"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
I am begining to believe that there is really no interest in small
antennas

only for very high frequencies.

where did art go, bad wx coming again, could use some entertainment!

"Dave" wrote in message
...

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
I am begining to believe that there is really no interest in small
antennas

only for very high frequencies.

where did art go, bad wx coming again, could use some entertainment!

Do we dare try to resurrect Chip?

"Wayne" wrote in message
...

"Dave" wrote in message
...

"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
I am begining to believe that there is really no interest in small
antennas

only for very high frequencies.

where did art go, bad wx coming again, could use some entertainment!

Do we dare try to resurrect Chip?

now that would be interesting, art and chip getting together!

Art Unwin wrote:

I am begining to believe that there is really no interest in small
antennas

I use small antennas all the time.

So is there really
somebody being hired to produce small antennas?

It would be fairly hard to use a small antenna if no one
were around to make any... :/

Same situation with
hams as they fight at the very idea of the possibility of small
efficient antennas that like the Universities do not want to hear of
the possibilities

Most that deal with small antennas eventually find that there is
no free lunch. This attempt at small antenna perfection has gone
on since way before I was born. Of course, being that you disregard
all previous science, I guess you missed the memo.

One doctorial student at Illinois University in Central illinois
stated that they have so many requests for review of antennas by the
populace it is not unusual to ignore the pleas of the local populace
presumably based on the premise that if it was possible they would
already have done it.

And he is right. They have only had about 100 years to work
on it.

They have teachers way more intelligent than
ordinary peopleand, where one spends most of her time working on
behalf of the IEEE that research or computer operation has to be put
to one side.

Delirious jibber jabber disregarded...

If there really was an interest in diverse antennas instead of
personal promotion maybe our tax dollars would be better spent. Yes,
I write off the University of Illinois as they have never produced
anything as pioneers in antennas especially with the departure of the
log periodic designer that they paid hansomly to hang out there
instead of there own Universities.

And likewise, neither have you.. So where is the beef?

So to sum up puting U of I to one
side, is there anybody in Industry who desires small antennas or
Universities investing time in such things ?.

Yes. But they deal with the real world, not a bunch of conjered up
voodoo science.

When O when is anything going to happen in the small antenna areana or
is the need actually ficticious
because of diminishing returns with the use of such?

You can't polish a turd and turn it into a diamond.
Only people with limited room are likely to be interesting
in accepting a decrease in performance, vs using full size
antennas. The only place you see me using small antennas on HF
is mobile. And while I've spent a good deal of time trying to
optimize the efficiency of those antennas, I have no delusions
of grandeur when it comes to their efficiency vs say a dipole.
I happen to realize that there is no free lunch.

What Universities
in the U.S. that are serious about small antennas and what have they
produced in the last couple of years?

Why don't you ask them. Could care less myself..

If they can't or deny the
possibilities then why fund them?

I don't.

It is your money. But then who
cares, we have antennas already so we don't need anymore
especiually when denial of the new suggests that all is known.

Good point, and I agree. I really don't care. I like big manly
efficient antennas, not air cooled dummy loads on a stick. :/
If you say all is known, I'll take your word for it.
Of course, I know that's not true, but if it applies to you,
it's good to know a man who knows his limitations.
Clint Eastwood would be proud.

NM5K wrote:


Yes. But they deal with the real world, not a bunch of conjered up
voodoo science.


Funny you should mention that. As, when you peek closely under the hood
of the NEC engine (at least the one I use and have the source code to),
it does have a bit of what you call "voodoo science", IMHO ...


Only people with limited room are likely to be interesting
in accepting a decrease in performance, vs using full size
antennas. The only place you see me using small antennas on HF

Don't forget us guys who are over 50 and getting tired of maintaining
large hunks of metal in the sky and fighting the force of gravity Gods
to do so (in more ways than one! And, not to mention neighbors, rules,
regulations, etc.) With the price of real estate being manipulated near
"Hong Kong Prices" (what is that, about a million dollars a sq. ft.?),
reduced size antennas will only increase in uses and demand ...

Regards,
JS

On Sat, 04 Oct 2008 11:12:51 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

of the NEC engine (at least the one I use and have the source code to),
it does have a bit of what you call "voodoo science", IMHO ...

In your Hyper-inflated Opinion. As with many of your opunions, none
are supported in accomplishment and I dare say you cannot recite a
block of labeled code that conforms to your supposed humility. As
with your confidence in reciting the volume of a sphere (and lacking a
simple answer to my offering a chord measurement to test your
confidence), I can well anticipate your post here, is as much a Troll
as any of the rest.

You can offer that labeled block of code to support your statement
or
admit your post is so much babble
or
your post is yet another troll

How many rounds will it take to resolve to one in three? I am sure
most here would hammer the last two in a heartbeat and the mole would
be whacked twice.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:


You can offer that labeled block of code to support your statement
or
admit your post is so much babble
or
your post is yet another troll


I asked R2D2 his opinion on this matter, and he went
bleeeeppp, sputter, raiiinnnnnngggggggggggg, fart.

You can hear it for yourself if you go here and type
"bull@#Z$%" into the frame.
http://www.r2d2translator.com/


I just asked him if his sensors felt any extra amounts
of excrement applied, and he sputtered out another
long tirade, which ended up meaning, "well you can see
the stupid meter for yourself can't you!!"
You can see live streaming of this meter at:
http://home.comcast.net/~nm5k/bsmeter.gif

Richard Clark wrote:

In your Hyper-inflated Opinion. As with many of your opunions, none
are supported in accomplishment and I dare say you cannot recite a
block of labeled code that conforms to your supposed humility. As
...
73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard:

Doesn't it even embarrass you in the least to make such statements which
the mere application of common sense will declare an outrageous lie(s)?

The code which comes into play when a gamma match configuration of
elements is defined and handed to the NEC engine, along with the proper
pf to cancel the inductance of the gamma-rod, should be proof enough
.... to any legitimate software engineer with "an antenna hobby."
Indeed, any man with common sense who can understand the equation(s)
being called to play and their very (rounding/guessing) nature ...

Download the code and locate it yourself! It comes in Fortran, Basic
and "C" flavors--at least ... if you are intelligent to understand this
conversation on even a basic level, you should be able to accomplish
that ...

Regards,
JS

NM5K wrote:

...
I asked R2D2 his opinion on this matter, and he went
bleeeeppp, sputter, raiiinnnnnngggggggggggg, fart.


Somehow, by the very nature of your participation(s) here, I can believe
that! ROFLOL

Well, I mean, you are liable to interpret your visions as such ... chuckle

Regards,
JS

Richard Clark wrote:

...
How many rounds will it take to resolve to one in three? I am sure
most here would hammer the last two in a heartbeat and the mole would
be whacked twice.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

And then, of course, there is this little jewel:

http://assemblywizard.fr33webhost.co...ristics%20.pdf

Citing antennas which NEC has a "bit" of a problem modeling. The
author, a professor and amateur, notes that the power is not being
"lost" as heat ... so you propose it is being transferred to another
dimension?

You remind me of the guy who took the boat trip to see the ocean. He
departed on the boat upstream at a large river. No one ever bothered to
tell him that he had reached the ocean ... he fell overboard ... among
his last cries, was heard, "And, I did so want to see the ocean before I
died ... gurrgleeee ... "

Regards,
JS