art wrote:
... Having never met a redneck from
the mountains I can only assume that such talk is the very nature of a
redneck that makes them a subject for comedy. For that you do a
terrific job with respect to american humour.

Art:

Is that a "stab" at placing a knife within a velvet sheath?

Chuckle,
JS

On Jan 20, 4:55 pm, art wrote:


This antenna of mine has really got you in a headlock.

You must be dreaming... :/

Your breathing
is close to being cut off and there is no blood flowing to your brain
such that you are so angry and can't think straight.

Angry? Have you lost your mind? This is comedy to me.
On a personal level, I could care less about you or your
sub par developments of psuedo science.
It does bother me that you pollute the minds of
unsuspecting newbies with your bafflegab though.
Not a whole lot, but enough to where I feel compelled
to tweak your ass every once in a while.
Maybe I better quit though, as it seems that when I do
this, it cuts off the flow of blood to your brain, and you
become very angry, and can't think straight. :/

What on earth does this antenna mean to a red neck who brags of
avoiding schooling? Is it regret of some sort? It is not a secret
antenna!

You got that right. It's not even new for that matter.
You think you are the first person to try to invent a small
perverted antenna with the performance of a full size version?
I'm curious... You and and that EH antenna guy are not
joined at the hip are you? Inquiring ponderers relish an
answer.

Sooner or later you will have the opportunity to make one
yourself.

Why would I want a sub par antenna when I already have
manly full size versions? You need to get out of the sun..
That 12 degrees is frying your brain...

Probably in time for the peak of the next sunspot cycle.

I don't depend on the sunspot cycles. That's probably why
I'm usually on the lower bands. My manly full size antennas
don't hurt things either..
Most any sub par design can me made to "work" on the higher
HF bands with enough efficiency to fool people who have never
tried a full size version.

But
then, what use will you make of it other than talk?

I agree. I already have enough dummy loads as it is.
I don't need an air cooled model that is mounted on a
tower.



On the other hand
I don't remember anytime referring to your antennas either for
transmitting or receiving other than hearing you say, in effect, that
they cam beat anything on the planet.

I expect you will be able to find me saying that with a google deja
search? I have made no claims as to my antennas being the
best on the planet. I do claim to avoid elevated dummy loads
though. I admit it. Sue me.

Having never met a redneck from
the mountains I can only assume that such talk is the very nature of a
redneck that makes them a subject for comedy. For that you do a
terrific job with respect to american humour.

I wasn't born in the mountains, although I think such a peaceful
setting would be nice. I was born in the downtown Dallas area.
The only mountains there are man made, and most are
glistening with lights and blinky things.
I have the dubious distinction of being born across the
street from where a certain president died a few years later.
BTW, here in the United States it's humor, not humour.
Git-R-Done Vern! Riches and fame await!
You might even end up cover boy of QST! Dang.. I'm
already impressed just thinking about it.

On 20 Jan, 15:01, John Smith wrote:
art wrote:
... Having never met a redneck from
the mountains I can only assume that such talk is the very nature of a
redneck that makes them a subject for comedy. For that you do a
terrific job with respect to american humour.

Art:

Is that a "stab" at placing a knife within a velvet sheath?

Chuckle,
JS

I don't understand that John!
I do remember a trip thru the mountains when we saw a sign that stated
"rest area ahead" but it was a red graffity sort of sign. We kept our
eyes open and later came upon it. It was an old mattress placed on the
side of the road. We later came across a flea market which we intended
to visit but we couldn't. There was only one huge car park that was
marked for the handicap only, and it was full! We thought was mighty
unfriendly. Other than that it was beautiful country. I heard one guy
say I should have gone to the most afluent areas,I told him we did
once and they were very friendly and invited us to a house warming. We
did not go ofcourse because of the set conditions where guests had to
promise to help with removing the wheels! They were not attached to
the house as they had fallen off en route and landed up in a marshy
area.
Regards
Art

On 18 Jan, 09:18, art wrote:
On 18 Jan, 08:38, wrote:





On Jan 18, 3:36 am, "Ed Cregger" wrote:

snip

Many of you are far more educated than I, but many of you
demonstrate precisely why I chose not to be brainwashed with
a formal education. Many cannot see past the end of their
noses, yet they insist upon laying down the law regarding
what is acceptable science and what is not. As though anyone
actually knows anything at all.

snip

Let's not forget that one's educational level has nothing to
do with native IQ.

Ed, NM2K

You are correct to say that education has nothing to do with IQ.
Faraday had little formal training, yet his arduous work is now
exalted by naming one of the basic electromagnetic laws after him. But
I take issue with the idea that you can't actually know anything at
all. For instance, electrodynamic theory was developed 150 years ago,
and the KNOWN successful results of that are numerous.

Newtonian mechanics held up well for hundreds of years. A whole
industrial revolution was built on it. Yet some pesky observations by
Michelson and Morley regarding the invariant speed of light found it
wanting. Relativistic mechanics subsumed Newtonian mechanics, but
Einstein didn't invalidate Newton. I believe the mathematical term
"embedding" applies.

I am currently re-studying the original theory of Maxwell, et. al.,
with the intent of finding some chink in the armor. Tesla reported
longitudinal electromagnetic wave phenomena, which contradicts the now-
standard theory that EM waves can ONLY be transversal. Using Maxwell's
original quaternion equations, before Heviside simplified them into
the now-standard vector form, one can derive longitudinal wave
components. If those exist, does that prove you don't know how to
operate a ham radio? No, it just means you're radiating something in
addition to what you expect.

You CAN know something and apply it. You just need to realize that
what you know isn't complete, and never can be.

The chink is provided by Gauss.Adding a time varient to his law of
statics brings you to
Maxwells law Holding on to the equilibrium underpinnings you may then
insert a radiator that also is in equilibrium i.e. a full wave length.
Now you are equipped to insert same into a antenna program to
determine shape ,size,elevation e.t.c for maximum horizontal gain.
Maxwells law will then show that to meet this requirement is for the
radiator to not be parallel to the ground surface but tipped to an
angle. This angle is the summation of the curl vector and others that
are entailed.Gauss following from the Newtonian aproach of equilibrium
provides a pasaage of knoweledge that was not available in the blank
statements of Maxwell.
All this provides a picture which equals a thousand words and a sound
basis to build upon.
The understanding of this aproach has been stalled with this newsgroup
on the basis of transformation of static field to a dynamic field is
illegal, regardless of the math proving otherwise! Facts are stranger
than the fiction of this group.
Have fun with your studies.
Art Unwin KB9MZ...xg (uk)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

OOOOps
I forgot to state that the house was not actually situated in the
afluent area in its intended spot. They made a lightning descision to
live in the neigboring county where the wheels came off. The house was
close to the road and leaning at an angle but they figures with the
gouges made by the axles in the dirt woud save them some costs in
drainage and with the windows leaning towards the sky they could sun
bathe while sitting in the living room.
Brain power they proudly stated while at the same time scratching
their rear ends.
Oh, and another thing. That graffitty sign I mentioned earlier which
was a red spray paint, they sprayed that on the board after the red
paint background on the board had dried off.
Regards
Art

On 20 Jan, 16:00, art wrote:
On 20 Jan, 15:01, John Smith wrote:

art wrote:
... Having never met a redneck from
the mountains I can only assume that such talk is the very nature of a
redneck that makes them a subject for comedy. For that you do a
terrific job with respect to american humour.

Art:

Is that a "stab" at placing a knife within a velvet sheath?

Chuckle,
JS

I don't understand that John!
I do remember a trip thru the mountains when we saw a sign that stated
"rest area ahead" but it was a red graffity sort of sign. We kept our
eyes open and later came upon it. It was an old mattress placed on the
side of the road. We later came across a flea market which we intended
to visit but we couldn't. There was only one huge car park that was
marked for the handicap only, and it was full! We thought was mighty
unfriendly. Other than that it was beautiful country. I heard one guy
say I should have gone to the most afluent areas,I told him we did
once and they were very friendly and invited us to a house warming. We
did not go ofcourse because of the set conditions where guests had to
promise to help with removing the wheels! They were not attached to
the house as they had fallen off en route and landed up in a marshy
area.
Regards
Art

John I remember now, I have seen a redneck. We came across a bunch,
all looking evil
with these huges blunderbuss type weapons. But appearances are
deceiving since they were just squirrel hunting. I asked then about
the necessity of these large wierd looking rifles but they said they
came in handy if they didn't win the race to pick up the road kill.
Taking another look at them it all seemed to make sense
Art

On 20 Jan, 14:22, wrote:
On Jan 20, 11:51 am, art wrote:



Yes. But when they over estimate their abilities in areas outside
their field of expertise you can expect problems.

Pot+Kettle=Black?

I proved myself as a true ham today.

You tacked your license to the wall above your MFJ259?

BTW, any directional gain means little if only a small amount
of the applied RF is radiated by the small inefficient antenna.
With such a small antenna, "gain" is the last thing you should be
worried about.
My MW receiving loops have a great f/s ratio. That does not
mean I would want to use them as transmitting antennas.. :/
Git my drift Vern?
MK

Well thank you for that info. I did not know that Texas was where
rednecks came from.
How comes Cecil is so smart?

On Jan 20, 6:37 pm, art wrote:


John I remember now, I have seen a redneck. We came across a bunch,
all looking evil
with these huges blunderbuss type weapons. But appearances are
deceiving since they were just squirrel hunting. I asked then about
the necessity of these large wierd looking rifles but they said they
came in handy if they didn't win the race to pick up the road kill.
Taking another look at them it all seemed to make sense
Art

That was probably back when Clinton was in the White House.
With the sunset of the AWB, many rednecks have progressed
to more capable tools. Of course, the race for road kill still exists
in many areas, as many prefer the grainy texture of an aged
animal carcass.
If you can find a roadkill old enough to be yellow striped, you can
consider yourself a lucky man indeed, as these are considered
a delicacy by many. Road striped possums and skunks are a
special treat at the dinner table, broiled or fried.
These days, many rednecks have switched to Barret .50 cal
sniper rifles, AR-15's, TEC 9's, etc.
The old antique shotguns have been relegated for A/C use for the
mobile homes. IE: they are often used as a doorstop to hold the
front door open. For mobile home protection, the favored handgun
of the modern progressive redneck is the Desert Eagle .50 cal..
Git-R-Done Vern!
MK

On 20 Jan, 12:47, "AI4QJ" wrote:
"art" wrote in message

...





On 19 Jan, 10:56, "AI4QJ" wrote:
wrote in message

ne

http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/le24.htm

I have just got around to reading just the intro
of the above URL. Later I will digest the rest of
the lesson.
What struck me was how deftly the author pointed out
where pseudo experts have dominated science thru the ages
such that it reflects the poles of the many led by the few.
It shows time and time again that science is a popularity
contest where the so called "in crowd" of of self rightious
people have been able to thwat the advances of science of
the past centuries. Gallilao comes to mind as does Green
of Nottingham and Heavieside of Clapton and ofcourse my favorite
Gauss. We are seeing the same thing here on this newsgroup

Wrong Art, the very purpose that the link was posted in this thread was to
encourage alternative concepts to those developed in the 1800's, 1904, 1905
and the 1930's.

There may indeed be a case for the Aether; personally, free space is merely
a concept of nothingness that only contains those parameters that the
scientist tends to use in his model. In electromagnetics, free space has a
characteristic impedance of Zo (377 ohms), it has permeability and
permittivity which fit well into our mathematical models. How can
nothingness have a characteristc impedance of 377 ohms? And today we have a
little more information (much more); we have theories of exotic matter and
energy that are so new that no one *has really taken a second look at the
old concepts and perhaps investigated for possible linkages. There may be
new possible explanations for the infinite negative energy of a Dirac sea
that didn't make sense in the 30's; there is only a shortage of physicists
with the time and money to come up with new theories in a short time.

Art, I'm sure your response to these statements will be negative (curiously
which, as in the past, actually tended to support your persistence and
encourage your new ideas but oppose your lack of scientific method). Finish
reading the article and understand the math. Judge for yourself if you see
any chinks. But do note thar Dr. Aspden uses math and logic to make his
points. He also publishes references in his paper. He leaves himself wide
open for peer review. This is the way it is properly done and completely
opposite of the faith-based approach you foist upon us.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No. Now I have read the whole thing I can state that my work resulted
from my travels
after Gauss which lead me to my personal law that an antenna to be of
maximum efficiency must be made from a diamagnetic material which can
be any size or shape or elevation as long as it is in a state of
equilibrium. I followed thru with this on computor programs which
confirmed
with my analysis. I have since made antennas of different size,shape
and elevation which is contrary to the norm which gives me impetus to
pursue the line of thought further. Gaussian law gave me a measure of
belief that static particles were at rest on a radiator which when
coupled to a diamagnetic inductance gave particles at rest at each and
every point of the radiator an ejection at right angles to the
radiator. Googling on each and every point of that traeveling gave
credence to the parth taken.When seeing that each point of a radiator
can be considered a minute electrical circuit it can be deduced that
many samples are ejected in pattern form as is the individual
impactson the radiator itself thus creating an occillation
a phenomina that has been accepted for many a year. To see the mirror
image of these impacts on a receiving antenna does seem realistic if
all particles follow the same trajectory.
The anti gravitational effects of a diamagnetic field gives credence
to a straight line trajectory and so on. So the dust can be lihas to
be linked in some way to the solar flow of particles pattern of eleven
years which matches the turn over of the sun's poles which is known to
lead to a heavy increase in solar dust into our atmosphere and where
the earth also has additional poles based on the location of various
inate elements which tend to congregate.
These poles obviously have a connection to the earth's wobbly rotation
by movement of these various poles that could account for the curl
vector in radiation as it does with a pendulum.
So I have invented a plausable account for radiation which for myself
I consider more reasonable because of computor results and my antenna
building. So far this trail has lead to antennas that are in
equilibrium and of various shapes and elevations that matches the
conclusions found on the trail.Existing computor programs also verify
the trail.When lstening to my small antennas with their wide band
coverage and small size I feel that I should be forgiven if I consider
the trail of conclusions are correct. But even if this were not so the
trail taken on this premise produced a different line of thought on
antennas that work exactly as predicted. So now I share my work and
thoughts as a layman in this area with other laymen
and not to the any society of physics which are closed units. I am
doing this to document my work for what it is and by no means put my
self on the same pedestal as Einstein, Newton and others. So by
sharing and explaining my thoughts with outhers I am taken to task
purely because such works are only credibly submitted by those skilled
in the arts within a closed circle. So it is considered wrong that I
share my experiences with other laymen if it is not previously
approved or meet the texts submitted by experts. So hams are now not
interested in antennas and I am in errorin explaining trails taken
which appear contrary to the teachings given to laymen some 50 years
ago. So the options provided by laymen is to not share, to not
discuss, to not sway people to rethink that which is 50 years old and
to not infer that bigger is not better. If you are a contestor you
must keep quiet with respect to your experiences and take them to your
grave thus giving science time to stumble across it in the future as
we have had enough of the re inventing of the wheel when we discover
to our dismay it was written up by somebody who is now deceased. I
know that people are resistant to change especially those with
experiences that are repeated exactly the same for every consecutive
day without change.
If this is so why is this newsgroup in existance? To keep old koots in
employ? Or to hold dear all the ideals that all hams have spent to
survive in their lives and keep the new at bay.
Would it not be better to converse and study each points found on the
trail so others will see a chink in my logic that can lead to even
better ideas. Could we review the trail and separate the good from the
bad leaving a new rock on which to build? Or is it our destiny to
prevent change to our ideals such when we die we take with us the
reasons for this being a hobby?"
The hobby cannot survive purely on the basis on the enjoyement of
slander and one upmanship.
When we have gone there will be no reason for this newsgroup or our
hobby since we are destroying the very tenents that allowed us to
enjoy and thus prevent those who follow us to have the same rewards.
In our younger days science profited from ham radio , but in our older
days our intransience is destroying it for future generations.Why
because there can be no future if we convince the young that all is
known about the radiation field and they should pursue other areas to
satisfy their inquisitivenes or in its absence just go with the flow
of depression.
can be any size ,shape and elevation

Cecil Moore wrote in news:M08kj.36592$JD.1707
@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net:

Light does travel at a slower speed against the aether
but relativity changes the length of a second when going
against the aether so it is undetectable.

How does a second go against the aether?

- 73 de Mikw N3LI -

Mike Coslo wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Light does travel at a slower speed against the aether
but relativity changes the length of a second when going
against the aether so it is undetectable.

How does a second go against the aether?

Did I dangle a participle?

"Light does travel at a slower speed against the
aether but relativity changes the length of a second
when the light goes against the aether, so it is
undetectable."
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com