On Dec 4, 9:23*am, K1TTT wrote:
On Dec 4, 1:02*am, Art Unwin wrote:



On Dec 3, 4:22*pm, K1TTT wrote:

On Dec 3, 2:46*pm, Art Unwin wrote:

On Dec 3, 5:57*am, "J.B. Wood" wrote:

On 12/02/2010 11:44 PM, Art Unwin wrote:
* What happens after the magnetic field is saturated is excess energy

then goes to increase the electric field which is enclosed inside a
shield or Faraday cage for maximum density which produces two vectors
equal to the two vectors created by gravity and spin as shown with the
tipped vertical. These vectors arise fro a diamagnetic condition when
the electrical field achieves satuaration or maximum density with a
Farady shield.
The importance of these two vectors is that we have the displacement
vector which elevates particles or electrons at rest on the coil
wire,.
It is this vector which is equal and opposite to gravity that allows
for ":straight line trajectory" of the negatively charged particle
such that the other vector is free from constriction in all forms
which is synonomous to equilibrium.
Thus a solenoid can be seen as a radiator according to Maxwell where
the magnetic vector is canceled for maximum efficiency.
This also shows that the previous two element design where both
elements are resonant within a boundary which must be included as a
shield around the two element array for maximum efficiency.
I find it completely fascinating that the two vectors I propose as
Einstein's predicted version of the Standard Model turns up once again
in this solenoid version of a radiator within a Faraday cage to which
a horn is easily added.
So this thread now comes to closure
Regards
Art

Art,

Shirley, you can't be serious! (with apologies to the late, great Leslie
Nielsen). *Sincerely, and 73s from N4GGO,
--
John Wood (Code 5520) * * * *e-mail:

Naval Research Laboratory
4555 Overlook Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20375-5337

Yes, I am very serious about my findings. I am very sorry that others
are unable to follow my same path to obtain the same joys of
discovery.
For some reason people cannot fathom the idea of equilibrium and that
displacement current provides the equal of the gravity vector.
There is no way a charge can travel in a straight line up to the
heavens and down again
without the neutralisation of gravity and without the auspices of
spin . The same goes with respect to light *according to the Zeeman
effect
Regards
Art

keep dreaming art... neither air nor aether can saturate or we would
have many other weird phenomena than your antennas.

I am not dreaming! The magnetic field increases density until it
reaches a maximum.
The curve of B vs H clearly shows this in a similar curve to Hooke's
Law for strength of materials. At the point of saturation the value of
B comes to a halt and where H takes off and increases rapidly. I would
imagine that if you searched the web under saturation magnetic fields
or some other similar key words you will eventually find verification
of what I have described. You might want to search under diamagnetic
because you eventually come to the point where diamagnetic field
predominates which puts you in the same position of superconductor
where skin resistance is removed. I am extremely surprised that as a
electrical engineer you never covered magnetics in depth. If you find
verification on the absence of saturation in magnetic fields I will be
more than happy to apologize for my lax memory of my early days. Up to
now tho, you have never produced evidence or any reasoning to back up
your comments or status as an electrical engineer, scientist or what
have you!. Was it ever explained to you that levitation
by fields is exactly equal in direction and value
to gravity? How do you explain to amateurs how "straight line
trajectory" is attained when explaining skip or are you going to deny
that also? I look forward to reading your back up
research statements that support your positions.
Regards
Art

you are looking at curves for ferromagnetic materials that do have a
saturation level... the point where all the magnetic dipoles in the
material are lined up. *for your quick browsing enjoyment:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturat...saturation.htm
at least one of those specifically states that air core magnets do not
saturate.

You are correct about the existance of the statement regarding
saturation of air but that is playing on words comparing the very
least of
return for power applied versus a ferrite enclosed in a pocket of air.
Now we have a situation that infers that it is when a ferrite attaines
saturation then excess flux is retained by air such that force has
made a transition from its previously linear form. But the fact is
that the electric field also drops such that regardless of the
increased size of the coil the flux containment of air is now dropping
from the maximum point attained and cannot exceed that point. Now you
can make the point that this is not truely a point of saturation
because of the increasing flux requirement for minimum retainment but
the real world shows that when the maximum point is reached, that
point cannot be retained.
Interesting subject., thanks for your interest
Regards
Art

Hi ...

I am let to chime in, but I would really like to take part in the
discussions.

Aurthur, I am a student of physics. The way I understand the situation
is as follows:

There is no charge moving. In practice, nothing is moving. an EM
(strictly E) field is created, into which power is distributed. So if
you pump more power after some saturation, the medium will breakdown to
provide an alternative mode of transport, i.e. direct conduction in this
case


Therefore i would appreciate if you elaborate what you mean by
trajectory of the charge.

s


In article a32a883e-14d3-49f3-a8f9-
,
says...

I have been struggling with this for some time
so maybe somebody can set me straight.
We wind a flat plate spiral antenna and we get to a point where the
center medium becomes saturated with flux.
Now I add even more coils. What action does that precipitate? I would
like to think that the Meissner effect ( perfect diamagnetism) then
takes over and swamps the external magnetic field as with a
superconductor ( ie opposite to that of a paramagnetic) The skin
effect is thus removed allowing the current flow to the surface by
allowing the atomic structure to relax, and add to the current already
in place to allow fully efficient radiation as it now lies outside the
confines of conductor resistance.
This is my effort in determining what is it that drives the constant
impedance attributes of a meander type array?
Regards
Art

On Dec 5, 12:51*pm, Sean Con wrote:
Hi ...
SNIP


Hi Sean
Re acceleration of charge.
First I have little training in physics so I am not pre programmed. I
am an old retired mechanical engineer
Stating facts as I see them.

Adding time variant to a Gaussian field results in Maxwell equation
for radiation establishing a particle as a carrier of charge. Solar
particles are attracted to diamagnetic surfaces which are also used
for radiators.
Only one resistance reflects energy supplied to a charge. the other
resistance of skin depth is a loss.When a external magnetic field is
removed from a radiator so is skin depth and current flows on the
surface. For Maximum efficiency the particle must be raised for
friction reasons and a displacement current does just that. Now a
Faraday cage I see as a separation
of fields imposed on a particle,The magnetic portion stays on the
outside of the shield and the electric field alignes itself on the
inside
cancels leaving only AC current , a reverse of radiation transmission
For a solenoid we have all the above features, A Faraday shield around
a radiator. The radiator is a Meander form and resistive or non
frequency relevant. Now the radiator is energized for transmission B
reaches saturation
energy transferred to H until the coil becomes diamagnetic. The
displacement current raises resting particle neutralizing gravity and
is in equilibrium.All energy applied to the particle is now equal to
acceleration of charge for maximum efficiency such that the thrust and
spin allows for straight line trajectory. All the above can be seen
from superconductor reaction equivilency. The two vectors of thrust
and helical spin applied to the particle are Newtons reaction to
Earth's position in the Universe and reflected by the two vectors of a
time variant current which is also the same as
a boundary break to release a particle from a Gaussian field during
the Big Bang and the basic forces envisaged by Einstein for the
Standard Model ala the twisted ladder of life itself.
Regards
Art xg

On Dec 5, 1:52*pm, Art Unwin wrote:
On Dec 5, 12:51*pm, Sean Con wrote:

Hi ...
SNIP

Hi Sean
Re acceleration of charge.
First I have little training in physics so I am not pre programmed. I
am an old retired mechanical engineer
Stating facts as I see them.

Adding time variant to a Gaussian field results in Maxwell equation
for radiation establishing a particle as a carrier of charge. Solar
particles are attracted to diamagnetic surfaces which are also used
for radiators.
Only one resistance reflects energy supplied to a charge. the other
resistance of skin depth is a loss.When a external magnetic field is
removed from a radiator so is skin depth and current flows on the
surface. For Maximum efficiency the particle must be raised for
friction reasons and a displacement current does just that. Now a
Faraday cage I see as a separation
of fields imposed on a particle,The magnetic portion stays on the
outside of the shield and the electric field alignes itself on the
inside
cancels leaving only AC current , a reverse of radiation transmission
For a solenoid we have all the above features, A Faraday shield around
a radiator. The radiator is a Meander form and resistive or non
frequency relevant. Now the radiator is energized for transmission B
reaches saturation
energy transferred to H until the coil becomes diamagnetic. The
displacement current raises resting particle neutralizing gravity and
is in equilibrium.All energy applied to the particle is now equal to
acceleration of charge for maximum efficiency such that the thrust and
spin allows for straight line trajectory. All the above can be seen
from superconductor reaction equivilency. The two vectors of thrust
and helical spin applied to the particle are Newtons reaction to
Earth's position in the Universe and reflected by the two vectors of a
time variant current which is also the same as
a boundary break to release a particle from a Gaussian field during
the Big Bang and the basic forces envisaged by Einstein for the
Standard Model ala the twisted ladder of life itself.
Regards
Art *xg

Searn
It has taken me several years to convince some
of the transition from electrostatics of Gauss to the Mathematics of
Maxwell to establish particles instead of waves., Probably the cgs
units create confusion. I would have liked to start from the "double
slit" experiment which has created a monkey fist stuck in a jar. If
only people could step back from a stubborn position
it would be an easy transfer of thought from a double slit experiment
to one of a array of slot antennas to get things back on track. The
last few years has taught me that many see passing the amateur radio
exam as a passport equivalent into the society of physics and the
protector of printed books of the ARRL so I am clearly outnumbered
with respect to the resistance to change.

On 12/5/2010 3:01 PM, Art Unwin wrote:
On Dec 5, 1:52 pm, Art wrote:
On Dec 5, 12:51 pm, Sean wrote:

Hi ...
SNIP

Hi Sean
Re acceleration of charge.
First I have little training in physics so I am not pre programmed. I
am an old retired mechanical engineer
Stating facts as I see them.

Adding time variant to a Gaussian field results in Maxwell equation
for radiation establishing a particle as a carrier of charge. Solar
particles are attracted to diamagnetic surfaces which are also used
for radiators.
Only one resistance reflects energy supplied to a charge. the other
resistance of skin depth is a loss.When a external magnetic field is
removed from a radiator so is skin depth and current flows on the
surface. For Maximum efficiency the particle must be raised for
friction reasons and a displacement current does just that. Now a
Faraday cage I see as a separation
of fields imposed on a particle,The magnetic portion stays on the
outside of the shield and the electric field alignes itself on the
inside
cancels leaving only AC current , a reverse of radiation transmission
For a solenoid we have all the above features, A Faraday shield around
a radiator. The radiator is a Meander form and resistive or non
frequency relevant. Now the radiator is energized for transmission B
reaches saturation
energy transferred to H until the coil becomes diamagnetic. The
displacement current raises resting particle neutralizing gravity and
is in equilibrium.All energy applied to the particle is now equal to
acceleration of charge for maximum efficiency such that the thrust and
spin allows for straight line trajectory. All the above can be seen
from superconductor reaction equivilency. The two vectors of thrust
and helical spin applied to the particle are Newtons reaction to
Earth's position in the Universe and reflected by the two vectors of a
time variant current which is also the same as
a boundary break to release a particle from a Gaussian field during
the Big Bang and the basic forces envisaged by Einstein for the
Standard Model ala the twisted ladder of life itself.
Regards
Art xg

Searn
It has taken me several years to convince some
of the transition from electrostatics of Gauss to the Mathematics of
Maxwell to establish particles instead of waves., Probably the cgs
units create confusion. I would have liked to start from the "double
slit" experiment which has created a monkey fist stuck in a jar. If
only people could step back from a stubborn position
it would be an easy transfer of thought from a double slit experiment
to one of a array of slot antennas to get things back on track. The
last few years has taught me that many see passing the amateur radio
exam as a passport equivalent into the society of physics and the
protector of printed books of the ARRL so I am clearly outnumbered
with respect to the resistance to change.

Sean

Amusing isn't he? He's written thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of
line of this, none exactly the same.

If you want to start a "discussion" with him it will never end unless he
says it does, and often not then.

73
tom
K0TAR

On Dec 5, 9:05*pm, tom wrote:
On 12/5/2010 3:01 PM, Art Unwin wrote:



On Dec 5, 1:52 pm, Art *wrote:
On Dec 5, 12:51 pm, Sean *wrote:

Hi ...
SNIP

Hi Sean
Re acceleration of charge.
First I have little training in physics so I am not pre programmed. I
am an old retired mechanical engineer
Stating facts as I see them.

Adding time variant to a Gaussian field results in Maxwell equation
for radiation establishing a particle as a carrier of charge. Solar
particles are attracted to diamagnetic surfaces which are also used
for radiators.
Only one resistance reflects energy supplied to a charge. the other
resistance of skin depth is a loss.When a external magnetic field is
removed from a radiator so is skin depth and current flows on the
surface. For Maximum efficiency the particle must be raised for
friction reasons and a displacement current does just that. Now a
Faraday cage I see as a separation
of fields imposed on a particle,The magnetic portion stays on the
outside of the shield and the electric field alignes itself on the
inside
cancels leaving only AC current , a reverse of radiation transmission
For a solenoid we have all the above features, A Faraday shield around
a radiator. The radiator is a Meander form and resistive or non
frequency relevant. Now the radiator is energized for transmission B
reaches saturation
energy transferred to H until the coil becomes diamagnetic. The
displacement current raises resting particle neutralizing gravity and
is in equilibrium.All energy applied to the particle is now equal to
acceleration of charge for maximum efficiency such that the thrust and
spin allows for straight line trajectory. All the above can be seen
from superconductor reaction equivilency. The two vectors of thrust
and helical spin applied to the particle are Newtons reaction to
Earth's position in the Universe and reflected by the two vectors of a
time variant current which is also the same as
a boundary break to release a particle from a Gaussian field during
the Big Bang and the basic forces envisaged by Einstein for the
Standard Model ala the twisted ladder of life itself.
Regards
Art *xg

Searn
It has taken me several years to convince some
of the transition from electrostatics of Gauss to the Mathematics of
Maxwell to establish particles instead of waves., Probably the cgs
units create confusion. I would have liked to start from the "double
slit" experiment which has created a monkey fist stuck in a jar. If
only people could step back from a stubborn position
it would be an easy transfer of thought from a double slit experiment
to one of a array of slot antennas to get things back on track. The
last few years has taught me that many see passing the amateur radio
exam as a passport equivalent into the society of physics and the
protector of printed books of the ARRL so I am clearly outnumbered
with respect to the resistance to change.

Sean

Amusing isn't he? *He's written thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of
line of this, none exactly the same.

If you want to start a "discussion" with him it will never end unless he
says it does, and often not then.

73
tom
K0TAR

Probably just a lonely old fart, could be any of us in a few years.
Sounds like some of us are already getting there.I knew a guy that
worked with him, said he was pretty sharp back in the day.

Jimmie

the displacement current raises resting particle neutralizing gravity
and
is in equilibrium.


Ok every one ..

the gausian field does result in maxwells equation. thats right.
solar particles are attracted to diamagnetic surfaces ... I dont
understand this. they have magnetic field lines frozen to them, if the
temperature is below some critical value, and are attracked bz other
magnetic field lines. thats a big story from MHD

some resistance leads to energy loss .. probably energy is being
converted to heat, not loss.

Current flows to a radiator skin --- farady said it should be so --
charge must move to outer surface

for maximum efficiency particles must be raised due to friction
reasons.. most likely not.
they dont feel friction, but the do encounter collisions, and the emf is
supplied to overcome the unwanted energy conversion during collisions.
They probably do not raise at surface because of efficiency issues, most
likely, as much as I know, they leave surface because ot surface is full
of electrons supplied from the electrode by the emf.

and the raising probably do not neutralize gravity, the field is putting
a larger force than gravity on those particles.

I can imagine gravity being turned off, but for that i would expect the
force to arise from a mass field, or something which has no component
along gravity. Art, how do you be sure that this force is "turning off"
or neutralizing gravity, and not just "working against gravity"



regards
s

On Wed, 8 Dec 2010 20:52:21 +0100, Sean Con
wrote:

It is difficult to separate the report from the reporter here (if, in
fact, such a distinction exists):

some resistance leads to energy loss .. probably energy is being
converted to heat, not loss.

Heat is not loss if heat is your objective. This is a curious
objective in light of the topics discussed here.

for maximum efficiency particles must be raised due to friction
reasons.. most likely not.

Must be...likely not. This is a curious self-annulment of a
statement. Basically it erases itself as a concept. One has to
wonder why bandwidth was expended in its expression.

they dont feel friction, but the do encounter collisions,

Particles "feel?" Well, if we were to descend to anthropomorphizing
inanimate objects, then what would friction feel like but one bumping
into another? Again, a curious self-annulling statement and more
wasted bandwidth.

and the emf is
supplied to overcome the unwanted energy conversion during collisions.

"Unwanted?" Putting that "feeling" (now psychological) aside, we now
have spontaneous energy (emf) springing out of the void? A cure for
entropy has been discovered.

They probably do not raise at surface because of efficiency issues,

Efficiency has now become an actor ("because of")?

most
likely, as much as I know, they leave surface because ot surface is full
of electrons supplied from the electrode by the emf.

Ah, the source of emf! Well, that being said (and I am not sure that
saying it is enough), how much emf is required to accomplish this feat
of leaving the surface?

and the raising probably do not neutralize gravity, the field is putting
a larger force than gravity on those particles.

I can imagine gravity being turned off, but for that i would expect the
force to arise from a mass field, or something which has no component
along gravity. Art, how do you be sure that this force is "turning off"
or neutralizing gravity, and not just "working against gravity"

Asking for explanations is not nearly as useful, or even productive,
as asking for solutions. As with my question above about "How much
emf?", the solution to that is a number with units of measure. If the
number is unsuitable for a solution, no amount of explanation will
replace that. If no number is offered, there is no explanation.

Words may be written, but they amount to fantasy only. Only the
patent office will publish fantasy that conventional publishing would
discard.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Dec 8, 1:52*pm, Sean Con wrote:
the displacement current raises resting particle neutralizing gravity
and
is in equilibrium.

Ok every one ..

the gausian field does result in maxwells equation. thats right.
VG
solar particles are attracted to diamagnetic surfaces ... I dont
VG
understand this. they have magnetic field lines frozen to them, if the
temperature is below some critical value, and are attracked bz other
magnetic field lines. thats a big story from MHD
Temperature is not involved. They form a skin
or boundary with hoop stress



some resistance leads to energy loss .. probably energy is being
converted to heat, not loss.
No energy conversion, they are at rest.


Current flows to a radiator skin --- farady said it should be so --
charge must move to outer surface

Excellent

for maximum efficiency particles must be raised due to friction
reasons.. most likely not.
they dont feel friction,
They must be placed in equilibrium otherwise you have a peeling action
that is a loss.
Now we have a single action and a equal reaction in place with no
losses.


but the do encounter collisions, and the emf is
supplied to overcome the unwanted energy conversion during collisions. *
Apparently particles in flight have a repelling force between them.
Either way the two vectors of current and displacement is applied
to the particle.
Now this particle does not take off with a parabolic curve and fall to
the ground because of gravity. The particle travels in a straight
line.
The two vectors applied to the particle are equal and opposite to
Gravity and the rotation of the Earth


They probably do not raise at surface because of efficiency issues, most
likely, as much as I know, they leave surface because ot surface is full
of electrons supplied from the electrode by the emf.
The electrons at rest are free electrons and are not part of the
substance or mass upon which they rest. An example is the skin upon
water which itself is a diamagnetic material. Place a magnet near the
skin and it will repel or bend the skin surface.

and the raising probably do not neutralize gravity, the field is putting.
The problem here is the word neutralize. Gravity enforces itself with
a vector that provides certain phenomina such as dragging a particle
to the ground. If one renders that vector neutral by an equal and
opposite force
then our little particle carrying a charge is not affect by gravity
and unless impacted by another vector or a magnetic field it will
continue to travel in a straight line.

a larger force than gravity on those particles.

I can imagine gravity being turned off, but for that i would expect the
force to arise from a mass field, or something which has no component
along gravity. Art, how do you be sure that this force is "turning off"
or neutralizing gravity, and not just "working against gravity"

You do not turn Gravity off! You can have a vector working against
gravity and in a loosing battle no less, but until that vector is
equal and opposite to gravity the effects of gravity cannot be said to
be neutralized. Remember, we are only relating to the vectors implied
upon the particle alone according to boundary rules.and the
"resultant" vector remains a straight line.

regards
s
Regards
Art

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 8 Dec 2010 20:52:21 +0100, Sean Con
wrote:

It is difficult to separate the report from the reporter here (if, in
fact, such a distinction exists):

some resistance leads to energy loss .. probably energy is being
converted to heat, not loss.

Heat is not loss if heat is your objective. This is a curious

boy... what is happening here - i feel lost



firstly, Art, temperature IS involved, when we are talking about solar
wind plasmas

second, richard, i guess my sentencing style is confusing
"some resistance leads to energy loss .. " -- this is copied from art's
previous message (if you follow the messages, you would notice the
copying)

"probably energy is being converted to heat, not loss." -- this is what
i commented

probably now you see why some other sentences appear self contradicting
because the first part is art's message, second part is what i write

and sorry for writing "feel", english is not my mother language, but i
believe you understood what i wanted to express

......

Art, can you please contact me to my email address directly, because i
feel people dont like us discussing something.

you can see my email address in the message, can you please also make
some diagrams etc.. ?

thank you