Art Unwin wrote:

...
John,
I have not read anything over the last two years regarding the M.O.M /
NEC
Can you give me a smigeon of information of what is being said of such
programs?
There was mention of such in a ARRL compendium a few years back that
made mention of the assumption made
on the continuity of an applied sine wave which conflicts I believe
with the Tank Circuit equivalent.
And ofcourse some programs do better with respect to proximity effect
better than others, but I have never seen anything of major content.
I do know that all four forces of the standard model are included in
such programs however they are rarely utelised since they are not
really understood
in the present state of the art.
Regards
Art

Art:

Actually, Roy, or one (or all the hams) engaged in writing an interface
to the NEC engine (MMANA-GAL and 'those guys' -- do an internet search,
their emails are readily available), which frees us from having to enter
the actual numerical data into a text file, would be much better gurus ...

As you know, I am much more interested it what we can't see, at the
moment -- the either ... Art, I have as many questions as you ...

Regards,
JS

On Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:13:27 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

Richard Clark wrote:
And you have something intelligent to say? It would have to improve
over your gumming through
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"
Voodoo science exists within the NEC code

Sorry Brett, gumming repetition does not prove an idea you already
allowed as being a dead and embraceable disgust. You clearly don't
have any idea how to progress beyond incantation of trolling
prosodies.

To your credit, no one expects originality from you. After all, that
is the point of your (self-supposed) anonymity (an ironic joke I
enjoy). You could as easily be Sara luxuriating in the flush of your
TV debate victory (complete with your aw-shucksisms)!

Well, let me see here, I mean, I want to give you all due respect, and
all that ...

No you don't. This maudlin appeal is weak tea, save it for Authur who
shares your disability in lack of originality.

I do applaud the parade of the lame and lazy excuses you two manage to
bluff up in the guise of outrage. What a hoot! Insisting others to
prove your claims has to rank up there on the honor roll of welfare
queens. If the Congress had a bailout for ineptitude (and it has been
fairly proven they do), they would have granted you earmarks for your
mutual admiration society diary entries. You guys scribble out those
tear stained pages like they earn tax credits. Weep on! The election
cycle still has 30 days of promises to be made to the technically
indigent.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard,
Calling people 'name' here is fairly common place. But making
comparison to politician is just plain nasty!
- 'Doc

On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 00:44:03 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Calling people 'name' here is fairly common place. But making
comparison to politician is just plain nasty!

Yes, I know. It keeps me up at nights worrying about it.

About the politicians that is, they deserve better associations than
to antenna inventors; and at 12% approval, politicians have higher
validation. After all, they at least offer you a solution even if,
like antenna inventions, it doesn't work.

Can you imagine *we the people* telling our leaders to "fix it" and
our leaders asking us "How?"

Hmmmm, Maybe the happiness twins have something going!
How many here would react positively to a write-in campaign to elect
them for somethin'? I dropped the 'g to sound folksy like Brett %-)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

wrote:
Richard,
Calling people 'name' here is fairly common place. But making
comparison to politician is just plain nasty!
- 'Doc


LOL ... I like your way of thinking.

OK. Just consider me Obama and "him" McCain ... grin

Regards,
JS

Richard Clark wrote:
On Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:13:27 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

Richard Clark wrote:
And you have something intelligent to say? It would have to improve
over your gumming through
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"
Voodoo science exists within the NEC code
Sorry Brett, gumming repetition does not prove an idea you already
allowed as being a dead and embraceable disgust. You clearly don't
have any idea how to progress beyond incantation of trolling
prosodies.

To your credit, no one expects originality from you. After all, that
is the point of your (self-supposed) anonymity (an ironic joke I
enjoy). You could as easily be Sara luxuriating in the flush of your
TV debate victory (complete with your aw-shucksisms)!
Well, let me see here, I mean, I want to give you all due respect, and
all that ...

No you don't. This maudlin appeal is weak tea, save it for Authur who
shares your disability in lack of originality.

I do applaud the parade of the lame and lazy excuses you two manage to
bluff up in the guise of outrage. What a hoot! Insisting others to
prove your claims has to rank up there on the honor roll of welfare
queens. If the Congress had a bailout for ineptitude (and it has been
fairly proven they do), they would have granted you earmarks for your
mutual admiration society diary entries. You guys scribble out those
tear stained pages like they earn tax credits. Weep on! The election
cycle still has 30 days of promises to be made to the technically
indigent.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

OK. I have been kind, actually. Really? You just don't matter ... I
have suggested it in my text to you, consider my text summarized with
the simple statement.

Besides, you are a long-winded-blow-hard ... you remind me of the guy
who I just walk away from my rig, come back ten minutes later, with a
cup of coffee, and wait a long time for him to finish ... a long wait,
most likely ... :-(

Regards,
JS

On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 18:36:36 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

OK. I have been kind, actually. Really? You just don't matter ...

Boy, self contradiction in the space of a breath.

That, or we are into parsing. What kind have you been?

Talk about gassing on, the two of you could be the solution to the
energy crisis if we could just get you guys off the endangered
wheezers list.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:
On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 18:36:36 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

OK. I have been kind, actually. Really? You just don't matter ...

Boy, self contradiction in the space of a breath.

That, or we are into parsing. What kind have you been?

Talk about gassing on, the two of you could be the solution to the
energy crisis if we could just get you guys off the endangered
wheezers list.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

I hope you feel you have made your point; I am satisfied with the forum
you have given me to present mine ...

Regards,
JS

On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 10:02:49 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

I hope you feel you have made your point; I am satisfied with the forum
you have given me to present mine ...

The instructions for bailing out in a parachute suggests you pull the
ripcord BEFORE you hit the ground.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:
On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 10:02:49 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

I hope you feel you have made your point; I am satisfied with the forum
you have given me to present mine ...

The instructions for bailing out in a parachute suggests you pull the
ripcord BEFORE you hit the ground.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard:

Look out the door of your plane ... it never left ground ...

Regards,
JS