America where it was discovered for the first time in the western
hemisphere that butile O rings had a low tensile strength, this found
over some one's dead body. We desperately need more Indian techs to
settle over here to help us out, and possibly one to join the group,
instead of marvelling on the side lines at the goings on regarding the
pursuit of knoweledge about radiation.
We have more than 500 permanent Indian and Asian technicians in my
town hired by State Farm in a desperate effort to upgrade their
computor comprehension and Bill Gates is also crying desperately for
employees from offshore venues. Our hospitals would just rot if were
were not aided by the educated from the emerging countries who are
leap frogging us in many ways. Caterpillar went to Northern England to
staff their metal pattern shops. As for the rest they generated the
'Rust Belt' regions by sticking with what they had. Surely we can find
just one that can inform the group about standing and travelling
waves! Gentlemen and radio hams, you can join the group without
leaving your countries to show of your education on this newsgroup.
They need help over here.....desperately.
Art

Education
 

On 12 Jan, 12:19, Christopher Cox
wrote:
Excellent,

By your statements, putting forth such elementary ideas should not be
much of a task. Looking forward to it.

Chris

Chris,
I am often reminded that as a mechanical engineer
which puts me lower than a sailor I should
stay out of electrical matters so on this one I am holding
back as my questions on the subject were answered to my
satisfaction. On the other hand Clark is asking lots of questions
as if he is the adjudicator of what is right and what is wrong.
Also Roy, who states reguarly that he is a antenna consultant no less
is having trouble as are the other instant experts. So Chris as a
newby on the newsgroup you are in excellent position to supply the
correct answers that all are so desparately looking for,
tho if you are an electrical engineer I have little hope for closure.
Art

Education
 

art wrote:
[interesting, inciting stuff--as usual]
Art

I think what goes on in a resonant cavity is far from boring, or, even
absolutely known ...

However, such be as it may. Damn brits are probably psychic!

Regards,
JS

Education
 

On 12 Jan, 13:01, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

...

Gentlemen and Radio hams

Comment #1: When you say radio hams remember that in the US the "ham" is
neither professional nor an occupation. In fact, it is considered bad form
for you to be discussing and attempting to gain information to enhance your
commercial 'invention' if indeed you are applying for a commercial patent on
your idea. You should define a clear separation between your amateur and
commercial activities and this is something that frankly has been bothering
me.



I had no idea that standing and travelling waves was reserved for post
doctorial studies in America, where offshore it is considered as an
early part of the education curriculum.

Whomever said it was not taught here as an early part of the curriculum? I
honestly think that you have an improper understanding of the standing wave
and its equations.

There are also physicists,
consultants, sailors,naval instructors, NASA Reps cb ers and lecturers
on this group argueing vehemently over the subject as if it is the
cusp of modern day research.

Not really. We are discussing it as it relates to amateur radio antennas
(that actually work). We are correcting each other as to how its
measurements affect, for example, the phase delay in a coil of a bug-catcher
antenna. We are far too low on the technical food to emulate you and relate
to such grandiose ideas as solving the unified field theory or trying to
explain the economics of global outsourcing where Bill Gates and others can
hire 10 times the "engineers" at 1/2 the cost. Bill will get plenty of US
technical labor at that point in time when americans are forced to accept
the reality that they must accept pauper wages or do not work at all. This
has NOTHING to do about differences in education. In fact, you will see many
Indian students at your beloved MIT who are forced to repatriate to hteir
home countries (although for me, I happen to find that going "home" in
Wisconsin is a nice thing, not a bad thing) after receiving their diplomas..
Bill Gates and IBM simply want them back and they will willingly return,
given the chance at a green card or H1B visa, since receiving 30K per year
in the US is far better than reciving 4K per year in India.

This has othing to do with a "hobby" or a "radio service" intended for use
by "amateurs" who are paid nothing at all.

Each discipline *having the benefit of
being educated in such in a manner suitable for the class content.
Considering the heated debate on mathematics on its misuse by a doctor
working on space research at MIT I really should not be that
surprised. It would appear that there is not a true foreign professor
around to consult or to request some teachings from so this debate of
several years could have closure. Reminds me of the 'O' ring debate in
America where it was discovered for the first time in the western
hemisphere that butile O rings had a low tensile strength, this found
over some one's dead body. We desperately need more Indian techs to
settle over here to help us out, and possibly one to join the group,
instead of marvelling on the side lines at the goings on regarding the
pursuit of knoweledge about radiation.

Upon reading this, my first question was 'what do O rings designed by
American or Indian engineers have to do with ham radio?', Suddenly I
realized that it involved the levitation of diagmagnetc O ring material
where perhaps current might travel through the center ;-) Perhaps you could
contact NASA, as a professional activity, and set them straight as to what
to do. Just give them a clue; then they can hire their 30K/year Indian
engineers to complete the solution.

We have more than 500 permanent Indian and Asian technicians in my
town hired by State Farm in a desperate effort to

....save millions of dollars in engineering labor/burden costs and improve
the bottom line, forcing other companies to do the same to remain
competitive.

Our hospitals would just rot if were
were not aided by the educated from the emerging countries who are

...applying methods and principles provided by US universties so emerging
3rd world countries can provide labor at 1/10 the cost of EU and US
professionals in the same field.

Caterpillar went to Northern England to
staff their metal pattern shops.

...at approximate 60% of the cost of hiring American workers. I know the
drill. I used to work for IBM who went to Ireland and Scotland to do the
same thing.

As for the rest they generated the
'Rust Belt' regions by

....having to compete with Japanese steel companies who forced them out of
business by dumping subsidized steel products on American shores without any
possibility of fair competition.

just one that can inform the group about standing and travelling
waves!

Frankly I believe that order would be too tall for you. I really don't think
you understand the equations but any mechancial engineer would have been
taught this phenomenon early in his curriculum. What happened? Did you
forget? Has it been too many years? Did nature in her cruelty decide to file
that information so far back in your memory banks that there is no hope for
a simple recovery of said information?

Gentlemen and radio hams, you can join the group without
leaving your countries to show of your education on this newsgroup.
They need help over here.....desperately.

Thus ends my participation in this troll thread.

AI4QJ

I am just a member of the WORLD wide web who has been viewing this
discussions of many thousands maybe tens of thousands of postings over
more than a decade. I am not sure if it is all a case of hitting Cecil
or that you cannot compete with his knoweledge. As for me I have also
been attacked for more than a dozen years because it is felt that my
ideas are all baloney. I share every thing I do with respect to ham
radio. I write up patents as a record of my work. How can I possibly
make money on my ideas when every body derides them as baloney without
providing a basis?
State Farm states that the talent is just not out there when the
subject comes up.
GE many years ago decided to get into the literal money side of
business and cut back on manufacturing e.t.c.Loads of engineers laid
off. About 80 at my plant went out the door leaving only six of us
engineers left.
If State Farm is correct then our teaching institutions are taking
money from students on the guise that a golden pot awaits. They
quickly find they have debts and nowhere to go.
As for hams on this newsgroup they costantly remind me of their former
employment to give credability to their statements when trying to down
size me.If you feel I am taking improper advantage of ham radio on a
commercial scale then talk to the FCC and also mention Roy by the way.
My ideas on waves may be way off but I am not really interested in
talking about them and probably have nothing to offer. When all of
this group challenged a well educated person on the validity of adding
a time varient to Gaussian law so it equates to Maxwells laws I was
shocked. That this group would fall over themselves denying the
validity of the math expressed
changed me immensily as does this savaging of the question of standing
waves.You don't have to make excuses to me why the standing wave can't
be resolved as with the mathematics supplied from that member of MIT,
This is viewed WORLD WIDE and those viewers are not stupid.
I know that my new antenna aproach is correct. You know that all that
is new will be rejected.
So when it becomes recognised and sort for by offshore companies
should I refuse them as an american when science outside of the
academic circle is berated? I have shared everything and I mean
everything, about by work with radio hams in the hope of bettering the
hobby. To reject is their choice especially when you intimate that it
doesn't work without reason. When this group requested a computor set
up so a member could check it out on his own program. Yes, the data
proved my work but what the hell, this group wanted to fight! Well I
am still here even tho my country rejects the science supplied. So you
can get back to your waves thread and continue to tell all of them
where you are correct while everybody else is wrong. As David
intimated the subject is good for quite a while yet, at least while
Cecil is still alive. But unlike Cecil who lets insults slide by I
think it is well past time to send some insults back
which those who insult consider shocking. I am very pleased that you
have decided not to pursue this thread because the actions of the
group speaks for themselves to the World
Changes need to be made in America, but without acceptance from
american employers and the complacence of the population the future
looks dire.As for me I have made my pile and feel good
Art,

Education
 

On 12 Jan, 16:49, John Smith wrote:
art wrote:
[interesting, inciting stuff--as usual]
Art

I think what goes on in a resonant cavity is far from boring, or, even
absolutely known ...

However, such be as it may. *Damn brits are probably psychic!

Regards,
JS

No John you are not a typical sample of this group. I have been on it
for over a decade
as have the two Richards and Roy. During that time we had a lot of
experts on hand that supplied info to the rest of us. But one by one
they all left because of personal attacks as the latest newcomers will
find to their cost. But I and Cecil and a couple of others are
standing our ground despite the reputation of this group. We are
interested in ham radio and ideas and do not subscribe to the idea
that all is known and if disputed must be crushed.
I have a small 160 metre antenna on top of my tower that is in
equilibrium,resonant and without the need for a ground. It is viewable
by anybody especially those with small gardens that are excluded from
that band. Why on earth would three guys try to suppress that fact?
What is it in there that they have a desire to supress? Would a full
size antenna small enough for a mobile without external loads or
ground requirements to get on 160 metres a real threat to ham radio?
John, you made Vincents antenna for yourself to obtain the facts. It
is not perfect but it is something new.You know Vincent was and is
under attack. The antenna
may not be perfect but some thing is new so hams ditch the baby with
the purifying water.
Regards
Art

Education
 

On Jan 13, 1:15 pm, "AI4QJ" wrote:


He has no "small' 160m antenna on his tower (so he is a fibber)


That's one hell of a statement, I assume you can back it up?


Derek

Education
 

On 12 Jan, 20:15, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"Christopher Cox" wrote in message

...

Me, nah, I hold little or no knowledge on the subject of antenna's. I have
lurked here for a very long time and have posted on occasion. I have a few
pet projects on topic, an OCF with a vertical radiator and I am toying
with a phase fed pair of quads.

What prompted me to post was the tone of yours. I do not hold any great
education, but know some very notable and brilliant people. I do O.k. for
myself and have found that actions produce better results than words. Just
thought that piece of wisdom applied here.

Once you understand the difference between standing waves, (which has no
real power itself but which stores the reactive VA power into that power
which is is eventually dissipated in "radiation resitance" dissipating into
free space as radiation power), and traveling waves, which do have real
power that is also disspated into that same type of radiation power through
the radiation resistance, an interesting question becomes "what is the
nature of this so-called radiation resistance which dissipates the power of
a forward wave or the stored power in a standing wave?". We feed power into
the antenna as electric current and then it exits the antenna as radiation..
Maxwell's equations (in spite of what art theorizes) says that the power has
been converted to an EM wave. So, electric current, which is not an EM wave
consisting of photons and propagating into space, is converted into a
different form of radiation energy that IS an EM and does consist of phtons
and waves. When this conversion occurs and energy is transmitted into free
space, we attempt to quantify this net loss to our generator with familiar
terms, i.e. current or voltage dissipated into "radiation resistance".
However, we all know there is no actual physical component known as a
radiation resistor. Conceptualizing how this power conversion works goes
back to maxwell: "why" is there a time varying EM magnetic and electric
field (external waves and photons) generated by the flow of current? Well,
it could be described as nature's tendency to maintain equilibrium. If a
change is made to a conductor by putting a current through it, nature
"objects" and fights back by setting up an EM wave that tends to cancel out
the incoming current pulse. But no matter what, I will always easily have
enough energy in my forcing function (current or voltage) to overcome
nature's objection and send a net outflow of energy occuring as radiation
theoretically equal to what I inputted.

Art's unusual theories apparently have something to do with this same
conversion of electric currents on the antenna to the radiated energy that
propagates through space. Art believes he has made discoveries that augment
the maxwell equations and solved the nystery as to how this power is
converted from amps to radiation. He essentially takes advantage of the fact
that scientists and hobbyists (at least on THIS board) have not done a good
job conceptualizing what actually happens during the process of converting
electric current from a generator to a radiated wave into free space. Our
rather feeble invention of the radiation "resistor" helps us in the design
of our antennas but it is not conceptually correct; a resistor is obviously
dissipated as heat, not radiation (other than infrared heat). So how,
physically does amps/volts in a conductor dissipates as radiation? That is a
good question. And Art will give you a very UNacceptable answer to that
question. No, the current particles do not fall out of the ends of the
antenna and get levitated as galactic particles; this is the sort of thing,
frankly, that you might hear from children. However, Arthur has been very
persistent and I believe that over time persistance CAN overcome handicaps
in both inteligence and education, at least on rare occaisions so I have
tried to cooperate with Mr. Art up to now. That is, until *I read into the
poor attitude and tone of his posings on this thread "Education". Indeed, he
attacks even people such as myself who have attempted to encourage him. Now
I see him for what he is...a simple crank of no relevance to the the
scientific community out of his own choosing. He has no "small' 160m antenna
on his tower (so he is a fibber),

I interupt your post at this point only since you are expressing your
views as in free speech
but to be a fibber, a lier in other words is a deliberate untruth. At
the moment I do not have the smallest antenna for 160M on my tower
since the radiator is around 18 foot long and tipped at an angle to
reflect what the computer states. I suppose I will have to make one
that will fit into a 1 foot cubed carton to satisfy the term small. We
have plenty of hams in this community plus repeaters so you can come
yourself or ask a surragate to inspect on your behalf. It is a fold
over tower so close examination is possible and I have all the
necessary equipment to measure impedance or what have you. I also have
on hand a loop style antenna for 20 M made on a hoola hoop, so I could
convert that to 160M. On top of thatJohn has just rigged up Vincent's
antenna that every body decries.
If he were willing I could describe modifications for the same antenna
constructed for a smaller size plus without the need for ground to
avoid the comments applied to Vincents antenna . I have never met John
but I believe him to be honest
So I will supply him the details if he wants them and he can report
results to you without pre inspection from myself. On the other hand I
can build a small 160 M antenna and send it to hime by post office
mail which he can play, with and report upon.
Disagreement and suppression is one thing but a lier I am not! Either
way I will now make a 160M small antenna incase it becomes desired.
Yes I am very hurt by this barb and will work hard in full filling my
side of what I have discussed. It may finish up a bit bigger than a
foot since I have no idea how small it can be made but it will be
small for shipping via the post office.It will be made of#22 wire so
that it can also be tested for heat resistance, the bain of the EH
antenna as well as Vincent's and many others. I haven't tested for
that but see no problems as #22 should be able to handle normal use
Art Unwin KB9MZ






to him he doesn't know the difference between a
standing wave and a traveling wave, is not familair with present models and
their difficulties. If point zero is at the beginning, Mr. art is at -7 and
he refuses to learn any tools that he needs to advance. I too would like a
better conceptualization of why/what and how maxwells EM fields work and how
the power conversion physically occurs on an antenna but for now I am stuck,
along with everyone else, using the radiation resistance model. For all of
its conceptual drawbacks, it works just fine mathematically. One key to
better understanding (my opinion only) may be in more recent exotic physics
models such as dark matter interactions with EM fields but that is way
beyond any understanding I have at this point; that is why I previously took
an interest in art's theory but which eventually went nowhere (too bad). I
don't criticize him for that; he just needs to sharpen his tools a bit and
take a completely different path if he is to succeed (but I predict he will
not). Levitation of galactic particles in my opinion is not the path to
success.

AI4QJ

Education
 

art wrote:

At
the moment I do not have the smallest antenna for 160M on my tower
since the radiator is around 18 foot long and tipped at an angle to
reflect what the computer states. I suppose I will have to make one
that will fit into a 1 foot cubed carton to satisfy the term small.

That's great, Art. How's it working out for you? Did you work J5C over
the past couple of nights? Did you snag G3JMJ's loud signal this evening?

I can load my 6m beam on 160m, but it doesn't work well at all. I use a
slightly long inverted L with a series vacuum variable and nearly 6,000
feet of buried radials. There's a three inch short, tapped coil to
ground at the feed point in order to match the antenna to the RG-213 I
feed it with. The antenna isn't small and it isn't elegant.

I'm willing to listen to your ideas about how I can equal the signal
from that inverted L by using a much smaller antenna. Why don't you
post information on such a creation?

Dave K8MN

Education
 

On Jan 13, 2:55 pm, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"Derek" wrote in message

...

On Jan 13, 1:15 pm, "AI4QJ" wrote:

He has no "small' 160m antenna on his tower (so he is a fibber)

That's one hell of a statement, I assume you can back it up?

Hi Derek,

Actually, having a small 160m antenna is the "one hell of a statement".

That being the case, the burden is on art to back it up in the positive.

He will not.

Nobody can prove a negative; it is up to art prove the positive.

Sorry but your assumption cannot possibly be correct since it is impossible
to prove a negative.

AI4QJ


You made a positive statement, You called Art a "liar" that is a
big difference from saying you disagree with Art's claim that he can
build a small 160m antenna, if you can't back your statement up Art
deserves an apology.

Derek

Education
 

On 12 Jan, 23:02, Dave Heil wrote:
art wrote:
At
the moment I do not have the smallest antenna for 160M on my tower
since the radiator is around 18 foot long and tipped at an angle to
reflect what the computer states. I suppose I will have to make one
that will fit into a 1 foot cubed carton to satisfy the term small.

That's great, Art. *How's it working out for you? *Did you work J5C over
the past couple of nights? *Did you snag G3JMJ's loud signal this evening?

I can load my 6m beam on 160m, but it doesn't work well at all. *I use a
slightly long inverted L with a series vacuum variable and nearly 6,000
feet of buried radials. *There's a three inch short, tapped coil to
ground at the feed point in order to match the antenna to the RG-213 I
feed it with. *The antenna isn't small and it isn't elegant.

I'm willing to listen to your ideas about how I can equal the signal
from that inverted L by using a much smaller antenna. *Why don't you
post information on such a creation?

Dave K8MN

Re Antennas and sharing. Checkout E ham forum
Art

Education
 

On 13 Jan, 09:02, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"Derek" wrote in message

...





On Jan 13, 2:55 pm, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"Derek" wrote in message

....

On Jan 13, 1:15 pm, "AI4QJ" wrote:

He has no "small' 160m antenna on his tower (so he is a fibber)

That's one hell of a statement, I assume you can back it up?

Hi Derek,

Actually, having a small 160m antenna is the "one hell of a statement".

That being the case, the burden is on art to back it up in the positive..

He will not.

Nobody can prove a negative; it is up to art prove the positive.

Sorry but your assumption cannot possibly be correct since it is
impossible
to prove a negative.

AI4QJ

* * *You made a positive statement, You called Art a "liar"

I absolutely did not! Show my a quote where I used thre word liar. I called
him a fibber. Big difference. A fibber might actually have something like a
160m antenna, true, but as for 'small' that would be his exagerration based
on his literary license with words. He later said it was 16 feet in length..
That is not "small". With a large loading coil I could build a 16 foot very
inefficient 160m antenna but it would be a fib to say it was 'small' without
also stating the length. The term 'liar' is your own term that you made up..
apparently.

*that is a

big difference from saying you disagree with Art's claim that he can
build a small 160m antenna, if you can't back your statement up Art
deserves an apology.

Sure, IF I has used the term liar but that statement is in itself a lie.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If a efficient antenna is less than 20 feet long without any loading
and without a ground plane or matching systemsis not considered
"small" for 160 metres then pray tell me what is considered "small"
and I will take mine down and replace it with a smaller one.
In the mean time, I will accept that I am a liar, because my
definition of "small" does not meet your personal requirements
and all that's new on antennas must be rejected by slander
if necessary. As a newby you sure lined up quickly with the habits
of the founders of this group!

Education
 

"AI4QJ" wrote in message
...

"art" wrote in message
...
On 12 Jan, 23:02, Dave Heil wrote:
art wrote:
At
the moment I do not have the smallest antenna for 160M on my tower
since the radiator is around 18 foot long and tipped at an angle to
reflect what the computer states. I suppose I will have to make one
that will fit into a 1 foot cubed carton to satisfy the term small.

That's great, Art. How's it working out for you? Did you work J5C over
the past couple of nights? Did you snag G3JMJ's loud signal this evening?

I can load my 6m beam on 160m, but it doesn't work well at all. I use a
slightly long inverted L with a series vacuum variable and nearly 6,000
feet of buried radials. There's a three inch short, tapped coil to
ground at the feed point in order to match the antenna to the RG-213 I
feed it with. The antenna isn't small and it isn't elegant.

I'm willing to listen to your ideas about how I can equal the signal
from that inverted L by using a much smaller antenna. Why don't you
post information on such a creation?

Dave K8MN

"Re Antennas and sharing. Checkout E ham forum
Art"

OK, I went to e ham forum and found 1732 pages of articles. It does not
allow me to filter on art, unwin or diamagnetic. Could you help us out a
little? This is like trying to literally find a needle in a haystack.

AI4QJ

Or Dougs tiny Adair.

Education
 

On Jan 14, 2:02 am, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"Derek" wrote in message

...



On Jan 13, 2:55 pm, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"Derek" wrote in message

...

On Jan 13, 1:15 pm, "AI4QJ" wrote:



You made a positive statement, You called Art a "liar"

I absolutely did not! Show my a quote where I used thre word liar. I called
him a fibber. Big difference.



semantics


Derek

Education
 

On Jan 14, 7:36 am, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"Derek" wrote in message

...



On Jan 14, 2:02 am, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"Derek" wrote in message

...

On Jan 13, 2:55 pm, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"Derek" wrote in message

...

On Jan 13, 1:15 pm, "AI4QJ" wrote:

You made a positive statement, You called Art a "liar"

I absolutely did not! Show my a quote where I used thre word liar. I
called
him a fibber. Big difference.

semantics

Yes, it's semantics, that's precisely why you are getting confused. "Derek"
(or whomever you are).

Do you have a call sign or something else that shows us who you are? I'm
sure you're not hiding your personhood intentionally, "Derek".


I am a retiree like many on this group living in Perth Australia,
who after many years of following this group has a great belief that
Art can do as he claims.
I am also a great believer in fair play, and calling someone a
fibber (liar) on open message without proof is not fair play in my
book.

Derek

Education
 

On Jan 13, 9:31 am, art wrote:
On 12 Jan, 23:02, Dave Heil wrote:



art wrote:
At
the moment I do not have the smallest antenna for 160M on my tower
since the radiator is around 18 foot long and tipped at an angle to
reflect what the computer states. I suppose I will have to make one
that will fit into a 1 foot cubed carton to satisfy the term small.

That's great, Art. How's it working out for you? Did you work J5C over
the past couple of nights? Did you snag G3JMJ's loud signal this evening?

I can load my 6m beam on 160m, but it doesn't work well at all. I use a
slightly long inverted L with a series vacuum variable and nearly 6,000
feet of buried radials. There's a three inch short, tapped coil to
ground at the feed point in order to match the antenna to the RG-213 I
feed it with. The antenna isn't small and it isn't elegant.

I'm willing to listen to your ideas about how I can equal the signal
from that inverted L by using a much smaller antenna. Why don't you
post information on such a creation?

Dave K8MN

Re Antennas and sharing. Checkout E ham forum
Art

Arthur don't be so silly. As a fellow over-the-edge old fart
mechanical engineer you've obviously missed some some fundamentals.

Back in the day the IEEE and the ASME came to an agreement: They
wouldn't fiddle with Mohr's Circles if we didn't fiddle with
electromagnetic wave mechanics. You're in violation Arthur so so knock
it off.

How many countries do you have confirmed on 160?

Brian w3rv

Education
 

On 13 Jan, 12:33, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

...
On 12 Jan, 23:02, Dave Heil wrote:





art wrote:
At
the moment I do not have the smallest antenna for 160M on my tower
since the radiator is around 18 foot long and tipped at an angle to
reflect what the computer states. I suppose I will have to make one
that will fit into a 1 foot cubed carton to satisfy the term small.

That's great, Art. How's it working out for you? Did you work J5C over
the past couple of nights? Did you snag G3JMJ's loud signal this evening?

I can load my 6m beam on 160m, but it doesn't work well at all. I use a
slightly long inverted L with a series vacuum variable and nearly 6,000
feet of buried radials. There's a three inch short, tapped coil to
ground at the feed point in order to match the antenna to the RG-213 I
feed it with. The antenna isn't small and it isn't elegant.

I'm willing to listen to your ideas about how I can equal the signal
from that inverted L by using a much smaller antenna. Why don't you
post information on such a creation?

Dave K8MN

"Re Antennas and sharing. Checkout E ham forum
Art"

OK, I went to e ham forum and found 1732 pages of articles. It does not
allow me to filter on art, unwin or diamagnetic. Could you help us out a
little? This is like trying to literally find a needle in a haystack.

AI4QJ- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

They are rated the top two threads at the present time ( yesterday)
I can't remember the titles or every thing that was written but as the
top articles of interest I don't think you can consider it as looking
for a needle.
Art

Education
 

On 13 Jan, 17:00, Brian Kelly wrote:
On Jan 13, 9:31 am, art wrote:





On 12 Jan, 23:02, Dave Heil wrote:

art wrote:
At
the moment I do not have the smallest antenna for 160M on my tower
since the radiator is around 18 foot long and tipped at an angle to
reflect what the computer states. I suppose I will have to make one
that will fit into a 1 foot cubed carton to satisfy the term small.

That's great, Art. *How's it working out for you? *Did you work J5C over
the past couple of nights? *Did you snag G3JMJ's loud signal this evening?

I can load my 6m beam on 160m, but it doesn't work well at all. *I use a
slightly long inverted L with a series vacuum variable and nearly 6,000
feet of buried radials. *There's a three inch short, tapped coil to
ground at the feed point in order to match the antenna to the RG-213 I
feed it with. *The antenna isn't small and it isn't elegant.

I'm willing to listen to your ideas about how I can equal the signal
from that inverted L by using a much smaller antenna. *Why don't you
post information on such a creation?

Dave K8MN

Re Antennas and sharing. Checkout E ham forum
Art

Arthur don't be so silly. As a fellow over-the-edge old fart
mechanical engineer you've obviously missed some some fundamentals.

Back in the day the IEEE and the ASME came to an agreement: They
wouldn't fiddle with Mohr's Circles if we didn't fiddle with
electromagnetic wave mechanics. You're in violation Arthur so so knock
it off.

How many countries do you have confirmed on 160?

Brian w3rv- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

As I have stated before I am not active anymore
Art

Education
 

On Jan 14, 9:06 am, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"Derek" wrote in message

...



On Jan 14, 7:36 am, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"Derek" wrote in message

...

On Jan 14, 2:02 am, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"Derek" wrote in message

...

On Jan 13, 2:55 pm, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"Derek" wrote in message

...

On Jan 13, 1:15 pm, "AI4QJ" wrote:

You made a positive statement, You called Art a "liar"

I absolutely did not! Show my a quote where I used thre word liar. I
called
him a fibber. Big difference.

semantics

Yes, it's semantics, that's precisely why you are getting confused.
"Derek"
(or whomever you are).

Do you have a call sign or something else that shows us who you are? I'm
sure you're not hiding your personhood intentionally, "Derek".

I am a retiree like many on this group living in Perth Australia,
who after many years of following this group has a great belief that
Art can do as he claims.
I am also a great believer in fair play, and calling someone a
fibber (liar) on open message without proof is not fair play in my
book.

You may have a great faith in art but not quite enough to say so publically,
do you? It is easy to be an art unwin groupie (no...NOT so easy for most),
taking an insane position under the cloak of anonymity. For that reason, I
really think you have reservations. If you really believed in antennas that
shot particles out the ends, you would say so in the open! I googled your
userid and I see that you exclusively post only on rraa and only as a
cheerleader for arts theories on rraa. I have not seen one post of your's
that had any technical content. Fibber? You saw he defined is "small"
antenna at 18 feet; that's not small; anybody could load a stinger that long
with a coil and transmit at 160m so you're damn right it was a "fib". See
ya Derek, knowing that you have nothing technical to offer and that I don't
need to be bothered all the time by the unwin groupie cheerleader; plonk.



You say I am taking an insane position. You also say I have
reservations.
You know my name is Derek and that I live in Australia.
Art states he has an antenna for 160m on the top of his tower,I have
not seen it neither have you.
Over the years Art has stated many facts about this antenna.It is in
equilibrium without loading which also means it does not require a
ground plane ie direct connection to the feed line.
I also assume that impedance is termed as an acceptable level with a
suitable SWR so it can be driven,If it is on top of the tower with no
other support "most" would consider that small for 160m.
Now you can call him a liar, and I believe that he is not.!
So..... I am willing to raise the money for a wager based on the
above where you may place other conditions in this quest to determine
if Art is a liar or not.
You can also choose the judge, and who holds the money since I am
in Australia.
If we come to an agreement on terms I am willing to put down up to
$5000US.

All of the above is subject to Arts agreement for access to his
antenna
of course.


Derek

Education
 

On Jan 13, 8:34 pm, art wrote:
On 13 Jan, 17:00, Brian Kelly wrote:



On Jan 13, 9:31 am, art wrote:

On 12 Jan, 23:02, Dave Heil wrote:

art wrote:
At
the moment I do not have the smallest antenna for 160M on my tower
since the radiator is around 18 foot long and tipped at an angle to
reflect what the computer states. I suppose I will have to make one
that will fit into a 1 foot cubed carton to satisfy the term small.

That's great, Art. How's it working out for you? Did you work J5C over
the past couple of nights? Did you snag G3JMJ's loud signal this evening?

I can load my 6m beam on 160m, but it doesn't work well at all. I use a
slightly long inverted L with a series vacuum variable and nearly 6,000
feet of buried radials. There's a three inch short, tapped coil to
ground at the feed point in order to match the antenna to the RG-213 I
feed it with. The antenna isn't small and it isn't elegant.

I'm willing to listen to your ideas about how I can equal the signal
from that inverted L by using a much smaller antenna. Why don't you
post information on such a creation?

Dave K8MN

Re Antennas and sharing. Checkout E ham forum
Art

Arthur don't be so silly. As a fellow over-the-edge old fart
mechanical engineer you've obviously missed some some fundamentals.

Back in the day the IEEE and the ASME came to an agreement: They
wouldn't fiddle with Mohr's Circles if we didn't fiddle with
electromagnetic wave mechanics. You're in violation Arthur so so knock
it off.

How many countries do you have confirmed on 160?

Brian w3rv- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

As I have stated before I am not active anymore

Not hardly. You pounced on my post within minutes. Strikes me as
rather "active" eh?

So I'll rephrase the question: How many countries did you work on 160
when you "were active"?

Art

Brian dit-dit beep-beep w3rv . . .

Education
 

On 13 Jan, 17:00, Brian Kelly wrote:
On Jan 13, 9:31 am, art wrote:





On 12 Jan, 23:02, Dave Heil wrote:

art wrote:
At
the moment I do not have the smallest antenna for 160M on my tower
since the radiator is around 18 foot long and tipped at an angle to
reflect what the computer states. I suppose I will have to make one
that will fit into a 1 foot cubed carton to satisfy the term small.

That's great, Art. *How's it working out for you? *Did you work J5C over
the past couple of nights? *Did you snag G3JMJ's loud signal this evening?

I can load my 6m beam on 160m, but it doesn't work well at all. *I use a
slightly long inverted L with a series vacuum variable and nearly 6,000
feet of buried radials. *There's a three inch short, tapped coil to
ground at the feed point in order to match the antenna to the RG-213 I
feed it with. *The antenna isn't small and it isn't elegant.

I'm willing to listen to your ideas about how I can equal the signal
from that inverted L by using a much smaller antenna. *Why don't you
post information on such a creation?

Dave K8MN

Re Antennas and sharing. Checkout E ham forum
Art

Arthur don't be so silly. As a fellow over-the-edge old fart
mechanical engineer you've obviously missed some some fundamentals.

Back in the day the IEEE and the ASME came to an agreement: They
wouldn't fiddle with Mohr's Circles if we didn't fiddle with
electromagnetic wave mechanics. You're in violation Arthur so so knock
it off.

How many countries do you have confirmed on 160?

Brian w3rv- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I am not in violation in my opinion. My theory may not be "exactly"
correct
as I have no way of looking at particles. But if you Google every
little bit, line by line it has enough agreed tangibles that it can
be taken as serious. You yourself know that I have been sharing the
details for a very, very long time. I also have shared everything
and described everything, nothing has been hidden and all explained
several times
Nobody has faulted anything one little bit! Pretty much all has been
the
slandering of me. I really do not understand that if this is a
newsgroup on antennas
why those knoweledgable in the state of the art instead of getting
angry with me doesn't debate it point by point where an error provides
a stop to the debate.
Ofcourse 'error' means so many different things with this group I
don't see a long thread.
I certainly do not have the patience to post thousands of times as
Cecil is able so I should easily be forces to go away as others have
done. Well, if you try very hard that I cannot take anymore. When you
have received an education one must always take advantage of it by
pursuit of the truth regardless of the regimen. I cannot see why I
should be expelled from intruding into physics by those you insist
that all is known about antennas otherwise you are a heritic.
Art

Education
 

On Jan 13, 9:18 pm, art wrote:
On 13 Jan, 17:00, Brian Kelly wrote:



On Jan 13, 9:31 am, art wrote:

On 12 Jan, 23:02, Dave Heil wrote:

art wrote:
At
the moment I do not have the smallest antenna for 160M on my tower
since the radiator is around 18 foot long and tipped at an angle to
reflect what the computer states. I suppose I will have to make one
that will fit into a 1 foot cubed carton to satisfy the term small.

That's great, Art. How's it working out for you? Did you work J5C over
the past couple of nights? Did you snag G3JMJ's loud signal this evening?

I can load my 6m beam on 160m, but it doesn't work well at all. I use a
slightly long inverted L with a series vacuum variable and nearly 6,000
feet of buried radials. There's a three inch short, tapped coil to
ground at the feed point in order to match the antenna to the RG-213 I
feed it with. The antenna isn't small and it isn't elegant.

I'm willing to listen to your ideas about how I can equal the signal
from that inverted L by using a much smaller antenna. Why don't you
post information on such a creation?

Dave K8MN

Re Antennas and sharing. Checkout E ham forum
Art

Arthur don't be so silly. As a fellow over-the-edge old fart
mechanical engineer you've obviously missed some some fundamentals.

Back in the day the IEEE and the ASME came to an agreement: They
wouldn't fiddle with Mohr's Circles if we didn't fiddle with
electromagnetic wave mechanics. You're in violation Arthur so so knock
it off.

How many countries do you have confirmed on 160?

Brian w3rv- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I am not in violation in my opinion. My theory may not be "exactly"
correct
as I have no way of looking at particles. But if you Google every
little bit, line by line it has enough agreed tangibles that it can
be taken as serious. You yourself know that I have been sharing the
details for a very, very long time. I also have shared everything
and described everything, nothing has been hidden and all explained
several times
Nobody has faulted anything one little bit! Pretty much all has been
the
slandering of me. I really do not understand that if this is a
newsgroup on antennas
why those knoweledgable in the state of the art instead of getting
angry with me doesn't debate it point by point where an error provides
a stop to the debate.
Ofcourse 'error' means so many different things with this group I
don't see a long thread.
I certainly do not have the patience to post thousands of times as
Cecil is able so I should easily be forces to go away as others have

A few years back I worked Cecil on 7.037 and he had

done. Well, if you try very hard that I cannot take anymore. When you
have received an education one must always take advantage of it by
pursuit of the truth regardless of the regimen. I cannot see why I
should be expelled from intruding into physics by those you insist
that all is known about antennas otherwise you are a heritic.
Art

Education
 

On 13 Jan, 18:15, Brian Kelly wrote:
On Jan 13, 8:34 pm, art wrote:





On 13 Jan, 17:00, Brian Kelly wrote:

On Jan 13, 9:31 am, art wrote:

On 12 Jan, 23:02, Dave Heil wrote:

art wrote:
At
the moment I do not have the smallest antenna for 160M on my tower
since the radiator is around 18 foot long and tipped at an angle to
reflect what the computer states. I suppose I will have to make one
that will fit into a 1 foot cubed carton to satisfy the term small.

That's great, Art. *How's it working out for you? *Did you work J5C over
the past couple of nights? *Did you snag G3JMJ's loud signal this evening?

I can load my 6m beam on 160m, but it doesn't work well at all. *I use a
slightly long inverted L with a series vacuum variable and nearly 6,000
feet of buried radials. *There's a three inch short, tapped coil to
ground at the feed point in order to match the antenna to the RG-213 I
feed it with. *The antenna isn't small and it isn't elegant.

I'm willing to listen to your ideas about how I can equal the signal
from that inverted L by using a much smaller antenna. *Why don't you
post information on such a creation?

Dave K8MN

Re Antennas and sharing. Checkout E ham forum
Art

Arthur don't be so silly. As a fellow over-the-edge old fart
mechanical engineer you've obviously missed some some fundamentals.

Back in the day the IEEE and the ASME came to an agreement: They
wouldn't fiddle with Mohr's Circles if we didn't fiddle with
electromagnetic wave mechanics. You're in violation Arthur so so knock
it off.

How many countries do you have confirmed on 160?

Brian w3rv- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

As I have stated before I am not active anymore

Not hardly. You pounced on my post within minutes. Strikes me as
rather "active" eh?

So I'll rephrase the question: How many countries did you work on 160
when you "were active"?

Art

Brian dit-dit beep-beep w3rv . . .- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I have never made a list of countries worked. Never had reason to do
it
I have only entered one "competition" when I was challenged to compete
in being 1 of the three
of the 9th group to have a contact with some station. I was never
given any warning of the when and where but I can say the noise was
horrendous. Why people subject themselves to that I do not know. On
the other side I generally use ham radio to keep in touch with my
friends in the UK which now I do by phone.Why all these questions? Is
another assault in the offing
from a college lecturer?
Art

Education
 

On 13 Jan, 17:36, Derek wrote:
On Jan 14, 9:06 am, "AI4QJ" wrote:





"Derek" wrote in message

...

On Jan 14, 7:36 am, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"Derek" wrote in message

....

On Jan 14, 2:02 am, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"Derek" wrote in message

...

On Jan 13, 2:55 pm, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"Derek" wrote in message

...

On Jan 13, 1:15 pm, "AI4QJ" wrote:

* * *You made a positive statement, You called Art a "liar"

I absolutely did not! Show my a quote where I used thre word liar. I
called
him a fibber. Big difference.

* * * * * semantics

Yes, it's semantics, that's precisely why you are getting confused.
"Derek"
(or whomever you are).

Do you have a call sign or something else that shows us who you are? I'm
sure you're not hiding your personhood *intentionally, "Derek".

* I am a retiree like many on this group living in Perth Australia,
who after many years of following this group has a great belief that
Art can do as he claims.
* * I am also a great believer in fair play, and calling someone a
fibber (liar) on open message without proof is not fair play in my
book.

You may have a great faith in art but not quite enough to say so publically,
do you? It is easy to be an art unwin groupie (no...NOT so easy for most),
taking an insane position under the cloak of anonymity. For that reason, I
really think you have reservations. If you really believed in antennas that
shot particles out the ends, you would say so in the open! *I googled your
userid and I see that you exclusively post only on rraa and only as a
cheerleader for arts theories on rraa. I have not seen one post of your's
that had any technical content. Fibber? You saw he defined is "small"
antenna at 18 feet; that's not small; anybody could load a stinger that long
with a coil and transmit at 160m so you're damn right it was a "fib". *See
ya Derek, knowing that you have nothing technical to offer and that I don't
need to be bothered all the time by the unwin groupie cheerleader; plonk..

You say I am taking an insane position. You also say I have
reservations.
* You know my name is Derek and that I live in Australia.
* Art states he has an antenna for 160m on the top of his tower,I have
not seen it neither have you.
*Over the years Art has stated many facts about this antenna.It is in
equilibrium without loading which also means it does not require a
ground plane ie direct connection to the feed line.
*I also assume that impedance is termed as an acceptable level with a
suitable SWR so it can be driven,If it is on top of the tower with no
other support "most" would consider that small for 160m.
* *Now you can call him a liar, and I believe that he is not.!
* So..... I am willing to raise the money for a wager based on the
above where you may place other conditions in this quest to determine
if Art is a liar or not.
* *You can also choose the judge, and who holds the money since I am
in Australia.
* If we come to an agreement on terms I am willing to put down *up to
$5000US.

* All of the above is subject to Arts agreement for access to *his
antenna
*of course.

Derek- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

People can wager on a beetle race as far as I am concerned. But if I
am to be involved
I cannot gamble. BUT.....
I am willing to pay a sizable entrance fee where the loser has to give
his fee to charity!
Let's roll
Art

Education
 

On Jan 13, 9:39 pm, Brian Kelly wrote:
On Jan 13, 9:18 pm, art wrote:



On 13 Jan, 17:00, Brian Kelly wrote:

On Jan 13, 9:31 am, art wrote:

On 12 Jan, 23:02, Dave Heil wrote:

art wrote:
At
the moment I do not have the smallest antenna for 160M on my tower
since the radiator is around 18 foot long and tipped at an angle to
reflect what the computer states. I suppose I will have to make one
that will fit into a 1 foot cubed carton to satisfy the term small.

That's great, Art. How's it working out for you? Did you work J5C over
the past couple of nights? Did you snag G3JMJ's loud signal this evening?

I can load my 6m beam on 160m, but it doesn't work well at all. I use a
slightly long inverted L with a series vacuum variable and nearly 6,000
feet of buried radials. There's a three inch short, tapped coil to
ground at the feed point in order to match the antenna to the RG-213 I
feed it with. The antenna isn't small and it isn't elegant.

I'm willing to listen to your ideas about how I can equal the signal
from that inverted L by using a much smaller antenna. Why don't you
post information on such a creation?

Dave K8MN

Re Antennas and sharing. Checkout E ham forum
Art

Arthur don't be so silly. As a fellow over-the-edge old fart
mechanical engineer you've obviously missed some some fundamentals.

Back in the day the IEEE and the ASME came to an agreement: They
wouldn't fiddle with Mohr's Circles if we didn't fiddle with
electromagnetic wave mechanics. You're in violation Arthur so so knock
it off.

How many countries do you have confirmed on 160?

Brian w3rv- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I am not in violation in my opinion. My theory may not be "exactly"
correct
as I have no way of looking at particles. But if you Google every
little bit, line by line it has enough agreed tangibles that it can
be taken as serious. You yourself know that I have been sharing the
details for a very, very long time. I also have shared everything
and described everything, nothing has been hidden and all explained
several times
Nobody has faulted anything one little bit! Pretty much all has been
the
slandering of me. I really do not understand that if this is a
newsgroup on antennas
why those knoweledgable in the state of the art instead of getting
angry with me doesn't debate it point by point where an error provides
a stop to the debate.
Ofcourse 'error' means so many different things with this group I
don't see a long thread.
I certainly do not have the patience to post thousands of times as
Cecil is able so I should easily be forces to go away as others have

.. . . A few years back I worked Cecil on 7.037 and he had a quite
respectable signal here which leads me to have some significant
respect for his abilities as an antenna injuneer.

done. Well, if you try very hard that I cannot take anymore. When you
have received an education one must always take advantage of it by
pursuit of the truth regardless of the regimen. I cannot see why I
should be expelled from intruding into physics by those you insist
that all is known about antennas otherwise you are a heritic.

Next time you see your doctor ask him about Lithium.

Art

w3rv

Education
 

"AI4QJ" wrote in
:

Once you understand the difference between standing waves, (which has
no real power itself but which stores the reactive VA power into that
power which is is eventually dissipated in "radiation resitance"
dissipating into free space as radiation power), and traveling waves,
which do have real power that is also disspated into that same type of
radiation power through the radiation resistance, an interesting
question becomes "what is the nature of this so-called radiation
resistance which dissipates the power of a forward wave or the stored
power in a standing wave?". We feed power into the antenna as electric
current and then it exits the antenna as radiation. Maxwell's
equations (in spite of what art theorizes) says that the power has
been converted to an EM wave. So, electric current, which is not an EM
wave consisting of photons and propagating into space, is converted
into a different form of radiation energy that IS an EM and does
consist of phtons and waves. When this conversion occurs and energy is
transmitted into free space, we attempt to quantify this net loss to
our generator with familiar terms, i.e. current or voltage dissipated
into "radiation resistance". However, we all know there is no actual
physical component known as a radiation resistor. Conceptualizing how
this power conversion works goes back to maxwell: "why" is there a
time varying EM magnetic and electric field (external waves and
photons) generated by the flow of current? Well, it could be described
as nature's tendency to maintain equilibrium. If a change is made to a
conductor by putting a current through it, nature "objects" and fights
back by setting up an EM wave that tends to cancel out the incoming
current pulse. But no matter what, I will always easily have enough
energy in my forcing function (current or voltage) to overcome
nature's objection and send a net outflow of energy occuring as
radiation theoretically equal to what I inputted.

Well put, Daniel. One of the biggest difficulties I have with Art's
theories is that I can't get my head wrapped around them. I know he
unfortunately has a few physical challenges that make his postings a
little difficult to go through at times, so I re-read them often to see
if I can glean something out of them.

But whereas I have great difficulty with some folks posts. I understand
everything you wrote.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

Education
 

On Jan 13, 8:18 pm, art wrote:

Nobody has faulted anything one little bit!

I can fault almost everything that spews out of your keyboard,
but I don't have the heart to constantly shred the delusions of a
whiny old fart.
And I'm basically a dumb ass uneducated redneck.
Doesn't that bother you, being you are so superior to us
meager amateurs?

As one example, your spew of needing a full wavelength radiator
in order to be one with the force... What a crock of dung...
I can whip you more with my little stick if you decide that you
like it..
Pick one of your goofball theories and expound to your hearts
delight.
I bet this uneducated dumbass can rip it to shreds with only a
small amount of pondering needed.
Try me, if you don't believe it. I suspect you will be chicken
though.
MK

Education
 

Derek wrote in
:


I am a retiree like many on this group living in Perth Australia,
who after many years of following this group has a great belief that
Art can do as he claims.

On what do you base that belief? Many of us have asked Art for some input
on building one of his antennas, and we don't get anything. Heck, I'd even
enjoy a picture, or a visit to the QTH to see something being used. But we
get nothing. I'm not a fan of faith based engineering.

- 73 d eMike N3LI -

Education
 

On Jan 14, 12:13 pm, Mike Coslo wrote:
Derek wrote :

I am a retiree like many on this group living in Perth Australia,
who after many years of following this group has a great belief that
Art can do as he claims.

On what do you base that belief? Many of us have asked Art for some input
on building one of his antennas, and we don't get anything. Heck, I'd even
enjoy a picture, or a visit to the QTH to see something being used. But we
get nothing. I'm not a fan of faith based engineering.

- 73 d eMike N3LI -


I have put my money where my mouth is.

Derek

Education
 

Derek wrote in
:

On what do you base that belief? Many of us have asked Art for some
input on building one of his antennas, and we don't get anything.
Heck, I'd even enjoy a picture, or a visit to the QTH to see
something being used. But we get nothing. I'm not a fan of faith
based engineering.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -


I have put my money where my mouth is.

Derek - placing of wagers is not an argument. I haven't partipated in
calling Art anything. It isn't a difficult thing to get a picture of this
antenna, I would even offer to post it on line.

It's simple really. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
show us the antennas, let us build them and test them. Let us compare them
to other antennas.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

Education
 

On Jan 14, 12:38 pm, Mike Coslo wrote:
Derek wrote :

On what do you base that belief? Many of us have asked Art for some
input on building one of his antennas, and we don't get anything.
Heck, I'd even enjoy a picture, or a visit to the QTH to see
something being used. But we get nothing. I'm not a fan of faith
based engineering.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

I have put my money where my mouth is.

Derek - placing of wagers is not an argument. I haven't partipated in
calling Art anything.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -


I did not intend to infer that you had, I just pointed out I was ready
to back my words

Derek

Education
 

On 13 Jan, 19:11, wrote:
On Jan 13, 8:18 pm, art wrote:

Nobody has faulted anything one little bit!

I can fault almost everything that spews out of your keyboard,
but I don't have the heart to constantly shred the delusions of a
whiny old fart.
And I'm basically a dumb ass uneducated redneck.
Doesn't that bother you, being you are so superior to us
meager amateurs?

As one example, your spew of needing a full wavelength radiator
in order to be one with the force... What a crock of dung...
I can whip you more with my little stick if you decide that you
like it..
Pick one of your goofball theories and expound to your hearts
delight.

I bet

Well I hope you make it a sizable wager and join others that might
want to
do same. You can a lot of money to buy all the antennas that you want.
Art




h.
MK

Education
 

On Jan 13, 10:05 pm, art wrote:


Well I hope you make it a sizable wager and join others that might
want to
do same. You can a lot of money to buy all the antennas that you want.
Art

h.

MK

I make all my antennas. I don't have to buy them.
Also, where do you get the idea that gambling comes
into play here?
I don't live in Vegas, and 8 liners are illegal here.
When I hear of gaussian jibber jabber, I think of this..
http://home.comcast.net/~nm5k/gauss.jpg
In fact, I'm starting to wonder if you are not related
to this gentleman. Small size means nothing if
most of the power turns to heat. This even applies
to aliens.
MK

Education
 

art wrote:
On 12 Jan, 23:02, Dave Heil wrote:
art wrote:
At
the moment I do not have the smallest antenna for 160M on my tower
since the radiator is around 18 foot long and tipped at an angle to
reflect what the computer states. I suppose I will have to make one
that will fit into a 1 foot cubed carton to satisfy the term small.
That's great, Art. How's it working out for you? Did you work J5C over
the past couple of nights? Did you snag G3JMJ's loud signal this evening?

I can load my 6m beam on 160m, but it doesn't work well at all. I use a
slightly long inverted L with a series vacuum variable and nearly 6,000
feet of buried radials. There's a three inch short, tapped coil to
ground at the feed point in order to match the antenna to the RG-213 I
feed it with. The antenna isn't small and it isn't elegant.

I'm willing to listen to your ideas about how I can equal the signal
from that inverted L by using a much smaller antenna. Why don't you
post information on such a creation?

Re Antennas and sharing. Checkout E ham forum

I know what others have said, Art. I asked if you'd share your ideas.
You have often dealt in non-specifics. I'd like to see how you think a
small antenna can be made to equal the performance of the full-sized
inverted L.

Dave K8MN

Education
 

On 13 Jan, 21:07, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

...

- Show quoted text -

"People can wager on a beetle race as far as I am concerned. But if I
am to be involved
I cannot gamble. * * * BUT.....
I am willing to pay a sizable entrance fee where the loser has to give
his fee to charity!
Let's roll"

Let's not. I'm not a gambling man either. I will say that a credible theory
that was repeatable would not require a Las Vegas style wager to demonstrate
the odds of its success.

Once again, what is the diameter of your 18 foot 160m antenna?

It was not to to demonstrate the odds of success from what I
read.Since he was backing that I was stating the truth it becomes
obvious that I also will come up with a amount of money which would go
to charity. I sir, am stating the truth
and will make a much smaller one if you make that one of the
conditions applied, or modify the existing one to meet same.
I suspect that others may be willing to join you from what I read.
Art

Education
 

On 13 Jan, 21:17, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

...





On 13 Jan, 12:33, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

...
On 12 Jan, 23:02, Dave Heil wrote:

art wrote:
At
the moment I do not have the smallest antenna for 160M on my tower
since the radiator is around 18 foot long and tipped at an angle to
reflect what the computer states. I suppose I will have to make one
that will fit into a 1 foot cubed carton to satisfy the term small.

That's great, Art. How's it working out for you? Did you work J5C over
the past couple of nights? Did you snag G3JMJ's loud signal this
evening?

I can load my 6m beam on 160m, but it doesn't work well at all. I use a
slightly long inverted L with a series vacuum variable and nearly 6,000
feet of buried radials. There's a three inch short, tapped coil to
ground at the feed point in order to match the antenna to the RG-213 I
feed it with. The antenna isn't small and it isn't elegant.

I'm willing to listen to your ideas about how I can equal the signal
from that inverted L by using a much smaller antenna. Why don't you
post information on such a creation?

Dave K8MN

"Re Antennas and sharing. Checkout E ham forum
Art"

OK, I went to e ham forum and found 1732 pages of articles. It does not
allow me to filter on art, unwin or diamagnetic. Could you help us out a
little? This is like trying to literally find a needle in a haystack.

AI4QJ- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

They are rated the top two threads at the present time ( yesterday)
I can't remember the titles or every thing that was written but as the
top articles of interest I don't think you can consider it as looking
for a needle.
Art

Nothing there. Not in the top 10 hottest or top 10 most recently active.
Must be a lot of constantly changing 'hottest' and 'recently active' forums
between yesterday and today. Guess I missed out.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No.
The two hottest is what I was pointing to when I responded to the
other person. One is called 'How radiation is created' or something
like that. The other is the assistance I gave on a "homebrew antenna".
The first thread is what I initiated with the call sign KB9MZ. Both
still remain at the top of the hottest list and probably will still be
for the next couple of days. After which they may well stay on that
list anyway.
Art

Education
 

Christopher Cox wrote:
It must upset you something fierce then to know that the founders of the
major Ivy league schools and some of the most wealthy and influential
people today all have a common trait, they do not hold a collage diploma.


As I have always said to my more highly educated colleagues:

"You either have to have a degree or be good at what you do to get a job
here."

They nod, agree, and to a person completely miss the double entendre'.

-73 de Mike N3LI -

Education
 

Art wrote:
"I had no idea that standing and travelling waves was reserved for post
doctorial studies in America,---."

It isn`t. Just as elsewhere, electromagnetism and wave motion are
covered in freshman physics. Anything needed beyond simple algebra is
covered in the physics course itself. It includes the relationship of
classical physics to modern physics, emphasizing conservation laws,
concepts of waves, fields, and particles.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Education
 

On Jan 14, 8:49 am, Michael Coslo wrote:
Christopher Cox wrote:
It must upset you something fierce then to know that the founders of the
major Ivy league schools and some of the most wealthy and influential
people today all have a common trait, they do not hold a collage diploma.

As I have always said to my more highly educated colleagues:

"You either have to have a degree or be good at what you do to get a job
here."

They nod, agree, and to a person completely miss the double entendre'.

-73 de Mike N3LI -

You better watch it Michael or The Moderator is gonna GETCHA boy!

Hee!