On Fri, 15 May 2009 09:08:06 +0200, Szczepan Bia?ek
wrote:
Here is wrote that it happend:

Trash is what this reference is called. Someone's diary is not
science.

If it were not trash, it does not prove doubling. Did you actually
read it? It doesn't prove IMD either as there would be a billion
reports every day from the presence of the MegaWatt LW stations in
Europe. I don't suppose you listen to radio either?

Not all MegaWatt LW stations are the Hertz dipole. Such was in Warsow but
collapsed.

This is a ridiculous observation. However, if I were to allow it, it
thus also means that SOME MegaWatt LW stations are "the Hertz dipole,"
by your own admission (which is significantly in question as to be
authoritative because you don't really know, do you?).

If station has only one end no doubling. Even if it has two the lower must
have the same possibilities (tip top of mountain).

As SOME MegaWatt LW stations are "the Hertz dipole," it follows there
must be literally billions of examples of what you describe. And yet
you offer no personal experience, and the record is empty of others'
observations.

MythBusted = Trash and False.


But the main issue is not doubling.

Funny you would say that in a thread whose topic was your deliberate
choice.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

"Richard Clark" wrote
...
On Fri, 15 May 2009 09:08:06 +0200, Szczepan Bia?ek
wrote:
Here is wrote that it happend:

Trash is what this reference is called. Someone's diary is not
science.

If it were not trash, it does not prove doubling. Did you actually
read it? It doesn't prove IMD either as there would be a billion
reports every day from the presence of the MegaWatt LW stations in
Europe. I don't suppose you listen to radio either?

Not all MegaWatt LW stations are the Hertz dipole. Such was in Warsow but
collapsed.

This is a ridiculous observation. However, if I were to allow it, it
thus also means that SOME MegaWatt LW stations are "the Hertz dipole,"
by your own admission (which is significantly in question as to be
authoritative because you don't really know, do you?).

If station has only one end no doubling. Even if it has two the lower must
have the same possibilities (tip top of mountain).

As SOME MegaWatt LW stations are "the Hertz dipole," it follows there
must be literally billions of examples of what you describe. And yet
you offer no personal experience, and the record is empty of others'
observations.

The others' obserwations were made in 1933 and a few next. Engineers are so
clever people that they very quickly found a remedy.

MythBusted = Trash and False.


But the main issue is not doubling.

Funny you would say that in a thread whose topic was your deliberate
choice.

Is the two: doubling and polarisation.
1. ""Over long distances, the atmosphere can cause the
polarization of a radio wave to fluctuate, so the distinction between
horizontal and vertical becomes less significant." From:
http://whatis.techtarget.com/definit...843762,00.html

2. It seems that at long distances should appear the phenomenon of frequency
doubling.

The common is "wave propagation"or more precise "are Radio Waves transverse
or longitudinal"?
What is your opinion?
S*

On Fri, 15 May 2009 19:23:44 +0200, Szczepan Bia?ek
wrote:

As SOME MegaWatt LW stations are "the Hertz dipole," it follows there
must be literally billions of examples of what you describe. And yet
you offer no personal experience, and the record is empty of others'
observations.

The others' obserwations were made in 1933

But not by you, in 2009. Are you too bored with the topic to turn on
a radio to confirm? So why do you post here?

MythBusted = Trash and False.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

"Richard Clark" wrote
...
On Fri, 15 May 2009 19:23:44 +0200, Szczepan Bia?ek
wrote:

As SOME MegaWatt LW stations are "the Hertz dipole," it follows there
must be literally billions of examples of what you describe. And yet
you offer no personal experience, and the record is empty of others'
observations.

The others' obserwations were made in 1933

But not by you, in 2009. Are you too bored with the topic to turn on
a radio to confirm?

I took a glance on my very old radio (it has the all waves) yesterday. No
possibility for doubling. All bands are arranged in such way that no
possibility.

So why do you post here?

I collect evidences that Radio Waves are longitudinal.
The harvest is huge in your Group.
S*


MythBusted = Trash and False.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
...

"Richard Clark" wrote
...
On Fri, 15 May 2009 19:23:44 +0200, Szczepan Bia?ek
wrote:

As SOME MegaWatt LW stations are "the Hertz dipole," it follows there
must be literally billions of examples of what you describe. And yet
you offer no personal experience, and the record is empty of others'
observations.

The others' obserwations were made in 1933

But not by you, in 2009. Are you too bored with the topic to turn on
a radio to confirm?

I took a glance on my very old radio (it has the all waves) yesterday. No
possibility for doubling. All bands are arranged in such way that no
possibility.

but amateur bands were initially assigned so that harmonics ended up in the
next higher band... but because transmitters generated harmonics because of
their design, not because the antennas or ionosphere created them.



So why do you post here?

I collect evidences that Radio Waves are longitudinal.
The harvest is huge in your Group.
S*

then you REALLY need to talk to art, his waves are caused by magical
levitating diamagnetic neutrinos jumping off the antenna when the current
flows in, that would fit nicely with your misguided theory.



MythBusted = Trash and False.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Sat, 16 May 2009 09:00:56 +0200, Szczepan Bia?ek
wrote:

But not by you, in 2009. Are you too bored with the topic to turn on
a radio to confirm?

I took a glance on my very old radio (it has the all waves) yesterday.

And you didn't even turn it on. Now THAT is lazy.

I collect evidences that Radio Waves are longitudinal.

You are not actually "doing" anything at all.

So why do you post here?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

"Dave" wrote
...

"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
...


I took a glance on my very old radio (it has the all waves) yesterday. No
possibility for doubling. All bands are arranged in such way that no
possibility.

but amateur bands were initially assigned so that harmonics ended up in
the next higher band... but because transmitters generated harmonics
because of their design, not because the antennas or ionosphere created
them.

Discussion with Wim: "In case of non-linear parts in a system (for example
a corroded
connector in an antenna cable that is used by two or more
transmitters, that may behave as a semiconductor), you might get so
called mixer products (sum frequencies, harmonics, difference
frequencies, etc)."

My answer was: "Harmonics may be the reason that nobody have seen the
Phenomenon."

So why do you post here?

I collect evidences that Radio Waves are longitudinal.
The harvest is huge in your Group.
S*

then you REALLY need to talk to art, his waves are caused by magical
levitating diamagnetic neutrinos jumping off the antenna when the current
flows in, that would fit nicely with your misguided theory.

It is not mine. It is by Ampere, Gauss, Weber, Helmholtz and many other
prominent scientists.
Helmholtz wrote the same equations for whirls in fluids. Maxwell admited it
in his Treatise "On line of forces".
So EM is the hydraulic analogy. Now for electrons the Gas analogy is better.
I am only a kibitzer.
S*

U¿ytkownik "Richard Clark" napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
On Sat, 16 May 2009 09:00:56 +0200, Szczepan Bia?ek
wrote:

But not by you, in 2009. Are you too bored with the topic to turn on
a radio to confirm?

I took a glance on my very old radio (it has the all waves) yesterday.

And you didn't even turn it on. Now THAT is lazy.

I collect evidences that Radio Waves are longitudinal.

You are not actually "doing" anything at all.

The most valuable was your statement: " An antenna radiates in ALL
directions from EVERYPOINT of
the antenna."
It meens for me that they are longitudinal. In ALL directions like
acoustics. From EVERYPOINT (of the end). In today's antennas before the end
are cabels in which the current oscyllates. EM waves radiate from this part
of the circuit where the current oscillate (in end no current). In the end
the electrons gathers periodically and radiate alternate electric field in
ALL directions.
Has it sense?
S*

So why do you post here?

Is another group on antennas?
S*

Szczepan Bia³ek wrote:

It is not mine. It is by Ampere, Gauss, Weber, Helmholtz and many other
prominent scientists.
Helmholtz wrote the same equations for whirls in fluids. Maxwell admited
it in his Treatise "On line of forces".
So EM is the hydraulic analogy. Now for electrons the Gas analogy is
better.
I am only a kibitzer.
S*


An appeal to long-dead authorities? Where have we seen this before? The
logic seems to be: I cherry-picked a few ideas from the masters,
therefore they all agree with me. Chased you out of the physics
newsgroup did they Bialek?
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Szczepan Bia³ek wrote:

U¿ytkownik "Richard Clark" napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci
...
On Sat, 16 May 2009 09:00:56 +0200, Szczepan Bia?ek
wrote:

But not by you, in 2009. Are you too bored with the topic to turn on
a radio to confirm?

I took a glance on my very old radio (it has the all waves) yesterday.

And you didn't even turn it on. Now THAT is lazy.

I collect evidences that Radio Waves are longitudinal.

You are not actually "doing" anything at all.

The most valuable was your statement: " An antenna radiates in ALL
directions from EVERYPOINT of
the antenna."
It meens for me that they are longitudinal. In ALL directions like
acoustics. From EVERYPOINT (of the end). In today's antennas before the
end are cabels in which the current oscyllates. EM waves radiate from
this part of the circuit where the current oscillate (in end no
current). In the end the electrons gathers periodically and radiate
alternate electric field in ALL directions.
Has it sense?
S*

So why do you post here?

Is another group on antennas?
S*

No, it hasn't sense. You need to post on the physics newsgroup where
your ideas will be appreciated by all the self-anointed geniuses who
think they understand electro-magnetics. Nothing anyone writes here is
going to convince you you're wrong. People with pet theories never give
them up. This newsgroup has become a repository for flawed physical
theories. Maybe, someday, it will get back to being a forum for hams who
just want to discuss antennas.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH