On Oct 5, 5:58*pm, K1TTT wrote:
On Oct 5, 8:16*pm, Art Unwin wrote:



On Oct 5, 2:12*pm, Owen Duffy wrote:

Art Unwin wrote in
Now you can't coat your elements with it but *if you have a solder
bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle
but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the
antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel
along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should
increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi
tho bandwidth may well suffer some what.
What do you think?

I am not sure whether you are considering coating the elements with
solder, tin, or bismuth... but they *all* degrade the RF resistance of an
aluminium element.

Nevertheless, hams are suckers for snake oil salesmen. Just look at the
products sold for antenna wire, open wire feed line and whips... so you
might have an opportunity there Art.

Owen

Hmmmm!
Isn't the idea to get current to flow on the surface
without the skin depth problem? For instance, when you make a Meander
antenna distributed loads are not existent as they cancel out. This
also means that skin depth is non existant as there is no magnetic
field. Thus there is nothing to prevent the current going beyond where
the skin depth is usually situated where it can continue on to flow on
the surface the path of least resistance.
Now the element resistance is of no concern as it is not now part of
the radiation circuit! * Instead of two resistances we only have the
one which pertains to radiation, the sole object of a radiator.
Capacitance and inductance does nothing to advance radiation, tho it
is quite useful to have in other areas of science so why fool with it?
Magnetism and polarization only comes into the picture after
propagation is initiated when particles/electrons are ejected with
helical spin and acceleration which generates various movements,
fields etc after the fact.
Remember, for both transmission and receive the only object that can
break up the parts of electrical and magnetic fields together with
time varying current is the Faraday cage, so it is useful to start
with the cage function to get a true story of radiation. A radiator is
only efficient when you can present a flow path for applied current
where the
source becomes totally resistive.
I threw Bismuth in since it is part and parcel of the superconductor
scenario. grin." Super" has many pleasant conoctations for a salesman
to use.

you see art, they just don't understand how the magical levitating
solar neutrinos will jump from the diamagnetic bismuth much more
efficiently than from aluminum... and they never will understand until
you can explain how my ferromagnetic vertical antennas that obviously
can't support a coating of your magical levitating solar neutrinos
could possibly work at all.

Ferromagnetic materials will work but the diamagnetic vectors get a
bit swamped in competition. Any good physics book will explain that
phenomina or alternatively look up wilkpedia.
Didn't you once state that physics was your major?
Your statements appears to put that as a matter of fiction. Why not
explain radiation from your point of view? You can have your posting
removed after a given time in case you embarrase yourself. Tom where
did all these weirdoes come from ?

On Oct 6, 12:04*am, Art Unwin wrote:
On Oct 5, 5:58*pm, K1TTT wrote:



On Oct 5, 8:16*pm, Art Unwin wrote:

On Oct 5, 2:12*pm, Owen Duffy wrote:

Art Unwin wrote in
Now you can't coat your elements with it but *if you have a solder
bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle
but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the
antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel
along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should
increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi
tho bandwidth may well suffer some what.
What do you think?

I am not sure whether you are considering coating the elements with
solder, tin, or bismuth... but they *all* degrade the RF resistance of an
aluminium element.

Nevertheless, hams are suckers for snake oil salesmen. Just look at the
products sold for antenna wire, open wire feed line and whips... so you
might have an opportunity there Art.

Owen

Hmmmm!
Isn't the idea to get current to flow on the surface
without the skin depth problem? For instance, when you make a Meander
antenna distributed loads are not existent as they cancel out. This
also means that skin depth is non existant as there is no magnetic
field. Thus there is nothing to prevent the current going beyond where
the skin depth is usually situated where it can continue on to flow on
the surface the path of least resistance.
Now the element resistance is of no concern as it is not now part of
the radiation circuit! * Instead of two resistances we only have the
one which pertains to radiation, the sole object of a radiator.
Capacitance and inductance does nothing to advance radiation, tho it
is quite useful to have in other areas of science so why fool with it?
Magnetism and polarization only comes into the picture after
propagation is initiated when particles/electrons are ejected with
helical spin and acceleration which generates various movements,
fields etc after the fact.
Remember, for both transmission and receive the only object that can
break up the parts of electrical and magnetic fields together with
time varying current is the Faraday cage, so it is useful to start
with the cage function to get a true story of radiation. A radiator is
only efficient when you can present a flow path for applied current
where the
source becomes totally resistive.
I threw Bismuth in since it is part and parcel of the superconductor
scenario. grin." Super" has many pleasant conoctations for a salesman
to use.

you see art, they just don't understand how the magical levitating
solar neutrinos will jump from the diamagnetic bismuth much more
efficiently than from aluminum... and they never will understand until
you can explain how my ferromagnetic vertical antennas that obviously
can't support a coating of your magical levitating solar neutrinos
could possibly work at all.

Ferromagnetic materials will work but the diamagnetic vectors get a
bit swamped in competition. Any good physics book will explain that
phenomina or alternatively look up wilkpedia.
Didn't you once state that physics was your major?
Your statements appears to put that as a matter of fiction. Why not
explain radiation from your point of view? You can have your posting
removed after a given time in case you embarrase yourself. *Tom where
did all these weirdoes come from ?

no, i'm an ee, not a scientist... my company wanted to change my title
to scientist once, i told them only if i could put 'mad' in front of
it and they let me keep the engineer title. I have to go with the
writings of the masters as mr. b would put it, except i got with the
final set of maxwell's equations as published in books like jackson
and other contemporary writers... which, by the way, do explain that
gauss'es law is a part of maxwell's equations and is a dynamic
equation even without the explicit 't' in it.

On Oct 5, 7:04*pm, tom wrote:
On 10/5/2010 10:06 AM, Jim Higgins wrote:

On Mon, 4 Oct 2010 19:31:38 -0700 (PDT), Art Unwin
*wrote:

Antennas usually are made of aluminum as copper is somewhat heavier
and silver and gold is to expensive. Since lead is now banned in a lot
of places especially with solder you can now buy solder that is doped
with Bismuth !
Now you can't coat your elements with it but *if you have a solder
bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle
but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the
antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel
along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should
increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi
tho bandwidth may well suffer some what.
What do you think?

As we all know, you are CLUELESS! *And you never check underlying facts..
* Never. *Ever.



I think the RF current flowing thru the crystallized bismuth will
result in the Peltier occurring and will cause the outer ends of the
elements to become very cold and the inner ends to become very hot and
that the heat will soften the inner portions and the cold will cause
heavy icing on the outer portions weighing them down considerably, the
combination resulting in the elements bending and destroying the
antenna.

`
As the Brothers Guinness said in their famous television ads - "BRILLIANT!!"

tom
K0TAR

Tom, you like many others, feel that your postings are like a private
E mail, but it is not. Your writings
and past postings are available for all to see and judge what sort of
person you are. You continually embarrase yourself. I invite all to
view your past postings to see what manner of man you really are.
As for the Peltier effect that you are referring to, it is you who
needs to check the facts as to who posted that. It certainly was not
I. But if you have the real facts then spit it out to show that you
know them and can prove it, until then you are spitting into the wind.
So Tom back to you. What are the "real" facts that you wish to point
to and be specific with respect to the connecting physics for
supporting data? You may have a open physics book at your side when
responding so you can read up on diamagnetic, levitation, neutrons etc
since it is very clear that you were able to jump semesters at will
leaving large holes in your educational standing which does not allow
you to debate in a reasonable fashion.
OR
You can continue with verbal bullying without
contribution or follow up discussion with other members of the group.

On Oct 5, 7:39*pm, K1TTT wrote:
On Oct 6, 12:04*am, Art Unwin wrote:



On Oct 5, 5:58*pm, K1TTT wrote:

On Oct 5, 8:16*pm, Art Unwin wrote:

On Oct 5, 2:12*pm, Owen Duffy wrote:

Art Unwin wrote in
Now you can't coat your elements with it but *if you have a solder
bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle
but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the
antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel
along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should
increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi
tho bandwidth may well suffer some what.
What do you think?

I am not sure whether you are considering coating the elements with
solder, tin, or bismuth... but they *all* degrade the RF resistance of an
aluminium element.

Nevertheless, hams are suckers for snake oil salesmen. Just look at the
products sold for antenna wire, open wire feed line and whips... so you
might have an opportunity there Art.

Owen

Hmmmm!
Isn't the idea to get current to flow on the surface
without the skin depth problem? For instance, when you make a Meander
antenna distributed loads are not existent as they cancel out. This
also means that skin depth is non existant as there is no magnetic
field. Thus there is nothing to prevent the current going beyond where
the skin depth is usually situated where it can continue on to flow on
the surface the path of least resistance.
Now the element resistance is of no concern as it is not now part of
the radiation circuit! * Instead of two resistances we only have the
one which pertains to radiation, the sole object of a radiator.
Capacitance and inductance does nothing to advance radiation, tho it
is quite useful to have in other areas of science so why fool with it?
Magnetism and polarization only comes into the picture after
propagation is initiated when particles/electrons are ejected with
helical spin and acceleration which generates various movements,
fields etc after the fact.
Remember, for both transmission and receive the only object that can
break up the parts of electrical and magnetic fields together with
time varying current is the Faraday cage, so it is useful to start
with the cage function to get a true story of radiation. A radiator is
only efficient when you can present a flow path for applied current
where the
source becomes totally resistive.
I threw Bismuth in since it is part and parcel of the superconductor
scenario. grin." Super" has many pleasant conoctations for a salesman
to use.

you see art, they just don't understand how the magical levitating
solar neutrinos will jump from the diamagnetic bismuth much more
efficiently than from aluminum... and they never will understand until
you can explain how my ferromagnetic vertical antennas that obviously
can't support a coating of your magical levitating solar neutrinos
could possibly work at all.

Ferromagnetic materials will work but the diamagnetic vectors get a
bit swamped in competition. Any good physics book will explain that
phenomina or alternatively look up wilkpedia.
Didn't you once state that physics was your major?
Your statements appears to put that as a matter of fiction. Why not
explain radiation from your point of view? You can have your posting
removed after a given time in case you embarrase yourself. *Tom where
did all these weirdoes come from ?

no, i'm an ee, not a scientist... my company wanted to change my title
to scientist once, i told them only if i could put 'mad' in front of
it and they let me keep the engineer title. *I have to go with the
writings of the masters as mr. b would put it, except i got with the
final set of maxwell's equations as published in books like jackson
and other contemporary writers... which, by the way, do explain that
gauss's law is a part of maxwell's equations and is a dynamic
equation even without the explicit 't' in it.

So what is your point exactly? Are you holding on to
radiation by "waves" instead of "particles" or what?
What is the specific relevant law of Gauss that you are referring to?
Show me specifically what Jackson states so I can get a handle on the
specific problem in question. I have no idea what is troubling you
whether it be levitation which you call "magical", "Neutrinos" which
occupy every cubic metre in the atmosphere on Earth. Or, the "double
slot" experiment which opposes a particular law of Gauss. Spit it out
specifically and I and the rest of the group can then discuss it. As
an aside, Gauss's work is in the form of cgs units which are not the
same as Maxwell's units so you have to be careful as how you explain
"this matches that" in your response when and if it comes up.
Regards
Art

On 10/5/2010 8:07 PM, Art Unwin wrote:
On Oct 5, 7:04 pm, wrote:
On 10/5/2010 10:06 AM, Jim Higgins wrote:
I think the RF current flowing thru the crystallized bismuth will
result in the Peltier occurring and will cause the outer ends of the
elements to become very cold and the inner ends to become very hot and
that the heat will soften the inner portions and the cold will cause
heavy icing on the outer portions weighing them down considerably, the
combination resulting in the elements bending and destroying the
antenna.

`
As the Brothers Guinness said in their famous television ads - "BRILLIANT!!"

tom
K0TAR

Tom, you like many others, feel that your postings are like a private
E mail, but it is not. Your writings
and past postings are available for all to see and judge what sort of
person you are. You continually embarrase yourself. I invite all to
view your past postings to see what manner of man you really are.
As for the Peltier effect that you are referring to, it is you who
needs to check the facts as to who posted that. It certainly was not
I. But if you have the real facts then spit it out to show that you
know them and can prove it, until then you are spitting into the wind.
So Tom back to you. What are the "real" facts that you wish to point
to and be specific with respect to the connecting physics for
supporting data? You may have a open physics book at your side when
responding so you can read up on diamagnetic, levitation, neutrons etc
since it is very clear that you were able to jump semesters at will
leaving large holes in your educational standing which does not allow
you to debate in a reasonable fashion.
OR
You can continue with verbal bullying without
contribution or follow up discussion with other members of the group.

Anyone reading can see you responded, mostly anyway, to Jim, not to me,
although I can guess that your feelings are pointed my way regardless.

Such is life to be tilted at by a Quixote pretender.

tom
K0TAR

On Oct 5, 8:39*pm, Art Unwin wrote:
On Oct 5, 7:39*pm, K1TTT wrote:



On Oct 6, 12:04*am, Art Unwin wrote:

On Oct 5, 5:58*pm, K1TTT wrote:

On Oct 5, 8:16*pm, Art Unwin wrote:

On Oct 5, 2:12*pm, Owen Duffy wrote:

Art Unwin wrote in
Now you can't coat your elements with it but *if you have a solder
bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle
but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the
antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel
along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should
increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi
tho bandwidth may well suffer some what.
What do you think?

I am not sure whether you are considering coating the elements with
solder, tin, or bismuth... but they *all* degrade the RF resistance of an
aluminium element.

Nevertheless, hams are suckers for snake oil salesmen. Just look at the
products sold for antenna wire, open wire feed line and whips.... so you
might have an opportunity there Art.

Owen

Hmmmm!
Isn't the idea to get current to flow on the surface
without the skin depth problem? For instance, when you make a Meander
antenna distributed loads are not existent as they cancel out. This
also means that skin depth is non existant as there is no magnetic
field. Thus there is nothing to prevent the current going beyond where
the skin depth is usually situated where it can continue on to flow on
the surface the path of least resistance.
Now the element resistance is of no concern as it is not now part of
the radiation circuit! * Instead of two resistances we only have the
one which pertains to radiation, the sole object of a radiator.
Capacitance and inductance does nothing to advance radiation, tho it
is quite useful to have in other areas of science so why fool with it?
Magnetism and polarization only comes into the picture after
propagation is initiated when particles/electrons are ejected with
helical spin and acceleration which generates various movements,
fields etc after the fact.
Remember, for both transmission and receive the only object that can
break up the parts of electrical and magnetic fields together with
time varying current is the Faraday cage, so it is useful to start
with the cage function to get a true story of radiation. A radiator is
only efficient when you can present a flow path for applied current
where the
source becomes totally resistive.
I threw Bismuth in since it is part and parcel of the superconductor
scenario. grin." Super" has many pleasant conoctations for a salesman
to use.

you see art, they just don't understand how the magical levitating
solar neutrinos will jump from the diamagnetic bismuth much more
efficiently than from aluminum... and they never will understand until
you can explain how my ferromagnetic vertical antennas that obviously
can't support a coating of your magical levitating solar neutrinos
could possibly work at all.

Ferromagnetic materials will work but the diamagnetic vectors get a
bit swamped in competition. Any good physics book will explain that
phenomina or alternatively look up wilkpedia.
Didn't you once state that physics was your major?
Your statements appears to put that as a matter of fiction. Why not
explain radiation from your point of view? You can have your posting
removed after a given time in case you embarrase yourself. *Tom where
did all these weirdoes come from ?

no, i'm an ee, not a scientist... my company wanted to change my title
to scientist once, i told them only if i could put 'mad' in front of
it and they let me keep the engineer title. *I have to go with the
writings of the masters as mr. b would put it, except i got with the
final set of maxwell's equations as published in books like jackson
and other contemporary writers... which, by the way, do explain that
gauss's law is a part of maxwell's equations and is a dynamic
equation even without the explicit 't' in it.

So what is your point exactly? Are you holding on to
radiation by "waves" instead of "particles" or what?
What is the specific relevant law of Gauss that you are referring to?
Show me specifically what Jackson states so I can get a handle on the
specific problem in question. I have no idea what is troubling you
whether it be levitation which you call "magical", "Neutrinos" which
occupy every cubic metre in the atmosphere on Earth. Or, the "double
slot" experiment which opposes a particular law of Gauss. Spit it out
specifically and I and the rest of the group can then discuss it. As
an aside, Gauss's work is in the form of cgs units which are not the
same as Maxwell's units so you have to be careful as how you explain
"this matches that" in your response when and if it comes up.
Regards
Art

With respect to the works of the Masters which one could include the
books by Jackson and others.
They all state that Gauss;'s law on MAGNETISM
was included in Maxwell's laws or equations on radiation. I know of no
text book that outlines the connection between ":statics" and the
equations of Maxwell. A debate was held on this forum on the
connection between statics and Maxwell which was held in denial by
all. After a year or so the statement was made that" the Jackson book
outlined the connection between Gauss and Maxwell" so the connection
of statics was wrongly connected to the Gaussian law on" magnetics"
and not his laws on "statics.".
The boundary laws of Maxwell which is the basis
of all of his equations are also those of statics which, when made
dynamic, are the one and the same equation arrived at by Maxwell . I
know of no mention in any book on radiation that equates as fact that
classical physics mathematically supports the position of particles as
the root of propagation which is in agreement with Einsteins laws on
Relativity. Point being that mass is required for "acceleration of
charge" as with particles./ electrons
and to my knowledge has not been stated as the Gaussian connection to
Maxwell..... anywhere!
I would appreciate it if you or anybody can point to where I am in
error and where your position can be determined as credible.
Regards
Art.

On Oct 4, 9:31*pm, Art Unwin wrote:

What do you think?

It's quite well known that the best antennas are built from zircon
encrusted wire, which is trimmed using only zircon encrusted
tweezers.
If you can look at the wire ends on a sunny day and can see
noticeable tweezer glint, you know you have a world class
antenna system worthy of the masters praise and endorsement.

On 10/5/2010 9:35 PM, wrote:

...
It's quite well known that the best antennas are built from zircon
encrusted wire, which is trimmed using only zircon encrusted
tweezers.
If you can look at the wire ends on a sunny day and can see
noticeable tweezer glint, you know you have a world class
antenna system worthy of the masters praise and endorsement.

WOW! Another one of those which you always wondered about, but were too
ashamed to ask about. I just knew there were others like me who must
have wondered about it. Now that you have just tossed it out like so
much fact ... I realize I was silly not to have asked.

We are much better off for having had you share that with the group.

Many thanks,
JS :-)

"Art Unwin" wrote
...



So what is your point exactly? Are you holding on to
radiation by "waves" instead of "particles" or what?

In reality are the continuous flow and the oscillatory flow. Flow of the
particles. The oscillatry flow is the wave.
In the ink printer works the oscillatory flow. In antennas and the space
also.

With respect to the works of the Masters which one could include the
books by Jackson and others.
They all state that Gauss;'s law on MAGNETISM
was included in Maxwell's laws or equations on radiation. I know of no
text book that outlines the connection between ":statics" and the
equations of Maxwell. A debate was held on this forum on the
connection between statics and Maxwell which was held in denial by
all. After a year or so the statement was made that" the Jackson book
outlined the connection between Gauss and Maxwell" so the connection
of statics was wrongly connected to the Gaussian law on" magnetics"
and not his laws on "statics.".
The boundary laws of Maxwell which is the basis
of all of his equations are also those of statics which, when made
dynamic, are the one and the same equation arrived at by Maxwell . I
know of no mention in any book on radiation that equates as fact that
classical physics mathematically supports the position of particles as
the root of propagation which is in agreement with Einsteins laws on
Relativity. Point being that mass is required for "acceleration of
charge" as with particles./ electrons
and to my knowledge has not been stated as the Gaussian connection to
Maxwell..... anywhere!
I would appreciate it if you or anybody can point to where I am in
error and where your position can be determined as credible.

"Maxwell equations" have nothing common with Maxwell.
http://www.ivorcatt.com/2810.htm

"Heaviside said that mathematics was an experimental science. He organised
Maxwell's mathematical work into the four equations which we now call
"Maxwell's Equations".
S*

On Oct 4, 10:31*pm, Art Unwin wrote:
Antennas usually are made of aluminum as copper is somewhat heavier
and silver and gold is to expensive. Since lead is now banned in a lot
of places especially with solder you can now buy solder that is doped
with Bismuth !
Now you can't coat your elements with it but *if you have a solder
bath you can run copper wire thru it. The bismuth is brittle
but with the underlying copper it is stiff enough to stick it on the
antenna elements. I am assuming that the applied current would travel
along the bismuth coating instead of the aluminum and therefore should
increase gain for antennas that use coupling methods such as the Yagi
tho bandwidth may well suffer some what.
What do you think?

Obviously a reduction in IR losses will improve any antenna. Art how
much do you thing making an antenna out of silver instead of aluminum
would reduce the IR losses.
Jimmie