Richard Clark wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
Why is that funny?

There is no charge with a physical dimension of 1/2WL :-)

The charge on a transmission line occupies the entire transmission
line. For instance, there's absolutely nothing prohibiting us from
saying, "Two of the batteries are holding a charge." It doesn't
mean they are holding the same charge or the same charge particles.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Richard Harrison wrote:

Yuri, K3BU wrote:
"I can see conductor (assuming insulated wire) having its electrical
length affected by the capacitance between wire and earth, but wouldn`t
current stay close to same along the length?"

Depends on distance from the source. Current fades fast close to the
source, but at a great distance, the decline is very slow.

Maybe one could coil the wire into a big helical coil where the
current-in is equal to the current-out. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

wrote:
Yuri said he would send me a check for the issues I didn't get and he
was true to his word. The check came in the mail today.

Hey Yuri, I didn't get any issues either. Send me a check. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 19:40:01 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:

The charge on a transmission line occupies the entire transmission
line.

Next you will be saying it is a Visa Charge. Or is it Master Card for
transmission lines? :-)

Richard Clark wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
The charge on a transmission line occupies the entire transmission
line.

Next you will be saying it is a Visa Charge. Or is it Master Card for
transmission lines? :-)

Have you never seen a calculation for the total electrical charge
for the entire planet earth? Charge is a concept, not a particle.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:07:10 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:

for the entire planet earth?
Did you get the visa statement? Or is earth Diner's Club? :-)

Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
"Becomes very lossy" or paraphrased "lose its conductivity" to make the point?

I agree that a wire laid on the ground does not become very lossy
although energy is lost to the lossy medium in proximity to the wire.
What is happening is decreasing ExH power caused by field attenuation
in the ground. In free space, the E-field causes an equal energy H-field
which causes an equal energy E-field, ad infinitum. In the presence of a
lossy medium, like earth, the fields undergo an attenuation factor so
that each field strength is less than the previous cycle. The decrease
of the voltage and the current on/in the wire on the ground is *caused*
by the attenuation of the surrounding fields and would occur even if
the wire were a super-conductor. The wire itself does not "become very
lossy". The ground around the wire becomes very lossy.

Consider the power transferred through a transformer. The primary
has highly conductive insulated wire but "loses" virtually all of
its power, not through conduction, but through induction, to the
secondary. The losses through an insulated wire laid on the ground
are through induction, not conduction.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Cecil Moore wrote:
Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
"Becomes very lossy" or paraphrased "lose its conductivity" to make
the point?

I agree that a wire laid on the ground does not become very lossy
although energy is lost to the lossy medium in proximity to the wire.

When I worked for the Schlumberger Oil Well Surveying Corp., I
used to run an "induction log" on freshly drilled wells before
the casing was set while the hole was filled with "mud". In basic
terms, it worked like a transformer. The primary would create an
inductive field in a donut shape out in the formation. That inductive
field would generate a voltage in the secondary of the transformer.
A little processing of the received signal yielded the conductivity
of the formation, high for shale and salt water, low for fresh water
and oil, lower for gas - same principle as metal detectors.

We also had a cheaper "electrical log" which was simply two conductive
electrodes at each end of a wire-line sonde between which conduction
current was measured. Not nearly as accurate as the induction log
because it was highly affected by the fresh water used to make the mud.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Tom Donaly wrote:
A charge defined at one point can go one direction or another, Cecil,
as in current, but not two opposing directions at once. And quit telling
me what
I believe; I'll tell you. Let me say in terms you might get this time:
The same infinitesimal charge dQ cannot move in two directions
at the same time. In order to do that it would have to split in two
and that would violate the principle of conservation of charge.

Get real, Tom. Does your vehicle battery hold a charge? Is that charge
an infinitesimal point charge? Introducing an infinitesimal charge into
the argument at this late point is known in logic as diverting the issue.

The charge on your battery is a total charge. The charge in a transmission
line is a total charge. The charge of the planet earth is a total charge.
Charge is moving in opposite directions 1/2WL apart in a transmission line.
Charge is NOT limited to an infinitesimal charged particle, as you imply.
Charge is a characteristic of *any* number of particles in *any* magnitude
of volume including, presumably, the entire universe.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Cecil Moore wrote:
Tom Donaly wrote:

A charge defined at one point can go one direction or another, Cecil,
as in current, but not two opposing directions at once. And quit
telling me what
I believe; I'll tell you. Let me say in terms you might get this time:
The same infinitesimal charge dQ cannot move in two directions
at the same time. In order to do that it would have to split in two
and that would violate the principle of conservation of charge.


Get real, Tom. Does your vehicle battery hold a charge? Is that charge
an infinitesimal point charge? Introducing an infinitesimal charge into
the argument at this late point is known in logic as diverting the issue.

The charge on your battery is a total charge. The charge in a transmission
line is a total charge. The charge of the planet earth is a total charge.
Charge is moving in opposite directions 1/2WL apart in a transmission line.
Charge is NOT limited to an infinitesimal charged particle, as you imply.
Charge is a characteristic of *any* number of particles in *any* magnitude
of volume including, presumably, the entire universe.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Go back to bed, Cecil.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH