Article: 217536 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Ladder Line and Interference from Metal Objects From: Rockinghorse Winner Message-ID: Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 00:23:58 GMT Up until now I have avoided considering wire antennas fed with ladder line like a full wave loop or Zepp, because I have metal rain gutters and windowframes, which the line would inevitably have to contend with. Is this a big issue? What kind of an effect do metal objects have on ladder line, and is this prohibitive to putting one up? Should I stick with coax? Thank you. -- R*Horse rwinner.blogspot.com Article: 217537 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 19:44:17 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: Hams of FCC's RID Aid Allied Effort in WW2 References: <1gnbj11s90aa1jc5j5cbrgt5i2e00o7k73@4ax.com> Message-ID: <4335f2e1$0$22196$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Walter Maxwell wrote: > I'm aware that this post is off-topic, except that it is the basis for my > two previous posts that were on topic to antennas. I believe it is time to > reexamine the contributions hams and commercial radio ops made to the WW2 effort > as they were the operating personnel of the FCC's Radio Intelligence Division. > This is their story. I would say say, please keep it up, on or off topic. Thanks so much for these pieces of history. tom K0TAR Article: 217538 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Uncle Ted Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 20:51:01 -0400 Message-ID: References: <9j86j1ldjphhhcge4t96p4hlun0qsnbohg@4ax.com> <433440ac$0$9217@dingus.crosslink.net> <51v8j1dmho8tc9bpcvmj1liusq8qdfv7mo@4ax.com> <26WdncROlerDdKneRVn-iQ@gbronline.com> <4pebj15vgg4hnncf93r04ubu0pu6litmju@4ax.com> On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 21:46:06 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >Uncle Ted wrote: >> On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 15:44:28 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >>>But "God" is a title, not a name. There's God Yahweh, God Jehovah, >>>God Jesus, God Allah, God Ra, God Thor - to name just a few. >> >> If we're one nation "under god", which god is it? > >That's the beauty of god, the one supreme being who goes >by many names in many languages - take your pick. I call >my supreme being, "Mother Nature" and it's not nice to >fool Mother Nature. ...not to mention that a female deity is a lot sexier - just don't fall in love with one of them. Article: 217539 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Uncle Ted Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 20:53:35 -0400 Message-ID: <85tbj1hk1oi2gsp5e8dcp82gjpqrisfsfd@4ax.com> References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 15:16:54 -0700, Zoran Brlecic <...WA7AA...@get.lost> wrote: >KØHB wrote: > > >> Everyone has to believe something. I believe I'll have another martini. > >And that's pretty much the only religion I respect. "Pardon me while I slip out of these wet clothes and into a dry martini." - Groucho (or was it Bugs Bunny?) Article: 217540 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Uncle Ted Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 20:59:12 -0400 Message-ID: References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <5245a$4335d586$97d56a13$3658@ALLTEL.NET> On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 18:38:21 -0400, "Fred W4JLE" wrote: >Most convicts get "religion" because it looks good for the parole board. > >The reason Jews are under represented is the high value placed on education >by the Jewish culture. A lesson lost on the ghetto dwellers in spite of the >fact the early civil rights fight was for an equal education. > >As long as niggers equate education with "acting white", they will enslave >themselves far more effectively that any plantation Massa of pre War of >Northern Agression times. > >Once a group learns education opens the doors of opportunity, they are truly >free. > >Your desperate grasping at straws to support atheism indicates to me, a >crying out on your part for someone to lead you to the path of >understanding. I shall pray for you my friend. > >Even if you do not believe in God, he believes in you! Maybe you ought to pray for yourself for your god to give you a new brain. It's obvious that the one you have is fried from going to too many cross burnings. Article: 217541 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Uncle Ted Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 21:01:37 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1127138720_12439@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <4330a9c8$0$22199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43109$43317117$97d56a13$4287@ALLTEL.NET> <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <4334478c$0$9217@dingus.crosslink.net> On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 15:21:03 -0700, Zoran Brlecic <...WA7AA...@get.lost> wrote: >Vito wrote: > > >> Not to mention Hitler. > >And we have a Godwin, all... > >Btw, Hitler, if you must bring him up, was a Christian. ...and may have been circumcised, but we'll never know for sure. Article: 217542 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Message-ID: Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 01:15:37 GMT Matt Osborn wrote: > ... I just don't think it's possible to be an atheist. It's the only rational conclusion possible if a person is consistent in applying the scientific method. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217543 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Charlie" Subject: Re: The Tower still standing ???? Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 20:24:19 -0500 Message-ID: <11jbv2j4qkqg138@news.supernews.com> References: <4335D3C9.5722F5A4@js.com> Dunno Joey..lemme go outside and see. Yup still standing..as if you really cared except to revel if it were to come down..... -- Charlie "joey" wrote in message news:4335D3C9.5722F5A4@js.com... > http://deepsouthnet.net/tower.html > > Wonder if this tower is still standing, > with guy cables anchored to oak trees > and one telephone pole ?? > Article: 217544 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <5245a$4335d586$97d56a13$3658@ALLTEL.NET> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 21:44:20 -0400 Message-ID: <1e1fc$4336011f$97d56a13$10761@ALLTEL.NET> Did we upset your little liberal world? Once again I note that inane remarks are usually made by gutless pseudo screen names. "Uncle Ted" wrote in message news:nctbj11i4rp45f8fqm7b55nehvlc892unm@4ax.com... > On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 18:38:21 -0400, "Fred W4JLE" > Maybe you ought to pray for yourself for your god to give you a new > brain. It's obvious that the one you have is fried from going to too > many cross burnings. Article: 217545 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Walter Maxwell Subject: Re: Hams of FCC's RID Aid Allied Effort in WW2 Message-ID: References: <1gnbj11s90aa1jc5j5cbrgt5i2e00o7k73@4ax.com> <4335f2e1$0$22196$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 22:58:04 -0400 On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 19:44:17 -0500, Tom Ring wrote: >Walter Maxwell wrote: > >> I'm aware that this post is off-topic, except that it is the basis for my >> two previous posts that were on topic to antennas. I believe it is time to >> reexamine the contributions hams and commercial radio ops made to the WW2 effort >> as they were the operating personnel of the FCC's Radio Intelligence Division. >> This is their story. > >I would say say, please keep it up, on or off topic. Thanks so much for >these pieces of history. > >tom >K0TAR Thanks, Tom, I appreciate your approval. Walt Article: 217546 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Uncle Ted Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 23:13:13 -0400 Message-ID: References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <5245a$4335d586$97d56a13$3658@ALLTEL.NET> <1e1fc$4336011f$97d56a13$10761@ALLTEL.NET> On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 21:44:20 -0400, "Fred W4JLE" wrote: >Did we upset your little liberal world? Once again I note that inane remarks >are usually made by gutless pseudo screen names. Translation: "If you don't have a callsign in the ham radio newsgroups, your opinion means nothing." Yet, the far-off hecklers in the crowd often speak the truth... Article: 217547 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Tom Donaly" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <43109$43317117$97d56a13$4287@ALLTEL.NET> <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <5245a$4335d586$97d56a13$3658@ALLTEL.NET> Message-ID: Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 03:46:55 GMT Fred W4JLE wrote: > Most convicts get "religion" because it looks good for the parole board. > > The reason Jews are under represented is the high value placed on education > by the Jewish culture. A lesson lost on the ghetto dwellers in spite of the > fact the early civil rights fight was for an equal education. > > As long as niggers equate education with "acting white", they will enslave > themselves far more effectively that any plantation Massa of pre War of > Northern Agression times. > > Once a group learns education opens the doors of opportunity, they are truly > free. > > Your desperate grasping at straws to support atheism indicates to me, a > crying out on your part for someone to lead you to the path of > understanding. I shall pray for you my friend. > > Even if you do not believe in God, he believes in you! > > > "Zoran Brlecic" <...WA7AA...@get.lost> wrote in message > news:Oo2dnQo1qoWNTajeRVn-vQ@comcast.com... > >>According to you, all atheists should be immoral by definition. It >>follows that prisons should be overflowing with them. Yet, strangely >>enough, in American prisons, Christians are over-represented, while >>atheists (along with Jews and Muslims) are under-represented. > > > Your sheet is showing, Fred. It's hard for rational beings to believe in undemonstrable phantasms, but even believing, it's even harder for any rational being to see how anyone could worship a mass murderer, as God has proven himself to be over the years, and still be moral. Morality transcends Christianity because truly moral people know that belief does not justify the committing of atrocities, a simple fact lost on most Christians over the millennia. 73, Tom Donaly, KA6RUH Article: 217548 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Uncle Ted Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 23:17:00 -0400 Message-ID: References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 01:15:37 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: >> ... I just don't think it's possible to be an atheist. > >It's the only rational conclusion possible if a person is >consistent in applying the scientific method. Most people, unfortunately, aren't rational... Article: 217549 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "H. Adam Stevens, NQ5H" Subject: Re: Metal Roof and Vertical Antenna Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 22:38:21 -0500 Message-ID: <11jc6tf98s7bm64@corp.supernews.com> References: <11j8isc2vp1so0f@corp.supernews.com> <1127616149.567252.46700@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> I have a Fluidmotion BiggIR on a 3500 sq ft peaked aluminum roof. Feedpoint impedance near 50 ohms at resonance can be achieved in such a configuration. 73 H. NQ5H wrote in message news:1127616149.567252.46700@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com... > It will work, but you have to treat the roof as a psuedo > mobile setup, as it's not resonant. Well... Unless you > get lucky. > I'd just ohm out the roof and see if it's connected before > I started trying to bond it together. > The performance is semi iffy... > In general, radials that are resonant would be better, but > that assumes there are enough of them for a given height. > It's quite possible some bands may be fairly poor, if the > roof shows a high impedance. IE: much like trying to > use 1/2 wave long radials elevated... > MK > Article: 217550 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 03:44:00 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Jim, To measure SWR on the line it is necessary to place the SWR meter at the antenna end of the line. Even then it gives the correct answer only when the line impedance is 50 ohms. But the SWR meter is always placed immediately adjacent to the transmitter. Whatever the meter indicates it is not SWR because there is no line on which to measure it. The meter is telling lies. The meter indicates only whether or not the transmitter is loaded with a resistance of 50 ohms. Which is ALL you want to know. It tells you nothing more and nothing less. This is, of course, a very valuable function of the instrument. But it is NOT behaving as an SWR meter. Its name should be changed to Transmitter Loading Indicator (TLI). To use the name "SWR meter" and to imagine it is actually measuring an SWR is seriously misleading and is a source of confusion about what is really going on. It is why there are perpetual arguments and misunderstandings about SWR, tuners and related matters on this newsgroup and in every other place. Change the name to TLI, which is what it really does. Novices will not be lead astray, clear thinking will prevail, false ideas will not take root to remain embedded for the remainder of one's radio career. Air pressure indicators instead of airspeedometers are OK because air pressure actually exists. SWR meters are NOT OK because there is no line for SWR to exist on. (At least not where the meter is imagined or supposed to measure it.) Makes a change from cavity magnetrons. ---- Reg. Article: 217551 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 04:18:11 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> <9j86j1ldjphhhcge4t96p4hlun0qsnbohg@4ax.com> <433440ac$0$9217@dingus.crosslink.net> <51v8j1dmho8tc9bpcvmj1liusq8qdfv7mo@4ax.com> <26WdncROlerDdKneRVn-iQ@gbronline.com> <52130$43355f54$97d56a13$16572@ALLTEL.NET> <1127572602.342832.210830@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <5s2bj1pgb8ni8ll9fv80e628k8micmu80f@4ax.com> > Reg Edwards wrote: > > Males will be entirely redundent except for recreational purposes. They > > will then fade away into history. > > Maybe only get kicked out of the hive when winter approaches. > -- > 73, Cecil ============================== Silicon lifeforms are more durable in this Universe than their carbon counterparts. Evolution and survival of the fittest will eventually sort things out. Present-day computer designers should build into their creations an affection for human beings. Then, when superior intelligent computers take over, at least they might keep us on as pets. --- Reg. Article: 217552 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Rod Maupin" Subject: Re: Hams of FCC's RID Aid Allied Effort in WW2 Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 21:26:37 -0700 Message-ID: <11jc9npadgegfaf@corp.supernews.com> References: <1gnbj11s90aa1jc5j5cbrgt5i2e00o7k73@4ax.com> <4335f2e1$0$22196$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Yes Walter, I enjoy your stories. I'm happy to read more of them. Rod KI7CQ Article: 217553 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 04:32:09 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <43109$43317117$97d56a13$4287@ALLTEL.NET> <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <5245a$4335d586$97d56a13$3658@ALLTEL.NET> The symbol of Christianity is an instrument of torture. It's amazing it has so many adherents. Article: 217554 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "John - kd5yi" Subject: Re: Hams of FCC's RID Aid Allied Effort in WW2 Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 23:35:41 -0500 Message-ID: References: <1gnbj11s90aa1jc5j5cbrgt5i2e00o7k73@4ax.com> Walter - Thanks very much for your very interesting posts. I have read them all and would like to read more. John (KD5YI) "Walter Maxwell" wrote in message news:1gnbj11s90aa1jc5j5cbrgt5i2e00o7k73@4ax.com... > I'm aware that this post is off-topic, except that it is the basis > for my > two previous posts that were on topic to antennas. I believe it is time > to > reexamine the contributions hams and commercial radio ops made to the WW2 > effort > as they were the operating personnel of the FCC's Radio Intelligence > Division. > This is their story. > With the War already raging in Europe in 1939, people at the State > Department knew they were missing vital war intelligence being exchanged > by > radio, especially that going between Germany and South America. They > queried the > FCC Field Division in early 1940 about monitoring to intercept the > information. > The Field Division operated the original primary monitoring stations, > performing > regulatory and enforcement duties. However, at that time the Field > Division > personnel had their hands full just monitoring domestic operations, and > had no > time for intelligence monitoring. > Congress was alerted to the need for additional personnel and > equipment for > the FCC to monitor intelligence, and it approved funds for establishing a > new > section, the National Defense Operating section, NDO. The NDO began > operations > September 3, 1940, and was later upgraded to a division, becoming the > Radio > Intelligence Division, RID. To head the NDO, the late George E. Sterling > (W1AE/W3DF) was elevated from Ass't Chief Engineer, FCC, to Chief, NDO > Section, > and later to Chief, RID. To obtain personnel for the new section he > instructed > one of his assistants, the late Harriette Koster, to search through the > file > cards containing the information on licensed amateur and commercial > operators. > She selected more than 500 operators from the file cards, and over T.J. > Slowie's > signature, she sent telegrams to those selected, offering them positions > of > Radio Operator, Ass't Monitoring Officer, and Monitoring Officer. The > entire > personnel for the new NDO Section, including myself, were obtained from > response > to those telegrams. (Harrriette later became my wife, and mother of my > four > children, W2WM, WB4GNR, K4JRM, and KC4UBZ (Sue's license now expired). > The > Congressional funding also supported building many new secondary > monitoring > stations throughout the country, each equipped with Hallicrafters SX-28 > and S-27 > receivers, and Adcock (sky-wave) direction finders. In addition, Hudson > automobiles equipped with the receivers and a loop direction finder were > a part > of each secondary station, used for mobile close-in surveillance. > Immediately following Pearl Harbor, December 7, 1941, the FCC RID > mobilized > a group from both primary and secondary monitoring stations to go to the > Hawaiian Islands to set up eight new secondary stations, one each on > Oahu, > Molokai, Kauai, Maui, and Lanai, and three on the big island of Hawaii. > NDO > Chief Sterling accompanied the group, of which I was a member from the > primary > station at Allegan, Michigan. > Extensive 24/7 mobile monitoring around the shoreline of all the > islands > was pursued, with the intention of finding clandestine radio operation > between > local Japanese loyal to Japan and Jap submarines cruising off shore. No > such > operations were found to occur, and no Hawaiians of Japanese descent were > found > to be disloyal to the U.S. During my stay on the Islands I worked at > stations on > Oahu, Kauai, Molokai and Hawaii. > With Adcock direction finders at all eight secondary stations, plus > the one > at the primary station in Honolulu, the FCC saved the lives of thousands > of > military personnel and more than 600 military aircraft flying the Pacific > between the Mainland and the Islands during WW2, after becoming lost due > to > errors in navigation with limited fuel supply. Details on how this task > was > performed, and how the Beverage antenna was used to receive broadcasts > from JOAK > Tokyo, were the subjects of my two previous posts. > Within the next few months I'll be relating some of the 'real > intelligence' > work involving RID operations that had a significant effect on shortening > WW2. > > Walter Maxwell, W2DU > Article: 217555 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 04:57:03 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> <9j86j1ldjphhhcge4t96p4hlun0qsnbohg@4ax.com> <433440ac$0$9217@dingus.crosslink.net> <51v8j1dmho8tc9bpcvmj1liusq8qdfv7mo@4ax.com> <26WdncROlerDdKneRVn-iQ@gbronline.com> <4pebj15vgg4hnncf93r04ubu0pu6litmju@4ax.com> > > If we're one nation "under god", which god is it? > > That's the beauty of god, the one supreme being who goes > by many names in many languages - take your pick. I call > my supreme being, "Mother Nature" and it's not nice to > fool Mother Nature. > -- > 73, Cecil ================================= God, Mother Nature, the Laws of the Universe, the Rules of Mathematics, E = mc^2 are all the same thing. But truly, at heart, everybody is agnostic. Probability and Doubt Rule, OK? --- Reg. Article: 217556 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: W2RAC Subject: Re: highwind,rohn25,stayerect??? - image5741.jpg (0/1) Message-ID: References: Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 05:27:58 GMT My Rohn 25 is as follows 42' high then 6' of mast pipe for a total of 48' no guys. It is anchored with 1yd cube concrete and mounted to a house bracket 9' from bottom. Antennas at that time where a dual band vertical 7' tall and a discone mounted on a homemade side arm and a hf dipole. It survived all the 2004 Hurricanes here in Daytona Beach FL with known winds of 100 mph. Granted, as I install more antennas (couple of yagi's and rotor) I will want to add a set of guy's. On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 14:13:48 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >lorentsonci@lycos.com wrote: >> What should a rohn 25 properly guyed, 50ft tower with two meter/440 >> ground plane antennas be able to 'handle high wind wise'?? >> Watching the news/weagther, I feel some will 'bite the dust'. >> Appreciate your input. cl. > >A properly guyed (2 sets of 3) 50 ft. Rohn 25 in a >minimum recommended configuration will support 10.5 >sq. ft. of antenna at 70 mph or 5 sq. ft. at 110 mph >according to my Rohn drawings. Article: 217557 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Ian Jackson Subject: Re: 73 Ohms, How do you get it? Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 08:07:26 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1126625499.680151.37850@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> In message , Reg Edwards writes > >"Tom Ring" wrote in message >news:4330af86$0$22205$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net... >> Tom Ring wrote: >> > >> > Sounds reasonable, Reg. To put it for simple people like me, it >would >> > mean it's a transmission line of diameter x with an infinite >diameter >> > shield. Then we feed 2 of them, balanced, colinear, and that's >our R >> > sub r. >> > >> > Did I misunderstand? >> > >> >> Minus the radiation, of course. >> >> Now, the question is, how much does that change things. >> >================================== >Tom, > >Twas not I who posed the original "input impedance of an infinitely >long dipole" question. > >The radiation resistance does not enter very much into the solution. >But in any case the radiation resistance is not the one we are >accustomed to because the current distribution along the wire is not >of sinewaveform but decays rather slowly exponentially. > >I've just remembered the name of the real antenna which best fits the >problem. It is the terminated Beverage which is just a very long >horizontal wire some distance above ground. > >The Zo of the Beverage is 60 * Ln( 4 * Height / d ) ohms, where d is >wire diameter. When terminated its input resistance at LF is Zo (see >the Bible, the ARRL Antenna Book). A typical value of Zo is 550 ohms. > >Note that radiation resistance does not enter the formula although it >cannot be denied radiation does occur. The formula is a close >approximation which serves present purposes. > >Putting two Beverages back-to-back to make a dipole we get an input >impedance of 1100 ohms. The infinite dipole is in the same high >impedance ballpark. > >To calculate Zo of an isolated infinite dipole we shall have to change >dimensions Height above ground disappears and is replaced by >wavelength (or frequency). > >Zo = 60 * ( Ln( Wavelength / 2 / d ) - 1 ) ohms, approximately. > >A more exact formula involves inverse hyperbolic functions and >wavelength, height, wire length, and wire diameter, but nobody ever >uses it. You won't find it in Terman. > >On the favourite American 40-meter band with a 14 AWG infinitely long >wire Zo = 505 ohms. > >Which makes the dipole input impedance = 1010 ohms but a nice, round >1000 ohms is near enough for me. > >Your 'infinite shield' is a fair description for the return path but >the end-effect is fairly large. I prefer 'the rest of the Universe'. >But the nearest point is still the Earth's surface. > >I leave the people, who attempted to use Smith Charts and Eznec to >solve the interesting problem, to fathom out where they (or the charts >or Eznec) went wrong. >---- >Reg. > > I'd like to say thanks to all who responded to my original question. There have been a variety of answers. The only answers I feel might be wrong are those where there is a reactive component. Surely, this can be removed by lengthening the antenna by the appropriate amount - but as it is already infinite, this might be difficult. Anyway, all very interesting. Cheers, Ian. -- Article: 217558 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "puns" References: <1gnbj11s90aa1jc5j5cbrgt5i2e00o7k73@4ax.com> Subject: Re: Hams of FCC's RID Aid Allied Effort in WW2 Message-ID: Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 11:23:13 GMT I wish you would write it as a novel. I enjoy reading about radio during WW2. "Walter Maxwell" wrote in message news:1gnbj11s90aa1jc5j5cbrgt5i2e00o7k73@4ax.com... > I'm aware that this post is off-topic, except that it is the basis for > my > two previous posts that were on topic to antennas. I believe it is time to > reexamine the contributions hams and commercial radio ops made to the WW2 > effort > as they were the operating personnel of the FCC's Radio Intelligence > Division. > This is their story. > With the War already raging in Europe in 1939, people at the State > Department knew they were missing vital war intelligence being exchanged > by > radio, especially that going between Germany and South America. They > queried the > FCC Field Division in early 1940 about monitoring to intercept the > information. > The Field Division operated the original primary monitoring stations, > performing > regulatory and enforcement duties. However, at that time the Field > Division > personnel had their hands full just monitoring domestic operations, and > had no > time for intelligence monitoring. > Congress was alerted to the need for additional personnel and > equipment for > the FCC to monitor intelligence, and it approved funds for establishing a > new > section, the National Defense Operating section, NDO. The NDO began > operations > September 3, 1940, and was later upgraded to a division, becoming the > Radio > Intelligence Division, RID. To head the NDO, the late George E. Sterling > (W1AE/W3DF) was elevated from Ass't Chief Engineer, FCC, to Chief, NDO > Section, > and later to Chief, RID. To obtain personnel for the new section he > instructed > one of his assistants, the late Harriette Koster, to search through the > file > cards containing the information on licensed amateur and commercial > operators. > She selected more than 500 operators from the file cards, and over T.J. > Slowie's > signature, she sent telegrams to those selected, offering them positions > of > Radio Operator, Ass't Monitoring Officer, and Monitoring Officer. The > entire > personnel for the new NDO Section, including myself, were obtained from > response > to those telegrams. (Harrriette later became my wife, and mother of my > four > children, W2WM, WB4GNR, K4JRM, and KC4UBZ (Sue's license now expired). The > Congressional funding also supported building many new secondary > monitoring > stations throughout the country, each equipped with Hallicrafters SX-28 > and S-27 > receivers, and Adcock (sky-wave) direction finders. In addition, Hudson > automobiles equipped with the receivers and a loop direction finder were a > part > of each secondary station, used for mobile close-in surveillance. > Immediately following Pearl Harbor, December 7, 1941, the FCC RID > mobilized > a group from both primary and secondary monitoring stations to go to the > Hawaiian Islands to set up eight new secondary stations, one each on Oahu, > Molokai, Kauai, Maui, and Lanai, and three on the big island of Hawaii. > NDO > Chief Sterling accompanied the group, of which I was a member from the > primary > station at Allegan, Michigan. > Extensive 24/7 mobile monitoring around the shoreline of all the > islands > was pursued, with the intention of finding clandestine radio operation > between > local Japanese loyal to Japan and Jap submarines cruising off shore. No > such > operations were found to occur, and no Hawaiians of Japanese descent were > found > to be disloyal to the U.S. During my stay on the Islands I worked at > stations on > Oahu, Kauai, Molokai and Hawaii. > With Adcock direction finders at all eight secondary stations, plus > the one > at the primary station in Honolulu, the FCC saved the lives of thousands > of > military personnel and more than 600 military aircraft flying the Pacific > between the Mainland and the Islands during WW2, after becoming lost due > to > errors in navigation with limited fuel supply. Details on how this task > was > performed, and how the Beverage antenna was used to receive broadcasts > from JOAK > Tokyo, were the subjects of my two previous posts. > Within the next few months I'll be relating some of the 'real > intelligence' > work involving RID operations that had a significant effect on shortening > WW2. > > Walter Maxwell, W2DU > Article: 217559 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John Ferrell Subject: Re: Hams of FCC's RID Aid Allied Effort in WW2 Message-ID: References: <1gnbj11s90aa1jc5j5cbrgt5i2e00o7k73@4ax.com> Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 12:44:31 GMT Please keep the stories coming! == John, de W8CCW On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 19:22:05 -0400, Walter Maxwell wrote: Article: 217560 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John Ferrell Subject: Re: The Tower still standing ???? Message-ID: References: <4335D3C9.5722F5A4@js.com> <11jbv2j4qkqg138@news.supernews.com> Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 12:53:52 GMT There are a lot of us out here who share your confidence in your tower. I am still using a crank up mast that I purchased in 1979(?). The mechanics of this thing are more related to a sailboat than a mountain. I count on it moving when the wind blows to "unload". It is currently installed without guys and has a Cushcraft A3S on it so it spends most of its time retracted.. -- John de W8CCW On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 20:24:19 -0500, "Charlie" wrote: >Dunno Joey..lemme go outside and see. > >Yup still standing..as if you really cared except to revel if it were to >come down..... Article: 217561 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Walter Maxwell Subject: Re: Hams of FCC's RID Aid Allied Effort in WW2 Message-ID: References: <1gnbj11s90aa1jc5j5cbrgt5i2e00o7k73@4ax.com> Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 10:46:48 -0400 I'm pleased that the history of radio in WW2 is acceptable on this news group. The three threads I've posted so far are from memory, and at the moment that's about all there is. However, I have files describing many real intelligence transmissions involving historic situations that for the most part went unheralded. These files are in my library at my home in DeLand, Florida. I'm now at my summer home in my home town of Mt. Pleasant, Michigan, but we return to FL Nov 1. I'll dig out some of the files when we return. Thanks again for the interest. When I posted the first one I thought I might be voted off the island. Walt, W2DU On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 12:44:31 GMT, John Ferrell wrote: >Please keep the stories coming! > == John, de W8CCW >On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 19:22:05 -0400, Walter Maxwell >wrote: > Article: 217562 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Walter Maxwell Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Message-ID: References: Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 11:02:13 -0400 On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 03:44:00 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards" wrote: Ah, Reggie, and Richie---- You two ought to go on the road together--your humor beats Bob Hope's hands down. You'd have em laughing their guts out in the aisles! Walt, W2DU Article: 217563 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Henry Subject: Re: Hams of FCC's RID Aid Allied Effort in WW2 Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 11:04:53 -0500 Message-ID: References: <1gnbj11s90aa1jc5j5cbrgt5i2e00o7k73@4ax.com> Walt, when you do posts these stories, will you post them under a name that people will recognize please? I missed the first one because it was posted under a topic I wasn't interested in. A new post heading would be appreciated by all, I'm sure. Thanks and 73, Henry Walter Maxwell wrote: > I'm pleased that the history of radio in WW2 is acceptable on this news > group. The three threads I've posted so far are from memory, and at the moment > that's about all there is. > However, I have files describing many real intelligence transmissions > involving historic situations that for the most part went unheralded. These > files are in my library at my home in DeLand, Florida. I'm now at my summer home > in my home town of Mt. Pleasant, Michigan, but we return to FL Nov 1. I'll dig > out some of the files when we return. > Thanks again for the interest. When I posted the first one I thought I might > be voted off the island. > > Walt, W2DU > > On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 12:44:31 GMT, John Ferrell > wrote: > > >>Please keep the stories coming! >> == John, de W8CCW >>On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 19:22:05 -0400, Walter Maxwell >>wrote: >> > > Article: 217564 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Walter Maxwell Subject: Re: Hams of FCC's RID Aid Allied Effort in WW2 Message-ID: References: <1gnbj11s90aa1jc5j5cbrgt5i2e00o7k73@4ax.com> Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 12:48:13 -0400 Good point, Henry, will do. Walt On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 11:04:53 -0500, Henry wrote: >Walt, when you do posts these stories, will you post them under a name >that people will recognize please? I missed the first one because it >was posted under a topic I wasn't interested in. A new post heading >would be appreciated by all, I'm sure. > >Thanks and 73, > >Henry Article: 217565 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Steve Silverwood Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: References: <11htogetcauugb1@news.supernews.com> <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <0nmUe.9902$FW1.9234@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 19:27:42 GMT In article , groupk0hb@earthlink.net says... > ... > A guy who is a radio-tower contractor (like cell sites, microwave towers, > commercial radio stations, etc.) sent this. > ... One heck of a story, thanks for sharing it! -- -- //Steve// Steve Silverwood, KB6OJS Fountain Valley, CA Email: kb6ojs@arrl.net Article: 217566 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "zappa" References: <43306f44$0$245$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Subject: Re: long wire antenna Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 21:27:47 +0200 Message-ID: <4336fa36$0$49019$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Currently, using the receiver alone with its build in antenna I can listen to the same broadcasts as attaching the wind up antenna into it. Perhaps it improves a wee bit reception, but it's not always noticeable. Even I'm starting to use the build in antenna with only its first section extracted and placed in a vertical position. Of course, I suffer from fadding and, sometimes, background noise but the wind up antenna doesn't really improve it. Therefore, will one of those kits help the receiver boosting reception? Thank you! Article: 217567 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Sonnich Jensen" Subject: Antenna for Danish Radio 1062 MHz Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 23:14:46 +0300 Message-ID: <4337050e$1_1@news.estpak.ee> Hi all! I have 2 problems: I'd to listen to Danish Radio P5, on 1062 Medium wawe. (http://www.dr.dk/omdr/article.asp?aid=532 og http://www.dr.dk/pubs/nyheder/html/programmer/kortboelge#p5 ) My problem is that my raido (tuner) at home must stand on the side, so the ferrit antenna is horizontal. Placing it normally, so it is vertical (and the radio too) it will not get anything. I can connect an antenna. I have 2 tuners, both have the problem - one old JVC T-10XL (excellent!) and Philips FT772 (digital). The philips doed not have a ferrit antenna, but a large coil somehow. Still, placing it on the side makes it work. In my car it works well too, but when the engine is running, it create so much noise, that I cannot hear anything but the engine (the radio "ticks", it must create a signal, or come by the power). It is possible to listen too, but hard. How can I avoid this noise? Better antenna? Engine problems? Power problems? The alarm causes the same :-) When the LED is flashing, it makes so much noise, that it is not possible to use the radio (with medium wave) I am listing to all yuor ideas. PS: send me CC copy, as the neti.ee server does not always get the answers :-) Article: 217568 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <11htogetcauugb1@news.supernews.com> <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <0nmUe.9902$FW1.9234@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 16:44:00 -0400 Message-ID: A college professor, an avowed atheist and active in the ACLU, was teaching his class. He shocked several of his students when he flatly stated that for once and for all he was going to prove there was no God. Addressing the ceiling he shouted: "GOD, if you are real, then I want you to knock me off this platform. I'll give you exactly 15 minutes!!!!!" The lecture room fell silent. You could hear a pin drop. Ten minutes went by. "I'm waiting God, if you're real knock me off this platform!!!!" Again after 5 minutes, the professor taunted God saying, "Here I am, God!!! I'm still waiting!!!" His count down got down to the last couple of minutes when a Ranger, just released from the Army after serving in Afghanistan and Iraq and newly registered in the class, walked up to the Professor. The Ranger hit him full force in the face, and sent the Professor tumbling >from his lofty platform. The Professor was out cold!! The students were stunned and shocked. They began to babble in confusion. The Ranger nonchalantly took his seat in the front row and sat silent. The class looked at him and fell silent waiting. Eventually, the professor came to and was noticeably shaken. He looked at the Ranger in the front row. When the professor regained his senses and could speak he asked: "What the hell is the matter with you?! Why did you do that?" "God was really busy protecting America's soldiers, who are protecting your right to say stupid things and act like a jerk !!! So he sent me!!" ONE NATION UNDER GOD!!! Article: 217569 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Christopher O'Callaghan" Subject: Free tv for only 1 euro Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 22:09:24 +0100 Message-ID: Might i recommend this to you. Ebay item number 5297402959 1 euro for tv on your computer.Its very good and thought you might be interested. All the best Chris Article: 217570 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <11htogetcauugb1@news.supernews.com> <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <0nmUe.9902$FW1.9234@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> Message-ID: Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 21:23:41 GMT Fred W4JLE wrote: > ONE NATION UNDER GOD!!! Especially ironic since Jehovah, Allah, and Yahweh are the same God-Head. Conclusion: God suffers >from multiple personality disorder. Mrs. God, i.e. Mother Nature, should hit Him up aside the head with a 2x4. :-) -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217571 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: bg998@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Martin Potter) Subject: Re: Hams of FCC's RID Aid Allied Effort in WW2 Date: 25 Sep 2005 23:18:18 GMT Message-ID: References: <1gnbj11s90aa1jc5j5cbrgt5i2e00o7k73@4ax.com> <4335f2e1$0$22196$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Tom Ring (news0002@taring.org) writes: > > I would say say, please keep it up, on or off topic. Thanks so much for > these pieces of history. > Hear, hear!! ... Martin VE3OAT ex-CSE (CANUKUS Eyes Only) Article: 217572 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: BillJ Subject: Re: Antenna for Danish Radio 1062 MHz References: <4337050e$1_1@news.estpak.ee> Message-ID: Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 20:24:06 -0400 Sonnich Jensen wrote: 1062 MHz Then it is 1062 KHz not MHz Article: 217573 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: Ladder Line and Interference from Metal Objects References: From: Rockinghorse Winner Message-ID: <7iHZe.260$Aw.4524@typhoon.sonic.net> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 00:29:55 GMT Ham op writes: >My installation is as follows: 1) 600 ohm open wire line [tuned of >course!] from the antenna to a protected [from WX] area under the sun >porch. There I simply connected 450 ohm ladder line to the 600 ohm line >for the run into the house. [450 ohm line has increased losses in bad >WX]. As mentioned in another response, I run the 450 ohm line at right >angles over metal structures. I keep the line a least 6 inches from >pipes, heating vents etc and twist the line one twist every three [+/-] >feet. >I run 1 KW 80 through 20 meters with NO interference or RFI in the >shack. This computer is located 3 feet from the amplifier and has no >adverse effects from the amplifier. BTW, my station is grounded >[earthed] IAW electrical code. Are there any lengths for the xmission line one should avoid when feeding different types of wire antenna? -- R*Horse rwinner.blogspot.com Article: 217574 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Bob Miller Subject: Re: Ladder Line and Interference from Metal Objects Message-ID: References: <7iHZe.260$Aw.4524@typhoon.sonic.net> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 01:07:16 GMT On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 00:29:55 GMT, Rockinghorse Winner wrote: >Ham op writes: > > >>My installation is as follows: 1) 600 ohm open wire line [tuned of >>course!] from the antenna to a protected [from WX] area under the sun >>porch. There I simply connected 450 ohm ladder line to the 600 ohm line >>for the run into the house. [450 ohm line has increased losses in bad >>WX]. As mentioned in another response, I run the 450 ohm line at right >>angles over metal structures. I keep the line a least 6 inches from >>pipes, heating vents etc and twist the line one twist every three [+/-] >>feet. > >>I run 1 KW 80 through 20 meters with NO interference or RFI in the >>shack. This computer is located 3 feet from the amplifier and has no >>adverse effects from the amplifier. BTW, my station is grounded >>[earthed] IAW electrical code. > >Are there any lengths for the xmission line one should avoid when feeding >different types of wire antenna? Some lengths work better than others, depending on band. See the web site, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp and look at the "tunerless" all band antenna fed w/ladderline. bob k5qwg Article: 217575 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Ken Taylor" References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <85tbj1hk1oi2gsp5e8dcp82gjpqrisfsfd@4ax.com> <9ZOdndbRttI2zKreRVn-sQ@adelphia.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 13:50:24 +1200 "Mike Coslo" wrote in message news:9ZOdndbRttI2zKreRVn-sQ@adelphia.com... > What happened to all the old Bugs Bunny cartoons anyway? > > - Mike KB3EIA - You can buy a Looney Toons collection via Amazon for a reasonable price. It doesn't have all the 'good ones', but I love it. I mean, the nephew loves it..... Ken Article: 217576 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 20:58:47 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Message-ID: <433755d8$0$22205$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Zoran Brlecic wrote: > Matt Osborn wrote: > >>> According to you, all atheists should be immoral by definition. It >>> follows that prisons should be overflowing with them. Yet, strangely >>> enough, in American prisons, Christians are over-represented, while >>> atheists (along with Jews and Muslims) are under-represented. >> >> >> >> No, I don't think atheists are amoral or unmoral, I just don't think >> it's possible to be an atheist. > > > > Well, then, you're clearly wrong, because I, for one, along with > millions of other people, am an atheist. I don't believe in your god, > nor do I believe in any other god until you provide objective evidence > instead of wishful thinking, "knowing in one's heart" and ancient myths. > > And if you still don't understand why, ask yourself why you don't > believe in Allah, Aphrodite, Ares, Athena, Apollo, Artemis, Babaluaye, > Bacchus, Baldur, Bast, Bellona, Brahma, Brigid, Ceres, Cupid, Cerridwen, > Demeter, Diana, Dione, Dionysus, Eris, Eos, Eleggua, , El Shaddai, > Elohim, Eshu, Ereshkigal, Frigga, Frey, Freya, Gaea, Lord Genesa, Hades, > Hebe, Hera, Helios, Hel, Hephaestus, Hermes, Hestia, Horus, Ibeji, Ifa, > Inanna, Indra, Ishana, Ishtar, Isis, Janus, Juno, Jehovah, Jove, > Jupiter, Kali, Krishna, Kronos, Korravai, Loki, Lugh, Lord Indra, > Manitou, Mars, Mercury, Minerva, Mercurius, Morrigan, Nahuiquiahuitl, > Nanahuatzin, Nephthys, Neptune, Obatala, Odin, Ogun, Oshosi, Oshun, > Osiris, Oya, Orunmila, Olokun, Olodumare, Pluto, Persephone, Poseidon, > Proserpina, Quetzalcoatl, Ra, Lord Rama, Rhea, Saturn, Set, Selene, > Shango, Lord Siva, Tammuz, Thor, Tir, Tiw, Uranus, Venus, Vesta, Vishnu, > Vesta, Vulcan, Wotan, Yahweh, Yemaya and Zeus. > > > 73 ... WA7AA > You forgot J.R. "Bob" Dobbs of the Church of the SubGenius. http://www.subgenius.com/ tom K0TAR Article: 217577 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <43109$43317117$97d56a13$4287@ALLTEL.NET> <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <5245a$4335d586$97d56a13$3658@ALLTEL.NET> Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 02:07:25 GMT Zoran Brlecic wrote: > 2. I don't see any straws in my arguments and atheism is a default > state. Children have to be indoctrinated in order to become theists. The straw is that there seems to be something in human nature that needs to believe in a higher power. Myths and religion wouldn't exist unless they fulfilled some need. One reason that we are more successful than our ape cousins is that we can control the bullies in our society. Religion helps to accomplish that control. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217578 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <43375952.B78B60FB@earthlink.net> From: "Michael A. Terrell" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <85tbj1hk1oi2gsp5e8dcp82gjpqrisfsfd@4ax.com> <9ZOdndbRttI2zKreRVn-sQ@adelphia.com> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 02:12:47 GMT Mike Coslo wrote: > > I'm badly in need of a Foghorn Leghorn fix! 8^) > > trying to kill this thread with inanity...... > > But I am serious about needing the old WB cartoons 8^) > > - Mike - I find some of the old cartoons on DVDs at the local dollar store. I've bought about 20, so far. ;-) -- ? Michael A. Terrell Central Florida Article: 217579 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 02:15:02 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Reg Edwards wrote: > Jim, > To measure SWR on the line it is necessary to place the SWR meter at > the antenna end of the line. Even then it gives the correct answer > only when the line impedance is 50 ohms. Well, duh. Anyone that doesn't know that SWR is with reference to a stated impedance or that SWR is influenced by the characteristics of a real transmission line just isn't paying attention. > But the SWR meter is always placed immediately adjacent to the > transmitter. Whatever the meter indicates it is not SWR because there > is no line on which to measure it. The meter is telling lies. Errr, no, the meter is telling what it sees at the point of measurement. If the measurer is so opaque that he/she doesn't take line influences into account, it is hardly the fault of the measuring instrument that what is reported is not the SWR of the antenna at the specified impedance. > The meter indicates only whether or not the transmitter is loaded with > a resistance of 50 ohms. Which is ALL you want to know. It tells you > nothing more and nothing less. Basically true given the stated conditions, and all that is probably of interest for the average ham. > This is, of course, a very valuable function of the instrument. But > it is NOT behaving as an SWR meter. Its name should be changed to > Transmitter Loading Indicator (TLI). Uttern nonsense; the instrument is still behaving as a SWR meter but the user is not applying it per spec and not correcting measurement error caused by line position. By this logic we have a lot of names to change. For starters: PAM has to change the name of their cooking spray to: Teenage looser get high in a can. Screwdriver manufacturers have to change the name of their product to: General prying instrument and paint can lid removal tool. You may add others. > To use the name "SWR meter" and to imagine it is actually measuring an > SWR is seriously misleading and is a source of confusion about what is > really going on. Nonsense, the meter is always measuring SWR but the user is obviously not measuring the SWR that would be seen at the end of the line. You can't fault the instrument for it's misuse by the ignorant. What would you call a low impedance voltmeter used by some nimrod to measure voltage in a high impedance circuit? > It is why there are perpetual arguments and misunderstandings about > SWR, tuners and related matters on this newsgroup and in every other > place. That is probably true since most people are opaque as to what goes on on a real transmission line, but not everyone is. > Change the name to TLI, which is what it really does. Novices will not > be lead astray, clear thinking will prevail, false ideas will not take > root to remain embedded for the remainder of one's radio career. Clear thinking would demand that the influences of a real line on the observered SWR at an arbitrary point be explained. > Air pressure indicators instead of airspeedometers are OK because air > pressure actually exists. Non sequitur; SWR actually exists. Getting an accurate measurment is another issue and a matter of education. > SWR meters are NOT OK because there is no line for SWR to exist on. > (At least not where the meter is imagined or supposed to measure it.) Nonsense. > Makes a change from cavity magnetrons. More nonsense and not even a sentence. About the only difference between microwave and HF is that it is a lot easier to build a line, i.e. waveguide, that approximates a theoretical ideal lossless transmission line for reasonable distances at microwave than it is to build lossless coax as commonly used at HF. All the theory remains the same. Personally, I have never had any problem with understanding what it is that a SWR meter displays. > ---- > Reg. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Article: 217580 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <43109$43317117$97d56a13$4287@ALLTEL.NET> <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 02:16:16 GMT Zoran Brlecic wrote: > Just because humans are capable of imagining a god that makes thunder or > a god that makes the Universe or a jolly old man that brings presents, > doesn't mean they exist. On the contrary, human imagination brings lots of concepts into existence. Your words, above, are just one example. Your word, "god", represents a concept that does indeed exist. "Love" is another concept that exists although I have never seen a drop of love. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217581 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Mike Andrews" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 02:21:46 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <43109$43317117$97d56a13$4287@ALLTEL.NET> <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> In rec.radio.amateur.dx Zoran Brlecic <...WA7AA...@get.lost> wrote: > Matt Osborn wrote: >>>>>>In all cases, they believe and act according to their beliefs. That >>>>>>the atheists fall prey to their unrecognized beliefs cannot be >>>>>>disputed. >>>>> >>>>>And this is because you say so? >>>> >>>>Please counter the argument. If atheists do not have faith in their >>>>beliefs, then upon what basis would they judge their choices? >>> >>>First of all, atheism is non-belief in deities. That's it. Anything else >>>you're adding to this concept is your own projection. >>>Second, you're equivocating and word-playing on the term "belief". What >>>beliefs are we talking about in atheism? Atheists don't believe in gods >>>- a lack of belief is not belief any more than baldness is a hair color. >>>So, then, what beliefs? When you define this I'll "counter the argument" >> >> Belief requires faith in something unknown. I see no difference if one >> were to name that unknown G-d or call it by some other name. >> Regardless of the name, we attribute 'correctness' to something we do >> not know. > What has this got to do with atheism? More to the point, what has this got to do with alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf, rec.radio.amateur.antenna, rec.radio.amateur.dx, or rec.radio.amateur.equipment? Please, folks, take it to E-mail or to some group more suited to discussion of philosophy and religion. I'd like to see something having to do with radio here. Apropos which, I see on the R-390 list that someone actually managed to hear SAQ's arc broadcast on 17.2 KHz last week. -- Mike Andrews, W5EGO mikea@mikea.ath.cx Tired old sysadmin Article: 217582 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Uncle Ted Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 22:55:32 -0400 Message-ID: References: <11htogetcauugb1@news.supernews.com> <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <0nmUe.9902$FW1.9234@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 16:44:00 -0400, "Fred W4JLE" wrote: >When the professor regained his senses and could speak he asked: "What the >hell is the matter with you?! Why did you do that?" "God was really busy >protecting America's soldiers, who are protecting your right to say stupid >things and act like a jerk !!! So he sent me!!" > > >ONE NATION UNDER GOD!!! Just what we need - a bunch of testosterone-charge assholes punching out people that don't believe in their god. It's pretty obvious who the real jerk is in your story, and it isn't the professor. Article: 217583 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kashe@sonic.net Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: References: <31f74$43299abf$471c63c6$12083@ALLTEL.NET> <1126821476.840433.194860@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <5ujsi196c3dl0l0a7su4uqltnt4u0ql4ko@4ax.com> <3f84j1t6o536tgnekhutv1ruepdo5d5ggs@4ax.com> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 03:13:56 GMT On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 06:42:51 -0400, Uncle Ted wrote: >On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 03:16:14 GMT, kashe@sonic.net wrote: > >>On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 22:22:10 -0400, Uncle Ted >>wrote: >> >>>On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 05:41:38 GMT, kashe@sonic.net wrote: >>> >>>>>It's bad enough that people feel a need to believe in any deities at >>>>>all, but when you have to listen to a bunch of old men in robes half a >>>>>world away tell you how to live your life, you're pretty screwed up. >>>> >>>> Is this a slam against our Muslim brethren? A comment on the >>>>position of Saudi Arabian women? >>> >>>Pope worshipers and Mohamahdists are all the same to me... >> >> That says more about you than about them. > >Such as? If you have to ask .... From Wed Sep 28 23:53:03 EDT 2005 Article: 217584 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 22:28:50 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 38 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-11!sn-xit-06!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22810 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217584 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29513 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208680 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251160 On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 18:45:44 -0700, Zoran Brlecic <...WA7AA...@get.lost> wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: >> Belief requires faith in something unknown. I see no difference if one > were to name that unknown G-d or call it by some other name. >> Regardless of the name, we attribute 'correctness' to something we do >> not know. > >What has this got to do with atheism? I still don't see any faith or >belief in *not* believing that a magic supernatural dude created >everything. Not believing supernatural and paranormal concepts is a >default state. If you want to convince me or anyone else about your >extraordinary claim, you have to provide extraordinary evidence. Simply >saying "it is so because I say it is so" does not cut it. May I suggest you read the 'Golden Bough' by Frazer, for starters. The belief in the unknown is universal, it is a fundamental part of the human psyche. When you say " I still don't see any faith or belief in *not* believing that a magic supernatural dude created everything", you are merely saying that what you believe is better than what the other guy believes. I've heard the same from some Christians speaking of Muslims, from some Muslims speaking of Christians, etc. What you seem to be doing is standing on soap box and claiming that Atheism is correct and religion is not. That Atheism has basis in fact where other religions are based on superstitions. Atheism is exactly the same in all fundamental respects as any other religion. Atheism, in other words doesn't exist, it cannot exist in any real sense. Rather than I proving that an elephant can't fly, why don't you prove that it can? -- msosborn at msosborn dot com From Wed Sep 28 23:53:03 EDT 2005 Article: 217585 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 22:35:44 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 47 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22811 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217585 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29514 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208681 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251161 On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 18:49:17 -0700, Zoran Brlecic <...WA7AA...@get.lost> wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: > >>>According to you, all atheists should be immoral by definition. It >>>follows that prisons should be overflowing with them. Yet, strangely >>>enough, in American prisons, Christians are over-represented, while >>>atheists (along with Jews and Muslims) are under-represented. >> >> >> No, I don't think atheists are amoral or unmoral, I just don't think >> it's possible to be an atheist. > > >Well, then, you're clearly wrong, because I, for one, along with >millions of other people, am an atheist. I don't believe in your god, >nor do I believe in any other god until you provide objective evidence >instead of wishful thinking, "knowing in one's heart" and ancient myths. > >And if you still don't understand why, ask yourself why you don't >believe in Allah, Aphrodite, Ares, Athena, Apollo, Artemis, Babaluaye, >Bacchus, Baldur, Bast, Bellona, Brahma, Brigid, Ceres, Cupid, Cerridwen, >Demeter, Diana, Dione, Dionysus, Eris, Eos, Eleggua, , El Shaddai, >Elohim, Eshu, Ereshkigal, Frigga, Frey, Freya, Gaea, Lord Genesa, Hades, >Hebe, Hera, Helios, Hel, Hephaestus, Hermes, Hestia, Horus, Ibeji, Ifa, >Inanna, Indra, Ishana, Ishtar, Isis, Janus, Juno, Jehovah, Jove, >Jupiter, Kali, Krishna, Kronos, Korravai, Loki, Lugh, Lord Indra, >Manitou, Mars, Mercury, Minerva, Mercurius, Morrigan, Nahuiquiahuitl, >Nanahuatzin, Nephthys, Neptune, Obatala, Odin, Ogun, Oshosi, Oshun, >Osiris, Oya, Orunmila, Olokun, Olodumare, Pluto, Persephone, Poseidon, >Proserpina, Quetzalcoatl, Ra, Lord Rama, Rhea, Saturn, Set, Selene, >Shango, Lord Siva, Tammuz, Thor, Tir, Tiw, Uranus, Venus, Vesta, Vishnu, >Vesta, Vulcan, Wotan, Yahweh, Yemaya and Zeus. You have made no case for atheism. All you have done is list a series of things in which do not believe. You have not listed what you do believe or in what you have placed your faith. Atheism is a logically faulty concept. Being human, you cannot possibly know everything. What you may think of the unknown is entirely up to you, but whatever that may be, will require just as much faith as any other religion. Your religion simply has different trappings. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217586 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: W2RAC Subject: Re: highwind,rohn25,stayerect??? Message-ID: <17sej1t8uo30m4kqkdkfeq48mhu9gvsllb@4ax.com> References: Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 03:54:48 GMT My Rohn 25 is as follows 42' high then 6' of mast pipe for a total of 48' no guys. It is anchored with 1yd cube concrete and mounted to a house bracket 9' from bottom. Antennas at that time where a dual band vertical 7' tall and a discone mounted on a homemade side arm and a hf dipole. It survived all the 2004 Hurricanes here in Daytona Beach FL with known winds of 100 mph. Granted, as I install more antennas (couple of yagi's and rotor) I will want to add a set of guy's. On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 14:13:48 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >lorentsonci@lycos.com wrote: >> What should a rohn 25 properly guyed, 50ft tower with two meter/440 >> ground plane antennas be able to 'handle high wind wise'?? >> Watching the news/weagther, I feel some will 'bite the dust'. >> Appreciate your input. cl. > >A properly guyed (2 sets of 3) 50 ft. Rohn 25 in a >minimum recommended configuration will support 10.5 >sq. ft. of antenna at 70 mph or 5 sq. ft. at 110 mph >according to my Rohn drawings. ÿØÿázExif Article: 217587 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <11htogetcauugb1@news.supernews.com> <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <0nmUe.9902$FW1.9234@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 00:09:26 -0400 Message-ID: <81ba1$4337749f$97d56a13$32473@ALLTEL.NET> How can you tell if someone is a liberal? Tell any joke, and they will find a way to take umbrage with it to show how politically correct they are... "Uncle Ted" wrote in message news:qaoej15d3su5d02jkpe603s1r30lohqd99@4ax.com... > On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 16:44:00 -0400, "Fred W4JLE" > wrote: > > > >When the professor regained his senses and could speak he asked: "What the > >hell is the matter with you?! Why did you do that?" "God was really busy > >protecting America's soldiers, who are protecting your right to say stupid > >things and act like a jerk !!! So he sent me!!" > > > > > >ONE NATION UNDER GOD!!! > > Just what we need - a bunch of testosterone-charge assholes punching > out people that don't believe in their god. It's pretty obvious who > the real jerk is in your story, and it isn't the professor. > Article: 217588 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "John Doe" <@127.0.0.1> References: <11jb21o36nq8ocf@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: SWRing The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 14:40:30 +1000 Message-ID: <43377bbc$0$21275$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au> Ah, Reggie & Richie. I tried SWRing once. My mother washed my mouth out with soap & water! Article: 217589 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: Ladder Line and Interference from Metal Objects References: <7iHZe.260$Aw.4524@typhoon.sonic.net> From: Rockinghorse Winner Message-ID: <8ALZe.287$Aw.4479@typhoon.sonic.net> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 05:22:12 GMT Bob Miller writes: >Some lengths work better than others, depending on band. See the web >site, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp and look at the "tunerless" all band >antenna fed w/ladderline. >bob >k5qwg Thanks fer info. I'll check it out-- R*Horse rwinner.blogspot.com From Wed Sep 28 23:53:05 EDT 2005 Article: 217590 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 05:14:19 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 142 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!wn13feed!worldnet.att.net!216.196.98.141!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!fr.ip.ndsoftware.net!62.253.162.218.MISMATCH!news-in.ntli.net!newsrout1-win.ntli.net!ntli.net!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-08!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22813 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217590 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29517 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208683 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251164 On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 00:53:36 -0700, Zoran Brlecic <...WA7AA...@get.lost> wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: > >>>>Belief requires faith in something unknown. I see no difference if one >>> >>>were to name that unknown G-d or call it by some other name. >>> >>>>Regardless of the name, we attribute 'correctness' to something we do >>>>not know. >>> >>>What has this got to do with atheism? I still don't see any faith or >>>belief in *not* believing that a magic supernatural dude created >>>everything. Not believing supernatural and paranormal concepts is a >>>default state. If you want to convince me or anyone else about your >>>extraordinary claim, you have to provide extraordinary evidence. Simply >>>saying "it is so because I say it is so" does not cut it. >> >> >> May I suggest you read the 'Golden Bough' by Frazer, for starters. The >> belief in the unknown is universal, it is a fundamental part of the >> human psyche. >> >> When you say " I still don't see any faith or belief in *not* >> believing that a magic supernatural dude created everything", you are >> merely saying that what you believe is better than what the other guy >> believes. > >Not at all, I keep saying, and you refuse to hear it, that I d-o n-o-t > b-e-l-i-e-v-e i-n y-o-u-r g-o-d-s. Any of them. Your belief in no G-d is no different than any belief in G-d. They are opposite sides of the same coin. If there is nothing to believe in then there is no need to say it. Science is a tool, not a plan. That is, science tells us how to build a house, not what house to build. We cannot exist without a plan, science and knowledge provide no plans, only tools to implement plans. For a plan, we need imagination and imagination requires the faith that we can accomplish or discover what we imagine. >Once again, absence of belief is not a belief. Let me illustrate: I'm not saying that an absence of belief in G-d is a belief in itself. What I am saying is that we do believe in something and would do so even if the concept of G-d had never arisen. If we are to make any plans whatever, we need some basis to make those plans. Without a belief that we can accomplish something we wouldn't even try. Worse, if we did try, our acts would be random in nature as we had no plan. What could that basis for making plans be? It is faith in ourselves and our future. We have to have faith or we would not survive. >suppose that someone accuses you of being a witch. He has no evidence, >other than he believes he saw you kill someone's cow with a spell. Now, >you obviously don't "believe that you're not" a witch, do you? It would >seem that his claim needs evidence/proof and you have nothing to believe >in and nothing to prove. >So now you're saying that his belief and your "belief" are somehow similar? I'm not defending any religion, I'm defending faith itself. How any individual displays or hides that faith is strictly up to the individual. I will insist, though, that all individuals believe in something that they cannot know and are therefore believers. >> What you seem to be doing is standing on soap box and claiming that >> Atheism is correct and religion is not. That Atheism has basis in >> fact where other religions are based on superstitions. >> Atheism is exactly the same in all fundamental respects as any other >> religion. Atheism, in other words doesn't exist, it cannot exist in >> any real sense. Rather than I proving that an elephant can't fly, why >> don't you prove that it can? > >Why don't you prove that your gods, devils and angels exist first, >before engaging in the standard theist shifting of the burden of proof. >If you have nothing to show for your gods other than the usual begging >the question and other logical fallacies, then I don't have to entertain >your hypothesis with any more seriousness than the hypothesis that the >Universe was farted out of the Super-Nuclear Donkey's butt yesterday >afternoon. I am not religious in the way you seem to believe. I do not believe in any of the known religions. Yet I do believe that I'm a part of something which is beyond my grasp. While I cannot know what that something is, I do know that with care and wisdom, I can carve a life worth living out of the unknown. In all of our science and knowledge, we have yet to find random things. Everything is related in some way or another. Atoms join to form molecules, molecules join to form compounds, each joins to form cells, cells join to form plants, etc. We see it in small things and we see it in large things. How did it come about? I have no idea, Am I part of it? Most certainly. >Either way, Matt, you keep spinning the old tired religious nonsense >about atheism being just another theism, because that's pretty much the >only thing they can say on the matter, other than engaging in the ad >hominem about atheists' immorality, that is. > >However, none of this would matter one bit and I would care about >Christianity as much as I care about some Amazon tribe's river gods, if >it weren't for the fact that the religious right affects my life in the >profoundly negative way, and the list is getting longer by the day: >health research, contraceptives, euthanasia, abortion, education, >politics, freedom of expression, "morality" laws, taxes, phony illegal >wars, etc. Your litany impinges upon the belief of others just as you say they impinge upon yours. You seem to think that we need not compromise to keep civilization alive. If you had your way, and in many respects you do, you would and you do affect my life negatively. We're in that same boat, you and I, as far as that goes. These are the normal struggles between ideas and beliefs. They have always existed and will always exist. Nothing above distinguishes the atheist from the religious. Each have their beliefs and opinions, each thinks their beliefs and opinions are correct. The only thing that varies is the reason for their beliefs and that reason varies even between religions. Atheists are no different than the religious, they, as do the religious themselves, simply believe in different things. >Americans have almost absolute freedom to practice their religion in >their homes and in their churches as they please, but that is never >enough for the Christian Taliban, is it? They won't be happy until this >country becomes a Christian Saudi Arabia. And you won't be happy until when? 73 KC0UKK -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217591 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 10:23:42 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: > Errr, no, the meter is telling what it sees at the point of measurement. > ===================================== But the meter is not seeing an SWR because an SWR does not exist. Where is the 50-ohm transmission line on which the SWR is imagined or supposed to lie? As you are unable to answer that question, the remainder of your argument (which, as I say, arises because of the SWR meter misleading misnomer) falls flat on its face. You are an intelligent person. I don't doubt you have no problems with understanding what the so-called SWR meter really indicates. But you didn't learn this from observations of the SWR meter - as you already know it tells lies! Just to reiterate, the so-called SWR meter indicates only whether or not the load on the transmitter is a resistive 50 ohms. If it is not 50 ohms it will not tell you what it actually is. Not that you need to know what it actually is because you will readjust your tuner, without thinking about it, to make it equal to 50 ohms. Which corresponds to no deflection of the meter needle. The TLI is a very useful and valuable device. It does not lead novices and old-wives (who ought to know better) into false ideas, or cause confusion and misunderstandings within the amateur fraternity. Professionals dismiss SWR for what it is worth anyway. Goodby to SWR except on lines where it matters and where it can be measured. Which, in practice, are very few. --- Reg, G4FGQ. From Wed Sep 28 23:53:05 EDT 2005 Article: 217592 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 05:27:54 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <7hifj15mjlbknfp34mdofh9q64us7gh6tj@4ax.com> References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <1eadnVR7S-qqMKreRVn-og@comcast.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 69 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!elk.ncren.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-08!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22814 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217592 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29518 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208684 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251165 On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 01:11:34 -0700, Zoran Brlecic <...WA7AA...@get.lost> wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: > > >>>Well, then, you're clearly wrong, because I, for one, along with >>>millions of other people, am an atheist. I don't believe in your god, >>>nor do I believe in any other god until you provide objective evidence >>>instead of wishful thinking, "knowing in one's heart" and ancient myths. > >> You have made no case for atheism. All you have done is list a series >> of things in which do not believe. You have not listed what you do >> believe or in what you have placed your faith. > >What difference does it make what I "believe"? When it comes to blind >faith in the supernatural and paranormal, I believe none of it until it >can be scientifically repeated, falsified and explained. Other than >that, I believe the Sun will rise tomorrow and I believe in peace and >love, and I believe I'll have a beer. But please don't go confusing >these three "beliefs" with the belief in the supernatural. This is the >equivocation game and it's dishonest. You do have blind faith in something unless you've already discovered everything. None of us can say anything of the unknown with certainty, yet we all have the faith to tackle the unknown head on and to carve from it useful knowledge. BTW, despite the allegations, there is no conflict between science and religion. The religious use science just as much as the rest of us. >> Atheism is a logically faulty concept. Being human, you cannot >> possibly know everything. > >What difference does this make? I don't know how the Universe began and >quite possibly no one will ever know exactly, but does that mean we can >simply pull the "answers" out of our asses? I am not playing the god of >the gaps game either. That's just stupid. If you don't know everything, than you have to have faith that you can operate and archive something in the face of the unknown. How you perceive that faith is up to you, but it is there. >> What you may think of the unknown is >> entirely up to you, but whatever that may be, will require just as >> much faith as any other religion. Your religion simply has different >> trappings. > >[sigh] I suppose it's hopeless. > >You keep blindly repeating what your voodoo practitioners told you, and >are unwilling to accept that atheists get to define what atheism is - >not you. So feel free to believe (no pun) that atheism is religion or >that atheists "deny" God, but I am telling you that the only thing that >atheism is, is the absence of belief in gods. Period. Agreed. Where we differ is that you think that makes you somehow different from those that do. You're not different, you're exactly the same. >And to everyone's relief, this will be my last post. Whoever wants to >follow up is free to transfer the discussion to alt.atheism, soc.atheism >or talk.atheism. > >73 ... WA7AA -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217593 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 11:34:02 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <85tbj1hk1oi2gsp5e8dcp82gjpqrisfsfd@4ax.com> <9ZOdndbRttI2zKreRVn-sQ@adelphia.com> > What happened to all the old Bugs Bunny cartoons anyway? > > - Mike KB3EIA - ================================== It is unfortunate that Hollywood so long has dominated the world's supposedly desirable standards of human behaviour and described, by countless examples in films, the ficticious and imagined way of life in the USA. But the truth about real life went to pot after Charlie Chaplin and others were expelled from your shores. Things may be different now that the Japanese wealth and enterprise have taken over Hollywood. But perhaps it is too late. The Internet, not Hollywood, is taking over the dissemination of ideas. Big Brother Rules! They who own and control the means of communication will rule the Earth. Makes a change from so-called SWR meters. ---- Reg, G4FGQ. Article: 217594 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 12:27:58 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> > Your belief in no G-d is no different than any belief in G-d. ==================================== It is noticed that you are sufficiently superstitious and afraid of the deity even to use, in print, the full name and description of "god". How do you manage in normal conversation to convey your ideas? ---- Reg. Article: 217595 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 13:33:22 GMT Matt Osborn wrote: > Atheism is exactly the same in all fundamental respects as any other > religion. If an atheist believes only in things that can be proven using the scientific method, he is the *exact opposite* of a religious person who substitutes blind faith for scientific inquiry. > Atheism, in other words doesn't exist, it cannot exist in > any real sense. This is known in scientific logic as begging the question. The onus of proof is upon you to first prove that a supreme supernatural being exists. Only after you accomplish that scientific feat of classic logic would you be in a position to discuss the implications. > Rather than I proving that an elephant can't fly, why > don't you prove that it can? The onus of proof is upon the person who asserts the positive premise which is: "God exists." Until you prove your premise, all of your arguments are easily recognized as logical diversions. Therefore all of your statements must be prefaced with: "If and only if my particular God exists, ...". If the existence of God were ever proven beyond a reasonable doubt and atheists continued to disbelieve, then atheism would become a religion, but not before. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217596 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 14:04:18 GMT Matt Osborn wrote: > You have made no case for atheism. Not that I'm an atheist, but here is the case for atheism: The existence of even one of the following as a supernatural being has never been proven. Allah, Aphrodite, Ares, Athena, Apollo, Artemis, Babaluaye, Bacchus, Baldur, Bast, Bellona, Brahma, Brigid, Ceres, Cupid, Cerridwen, Demeter, Diana, Dione, Dionysus, Eris, Eos, Eleggua, , El Shaddai, Elohim, Eshu, Ereshkigal, Frigga, Frey, Freya, Gaea, Lord Genesa, Hades, Hebe, Hera, Helios, Hel, Hephaestus, Hermes, Hestia, Horus, Ibeji, Ifa, Inanna, Indra, Ishana, Ishtar, Isis, Janus, Juno, Jehovah, Jove, Jupiter, Kali, Krishna, Kronos, Korravai, Loki, Lugh, Lord Indra, Manitou, Mars, Mercury, Minerva, Mercurius, Morrigan, Nahuiquiahuitl, Nanahuatzin, Nephthys, Neptune, Obatala, Odin, Ogun, Oshosi, Oshun, Osiris, Oya, Orunmila, Olokun, Olodumare, Pluto, Persephone, Poseidon, Proserpina, Quetzalcoatl, Ra, Lord Rama, Rhea, Saturn, Set, Selene, Shango, Lord Siva, Tammuz, Thor, Tir, Tiw, Uranus, Venus, Vesta, Vishnu, Vesta, Vulcan, Wotan, Yahweh, Yemaya and Zeus Even the very existence of a supernatural dimension or realm has never been proven. Religion is based on blind faith and beliefs in things that cannot be proven. Atheism is based on an absence of blind faith and beliefs in things that can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217597 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <43109$43317117$97d56a13$4287@ALLTEL.NET> <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 14:12:40 GMT Zoran Brlecic wrote: > I am not arguing that the *concept* of a god does not exist. I know, Zoran, the devil made me do it. :-) -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217598 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 14:33:56 GMT Matt Osborn wrote: > In all of our science and knowledge, we have yet to find random > things. False. Certain characteristics of entangled particles are completely random and must remain so in order to avoid faster than light transfer of information, something presently considered to be impossible. Can your G-d communicate at faster than light speeds? > Atheists are no different than the religious, they, as do the > religious themselves, simply believe in different things. False. The absence of a belief is the exact opposite of the existence of a belief. By your logic, the absence of a tree is exactly the same thing as the presence of a tree. Methinks you picked the wrong newsgroup to try to flim-flam. Are you an EH antenna salesman by any chance? :-) -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217599 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. References: Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 14:39:25 GMT Reg Edwards wrote: > Where is the 50-ohm transmission line on which the SWR is imagined or > supposed to lie? On my system, there's a 50 ohm cable from the transceiver to the input of the SWR meter and another 50 ohm cable from the output of the SWR meter to the balun. Each of these cables forces the ratio of the voltage to current in each of the traveling waves to a value of 50 ohms. I have an in-line Autek WM-1 and no tuner. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217600 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Uncle Ted Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 10:30:45 -0400 Message-ID: References: <11htogetcauugb1@news.supernews.com> <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126284201.468452.155920@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <0nmUe.9902$FW1.9234@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 22:31:47 -0700, Cmdr Buzz Corey wrote: >> Just what we need - a bunch of testosterone-charge assholes punching >> out people that don't believe in their god. It's pretty obvious who >> the real jerk is in your story, and it isn't the professor. >> > >It's a joke son. Yes, and I've heard this joke told before by people who think they're being clever. Unfortunately, there are too many people that have this mentality in real life. They are the ones who say, "You're free, as long as you think the same way as me." Article: 217601 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Uncle Ted Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 10:44:55 -0400 Message-ID: <3k1gj1doq7j8r8s4289jfnnk3k6b6dshg8@4ax.com> References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 22:35:44 -0500, Matt Osborn <> wrote: >You have made no case for atheism. All you have done is list a series >of things in which do not believe. You have not listed what you do >believe or in what you have placed your faith. > >Atheism is a logically faulty concept. Being human, you cannot >possibly know everything. What you may think of the unknown is >entirely up to you, but whatever that may be, will require just as >much faith as any other religion. Your religion simply has different >trappings. There are some atheists who say that there is no god, and there are others who say that the existence of any god can neither be proven nor disproved. Either way, those asserting a belief in a god have the burden of proof. It's not up to atheists to prove that a god does not exist. Of course, you are correct when you say that humans cannot possibly know everything, but to accept a concept such as "god" is applying faith without any critical thinking or reason. This is blind faith. Article: 217602 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "k" References: <1gnbj11s90aa1jc5j5cbrgt5i2e00o7k73@4ax.com> <4335f2e1$0$22196$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <982gj1hr87ahvbl001cpkstuttn754aa6c@4ax.com> Subject: Re: Hams of FCC's RID Aid Allied Effort in WW2 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 15:16:51 GMT So, what does it mean, or would you have to kill me if you told me? Jer "J. Teske" wrote in message news:982gj1hr87ahvbl001cpkstuttn754aa6c@4ax.com... : On 25 Sep 2005 23:18:18 GMT, bg998@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Martin Potter) : wrote: : : > : >Tom Ring (news0002@taring.org) writes: : >> : >> I would say say, please keep it up, on or off topic. Thanks so much for : >> these pieces of history. : >> : > : > : >Hear, hear!! : > : >... Martin VE3OAT : >ex-CSE (CANUKUS Eyes Only) : : Hey Martin, I know what that all means : : Jon W3JT, Retired NSA : > : Article: 217603 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Uncle Ted Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 11:06:09 -0400 Message-ID: References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <1eadnVR7S-qqMKreRVn-og@comcast.com> <7hifj15mjlbknfp34mdofh9q64us7gh6tj@4ax.com> On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 05:27:54 -0500, Matt Osborn <> wrote: >You do have blind faith in something unless you've already discovered >everything. None of us can say anything of the unknown with >certainty, yet we all have the faith to tackle the unknown head on and >to carve from it useful knowledge. Of course, if you paint with that broad of a stroke, faith can mean just about anything you want it to mean. To say that atheists have "faith" in their beliefs or that such beliefs are actually a religion is flawed. I can assure you that if some winged being flew down out of the sun and ended all disease, suffering, and hunger, and brought peace to the world, and if every person in the world called this being "god" in their own native tongue, I guarantee even the most hardcore atheist would have faith in that god. >BTW, despite the allegations, there is no conflict between science and >religion. The religious use science just as much as the rest of us. No, the conflict is about religionists trying to pass their beliefs off as science. >>What difference does this make? I don't know how the Universe began and >>quite possibly no one will ever know exactly, but does that mean we can >>simply pull the "answers" out of our asses? I am not playing the god of >>the gaps game either. That's just stupid. > >If you don't know everything, than you have to have faith that you can >operate and archive something in the face of the unknown. How you >perceive that faith is up to you, but it is there. ...and the brush strokes become even broader. Article: 217604 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Uncle Ted Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 11:11:12 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1126821476.840433.194860@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <5ujsi196c3dl0l0a7su4uqltnt4u0ql4ko@4ax.com> <3f84j1t6o536tgnekhutv1ruepdo5d5ggs@4ax.com> On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 03:13:56 GMT, kashe@sonic.net wrote: >>>>>>It's bad enough that people feel a need to believe in any deities at >>>>>>all, but when you have to listen to a bunch of old men in robes half a >>>>>>world away tell you how to live your life, you're pretty screwed up. >>>>> >>>>> Is this a slam against our Muslim brethren? A comment on the >>>>>position of Saudi Arabian women? >>>> >>>>Pope worshipers and Mohamahdists are all the same to me... >>> >>> That says more about you than about them. >> >>Such as? > > If you have to ask .... Ambiguity will get you nowhere. Article: 217605 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 15:27:41 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Reg Edwards wrote: > > Errr, no, the meter is telling what it sees at the point of > measurement. > > > ===================================== > But the meter is not seeing an SWR because an SWR does not exist. Nonsense. > Where is the 50-ohm transmission line on which the SWR is imagined or > supposed to lie? In my personal case, there is 50 Ohm transmission line between the transceiver and the SWR meter, then a length of line to a coax switch, then several lines out to antennas. You seem fixated on haveing some magical length of transmission line being necessary for a SWR to exist. This is nonsense. > As you are unable to answer that question, the remainder of your > argument (which, as I say, arises because of the SWR meter misleading > misnomer) falls flat on its face. > You are an intelligent person. I don't doubt you have no problems > with understanding what the so-called SWR meter really indicates. But > you didn't learn this from observations of the SWR meter - as you > already know it tells lies! Babble. A SWR meter indicates what is. Knowing what the reading really means is a matter of education, not veracity. > Just to reiterate, the so-called SWR meter indicates only whether or > not the load on the transmitter is a resistive 50 ohms. If it is not > 50 ohms it will not tell you what it actually is. Not that you need to > know what it actually is because you will readjust your tuner, without > thinking about it, to make it equal to 50 ohms. Which corresponds to > no deflection of the meter needle. With some education and multiple measurements, you can caluclate the actual impedance if one desires. What tuner? What makes you believe everyone has a tuner? > The TLI is a very useful and valuable device. It does not lead > novices and old-wives (who ought to know better) into false ideas, or > cause confusion and misunderstandings within the amateur fraternity. > Professionals dismiss SWR for what it is worth anyway. The only one I see confused is you and professionals use SWR all the time and in many systems it is extremely important. > Goodby to SWR except on lines where it matters and where it can be > measured. Which, in practice, are very few. If one knows what they are doing, SWR can always be measured. > --- > Reg, G4FGQ. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Article: 217606 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 16:20:14 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Jim wrote, > If one knows what they are doing, SWR can always be measured. > =================================== NOT on a line which isn't there. QED. --- Reg. Article: 217607 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: rob Subject: Re: Lightning Question References: <1125443164.355999.136830@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 16:34:26 GMT N7ZZT - Eric Oyen wrote: > wizard12342002@yahoo.com wrote: > > >>Suppose I have an antenna some distance from the house. I run the >>transmission line down from the antenna, bury the line, run it >>underground to the house, place a lightning arrestor and ground just >>outside the house, then run the transmission line up the side of the >>house to the operating position on the second floor. Does anyone see a >>problem with this arrangement? I can't imagine that a lightning would >>"want" to travel back up toward the operating position when it has a >>good ground (at the arrestor) closer to the antenna. >> >>-JJ > > you would be better to place a lightning arrestor at the tower (and ground > the tower as well) and perhaps 1 or 2 along the coax to your house (all > ground rodded). This method is referred to as "defense in depth" . Wouldn't this encourage lightning to go through your tower? (with the risk of the concrete holding the tower up being cracked/ or worse) I would think that putting earths a safe distance away from the tower's support would be better ? (BTW I am not an expert!) Not sure how they protect HT Pylons here in the UK - or even that they are protected? Rob Article: 217608 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim Higgins Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: <478gj1h5m0rk1mq8sue81q95r4ik2g117f@4ax.com> References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 16:26:28 GMT On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 14:04:18 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: >> You have made no case for atheism. > >Not that I'm an atheist, but here is the case for atheism: The >existence of even one of the following as a supernatural being >has never been proven. > >Allah, Aphrodite, Ares, Athena, Apollo, Artemis, Babaluaye, >Bacchus, Baldur, Bast, Bellona, Brahma, Brigid, Ceres, Cupid, Cerridwen, >Demeter, Diana, Dione, Dionysus, Eris, Eos, Eleggua, , El Shaddai, >Elohim, Eshu, Ereshkigal, Frigga, Frey, Freya, Gaea, Lord Genesa, Hades, >Hebe, Hera, Helios, Hel, Hephaestus, Hermes, Hestia, Horus, Ibeji, Ifa, >Inanna, Indra, Ishana, Ishtar, Isis, Janus, Juno, Jehovah, Jove, >Jupiter, Kali, Krishna, Kronos, Korravai, Loki, Lugh, Lord Indra, >Manitou, Mars, Mercury, Minerva, Mercurius, Morrigan, Nahuiquiahuitl, >Nanahuatzin, Nephthys, Neptune, Obatala, Odin, Ogun, Oshosi, Oshun, >Osiris, Oya, Orunmila, Olokun, Olodumare, Pluto, Persephone, Poseidon, >Proserpina, Quetzalcoatl, Ra, Lord Rama, Rhea, Saturn, Set, Selene, >Shango, Lord Siva, Tammuz, Thor, Tir, Tiw, Uranus, Venus, Vesta, Vishnu, >Vesta, Vulcan, Wotan, Yahweh, Yemaya and Zeus That list is conspicuous for the absence of Bob and The Flying Spaghetti Monster. Article: 217609 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim Kelley Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 10:32:15 -0700 Message-ID: References: Reg Edwards wrote: > Jim wrote, > > >>If one knows what they are doing, SWR can always be measured. >> > > =================================== > > NOT on a line which isn't there. QED. > --- > Reg. Perhaps this is a dumb question Reg, but if the transmission line isn't there, how does RF get from the transmitter to the antenna? Thanks, ac6xg Article: 217610 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Bob Bob Subject: Free space pathloss calcs and factor K Message-ID: <5hpl03-3ps.ln1@p400bob.personal.cox.net> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 12:59:32 -0500 Hi all. No doubt I could get this reading lots and lots of text books. It might however be interesting to air a discussion on it.. Have been reading the free space pathloss formula from the ARRL antenna handbook; Loss in dB = K + 20logf + 20logD Where f is the freq in GHz and D is the distance in miles K is a constant of around 96.6dB I have known about a "fixed K" loss in an antenna system for ages. It even made mention I think in this NG recently when talking about a passive repeater system. From my own exposure to path modelling (EDX/Pathloss etc) I noted a very high dB loss per distance rate in the first (say) 100 wavelengths when looking at graphs of same. (I wasnt doing the actual job, just providing data to the engineer to compare measured with predicted. Fascinating stuff!) What I wonder is where roughly does the 96dB odd "come from". More interestingly can it be reduced by any appreciable amount. Is it maybe a antenna to "air" coupling loss, maybe even that a RX antenna cant possibly extract all of the energy from the wave as it goes past. I would appreciate any input on this. My initial forays (as a young ham) into LOS paths went through the isotropic/point source radiators and looking at the surface area of the covered "sphere" containing all of the radiated power idea. Then the RX antenna "aperture" area was used to calculate the actual received power. Needless to say it never met the actual measured values! Cheers Bob VK2YQA (in W5) Article: 217611 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "harrogate2" References: <5hpl03-3ps.ln1@p400bob.personal.cox.net> Subject: Re: Free space pathloss calcs and factor K Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 18:06:35 GMT "Bob Bob" wrote in message news:5hpl03-3ps.ln1@p400bob.personal.cox.net... > Hi all. > > No doubt I could get this reading lots and lots of text books. It might > however be interesting to air a discussion on it.. > > Have been reading the free space pathloss formula from the ARRL antenna > handbook; > > Loss in dB = K + 20logf + 20logD > > Where f is the freq in GHz and D is the distance in miles > > K is a constant of around 96.6dB > > I have known about a "fixed K" loss in an antenna system for ages. It > even made mention I think in this NG recently when talking about a > passive repeater system. From my own exposure to path modelling > (EDX/Pathloss etc) I noted a very high dB loss per distance rate in the > first (say) 100 wavelengths when looking at graphs of same. (I wasnt > doing the actual job, just providing data to the engineer to compare > measured with predicted. Fascinating stuff!) > > What I wonder is where roughly does the 96dB odd "come from". More > interestingly can it be reduced by any appreciable amount. Is it maybe a > antenna to "air" coupling loss, maybe even that a RX antenna cant > possibly extract all of the energy from the wave as it goes past. I > would appreciate any input on this. > > My initial forays (as a young ham) into LOS paths went through the > isotropic/point source radiators and looking at the surface area of the > covered "sphere" containing all of the radiated power idea. Then the RX > antenna "aperture" area was used to calculate the actual received power. > Needless to say it never met the actual measured values! > > Cheers Bob VK2YQA (in W5) For interest the K is 36 if the frequency is in MHz and the distance in miles, or 32.5 if the distance is in Km. Used it for years and it's never far out. -- Woody harrogate2 at ntlworld dot com Article: 217612 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "David G. Nagel" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 13:12:55 -0500 Message-ID: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> References: Reg Edwards wrote: >>Errr, no, the meter is telling what it sees at the point of > > measurement. > > ===================================== > > But the meter is not seeing an SWR because an SWR does not exist. > > Where is the 50-ohm transmission line on which the SWR is imagined or > supposed to lie? > Why do you keep insisting that SWR can only exhist on a 50-ohm transmission line. There are a multitude of impedances in transmission lines that are other than 50-ohms. SWR is present on every and any transmission line that doesn't match the transmission element perfectly. Dave WD9BDZ > As you are unable to answer that question, the remainder of your > argument (which, as I say, arises because of the SWR meter misleading > misnomer) falls flat on its face. > > You are an intelligent person. I don't doubt you have no problems > with understanding what the so-called SWR meter really indicates. But > you didn't learn this from observations of the SWR meter - as you > already know it tells lies! > > Just to reiterate, the so-called SWR meter indicates only whether or > not the load on the transmitter is a resistive 50 ohms. If it is not > 50 ohms it will not tell you what it actually is. Not that you need to > know what it actually is because you will readjust your tuner, without > thinking about it, to make it equal to 50 ohms. Which corresponds to > no deflection of the meter needle. > > The TLI is a very useful and valuable device. It does not lead > novices and old-wives (who ought to know better) into false ideas, or > cause confusion and misunderstandings within the amateur fraternity. > Professionals dismiss SWR for what it is worth anyway. > > Goodby to SWR except on lines where it matters and where it can be > measured. Which, in practice, are very few. > --- > Reg, G4FGQ. > > Article: 217613 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "JD" References: <4335D3C9.5722F5A4@js.com> <11jbv2j4qkqg138@news.supernews.com> Subject: Re: The Tower still standing ???? Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 14:07:27 -0400 The tower looks great Charlie. Hope to have one similar going myself soon. John VE3DIX "Charlie" wrote in message news:11jbv2j4qkqg138@news.supernews.com... Dunno Joey..lemme go outside and see. Yup still standing..as if you really cared except to revel if it were to come down..... -- Charlie "joey" wrote in message news:4335D3C9.5722F5A4@js.com... > http://deepsouthnet.net/tower.html > > Wonder if this tower is still standing, > with guy cables anchored to oak trees > and one telephone pole ?? > Article: 217614 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "David G. Nagel" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 13:22:06 -0500 Message-ID: <11jgf2k423re00@corp.supernews.com> References: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > Reg Edwards wrote: > >>>Errr, no, the meter is telling what it sees at the point of >> >>measurement. >> >>===================================== > > >>But the meter is not seeing an SWR because an SWR does not exist. > > > Nonsense. > > >>Where is the 50-ohm transmission line on which the SWR is imagined or >>supposed to lie? > > > In my personal case, there is 50 Ohm transmission line between the > transceiver and the SWR meter, then a length of line to a coax switch, > then several lines out to antennas. > > You seem fixated on haveing some magical length of transmission line > being necessary for a SWR to exist. This is nonsense. > > >>As you are unable to answer that question, the remainder of your >>argument (which, as I say, arises because of the SWR meter misleading >>misnomer) falls flat on its face. > > >>You are an intelligent person. I don't doubt you have no problems >>with understanding what the so-called SWR meter really indicates. But >>you didn't learn this from observations of the SWR meter - as you >>already know it tells lies! > > > Babble. > > A SWR meter indicates what is. Knowing what the reading really means > is a matter of education, not veracity. > > >>Just to reiterate, the so-called SWR meter indicates only whether or >>not the load on the transmitter is a resistive 50 ohms. If it is not >>50 ohms it will not tell you what it actually is. Not that you need to >>know what it actually is because you will readjust your tuner, without >>thinking about it, to make it equal to 50 ohms. Which corresponds to >>no deflection of the meter needle. > > > With some education and multiple measurements, you can caluclate > the actual impedance if one desires. > > What tuner? What makes you believe everyone has a tuner? > Actually no one has a tuner. To tune an antenna you must make physical adjustments to the length, location, size, etc. to the antenna. What one has is an impedance matching network. Modern transmitters are set to expect a characteristic impedance of 50-ohms. If the transmission line and antenna system is not 50-ohms you must insert various values of capacitance and inductance so as to make the transmitter think it is looking at 50-ohms. Older, read tube, transmitters, read finals, generally have adjustable inductance and capacitance elements between the output plate/s and the transmission line. Adjusting these does the same thing as using an external transmatch. If we are going to be picky lets be accurate. Now, having said this if I happen to be wrong on any specific element I welcome correction not scorn. Dave WD9BDZ > >>The TLI is a very useful and valuable device. It does not lead >>novices and old-wives (who ought to know better) into false ideas, or >>cause confusion and misunderstandings within the amateur fraternity. >>Professionals dismiss SWR for what it is worth anyway. > > > The only one I see confused is you and professionals use SWR all the > time and in many systems it is extremely important. > > >>Goodby to SWR except on lines where it matters and where it can be >>measured. Which, in practice, are very few. > > > If one knows what they are doing, SWR can always be measured. > > >>--- >>Reg, G4FGQ. > > > > Article: 217615 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: dplatt@radagast.org (Dave Platt) Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 18:24:06 -0000 Message-ID: <11jgf66o5ba6i4d@corp.supernews.com> References: In article , Reg Edwards wrote: >> If one knows what they are doing, SWR can always be measured. >NOT on a line which isn't there. QED. In the strong sense of the definition ("A VSWR meter is a meter which measures, literally, the ratio between the voltage maxima and minima present on a transmission line"), Reg is correct. This can be done with a section of slotted line and a probe, of course, tapped into a section of a transmission line having the same characteristic impedance. That's not how a typical amateur "SWR" meter works, though - it's not either locating or measuring either the maxima or the minima of either voltage or current on the line. So, the strong, literal, pedantic sense of the term, I agree with Reg that a standard "SWR" meter is not truly measuring SWR, and that he's correct in his objection. However, I also think he's overstating the case. An "SWR" meter circuit, in the usual sense (e.g. a Monimatch or similar) can provide an accurate *indirect* measurement of SWR, *if* the conditions under which it is used are appropriate. It measures the currents and voltages flowing through it, and derives (electrically and mathematically) a number which correlates extremely well to what a true SWR measurement on a T-line of specified impedance would say. If you build and calibrate this sort of circuit accurately enough, and then put it in the middle of a section of 50-ohm line (or whatever it's calibrated for), it'll give the same numbers as a true, direct measurement of VSWR on a length of T-line at that point. Now, it's true (as Reg says) that a Monimatch or similar indirect-measurement meter can give you inaccurate or misleading numbers, if used in an environment other than what it's designed for. If you stick a Monimatch at the output of a transmitter or transmatch, with its output looking into a high-impedance balanced line, then the numbers it displays won't equal the actual VSWR on the line. You might be able to come up with a correction factor / curve for it, though. If you stick it right at the transmitter output, and it reads 1.0:1, then you can be confident that your transmitter is seeing the load that it wants to see... hence Reg's desire to have it renamed as a "TLI". Seems to me, though, that the same is true of a real "VSWR" measurement system (e.g. a slotted line) if you use it under inappropriate test conditions. If you take a slotted-line-and- probe measurement device whose internal line is 50 ohms, and stick it in the middle of a 75-ohm line, and measure the VSWR on your slotted line, you'll come up with a number which *does* equal the VSWR in the slotted line but does *not* equal the VSWR on the actual transmission line. Same problem, really. In that sense, even a "real" VSWR meter isn't a "useful" VSWR meter, if you use it inappropriately. All that being said: I conclude that there's nothing wrong with calling a Monimatch (or similar) current/voltage measurement circuit a "SWR" meter, as it *will* display correct and accurate numbers for the SWR on the line when used appropriately (within the limits of its calibration, of course). It's up to the user to understand the conditions under which this sort of measurement can be made accurately and usefully... just as it is with every other sort of test instrument I know of. Reg, I think you're tilting at windmills. -- Dave Platt AE6EO Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads! Article: 217616 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "David G. Nagel" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 13:24:58 -0500 Message-ID: <11jgf7vp410sc82@corp.supernews.com> References: Jim Kelley wrote: > > > Reg Edwards wrote: > >> Jim wrote, >> >> >>> If one knows what they are doing, SWR can always be measured. >>> >> >> =================================== >> >> NOT on a line which isn't there. QED. >> --- >> Reg. > > > Perhaps this is a dumb question Reg, but if the transmission line isn't > there, how does RF get from the transmitter to the antenna? > > Thanks, ac6xg > > > Well there's wave guide, there's printed circuit traces, there's wire. OPPS.... those are transmission lines. Dave WD9BDZ Article: 217617 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim Kelley Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 11:51:06 -0700 Message-ID: References: <43109$43317117$97d56a13$4287@ALLTEL.NET> <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <5245a$4335d586$97d56a13$3658@ALLTEL.NET> Reg Edwards wrote: > The symbol of Christianity is an instrument of torture. > > It's amazing it has so many adherents. Especially when they could have just as easily chosen a lion devouring a man as their symbol. Blaming crucifixion on Christians is a little like blaming Jews for the Holocaust. It neglects a lot of relevant history, don't you think? I don't believe there are bad religions as much as there are bad practitioners. Even my 7 year old could understand the moral of the Hunchback of Notre Dame, Reg. ac6xg Article: 217618 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Ken Taylor" References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <85tbj1hk1oi2gsp5e8dcp82gjpqrisfsfd@4ax.com> <9ZOdndbRttI2zKreRVn-sQ@adelphia.com> <43375952.B78B60FB@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 07:44:15 +1200 "Mike Coslo" wrote in message news:d9WdnUJVw9wkxKreRVn-sA@adelphia.com... > Michael A. Terrell wrote: >> Mike Coslo wrote: >> >>> I'm badly in need of a Foghorn Leghorn fix! 8^) >>> >>> trying to kill this thread with inanity...... >>> >>> But I am serious about needing the old WB cartoons 8^) >>> >>> - Mike - >> >> >> >> I find some of the old cartoons on DVDs at the local dollar store. >> I've bought about 20, so far. ;-) >> > > Heh! I'm beginning to think I need to get out more, Mike! 8^) > > - mike - Me too - where's that store? :-) Ken Article: 217619 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 19:49:00 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: > > Perhaps this is a dumb question Reg, but if the transmission line isn't > there, how does RF get from the transmitter to the antenna? > > Thanks, ac6xg > ============================= The 50-ohm line on which the SWR is supposed to be measured is between the transmitter and the so-called SWR meter. If the transmitter is connected directly to the meter, (as it usually is, very often it is inside the transmitter on the front panel) there is no line and no SWR on it which can be measured. Neverthess, the meter still provides a reading of SWR. Obviously it is telling lies and causes confusion and misunderstanding to novices about what is really happening within their equipment. In fact, just as it has been doing since Joker, Richard Clark, entered the thread. Some people force themselves to imagine a 1/4-wavelength transmission inside the little box in a vain endeavor to explain how an SWR meter works. Actually the meter indicates whether or not the transmitter is loaded with 50-ohms - and nothing else. It is an HF resistance bridge to which its circuit reduces. But, as I say, it is a very useful, almost indispensible instrument. It is a TLI. ---- Reg. Article: 217620 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 20:09:26 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> I have not insisted, not even mentioned, that SWR can exist only on 50-ohm lines. All I have said, somewhere, is that the usual SWR meter gives the correct answers only on 50-ohm lines. ---- Reg. Article: 217621 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim Kelley Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 13:07:49 -0700 Message-ID: References: Reg Edwards wrote: >>Perhaps this is a dumb question Reg, but if the transmission line > > isn't > >>there, how does RF get from the transmitter to the antenna? >> >>Thanks, ac6xg >> > > ============================= > > The 50-ohm line on which the SWR is supposed to be measured is between > the transmitter and the so-called SWR meter. > > If the transmitter is connected directly to the meter, (as it usually > is, very often it is inside the transmitter on the front panel) there > is no line and no SWR on it which can be measured. What you're saying is that there's a line connecting the transmitter to the meter, but there isn't a line connecting the transmitter to the meter. I'd have difficulty defending such a position. > Neverthess, the meter still provides a reading of SWR. Obviously it > is telling lies and causes confusion and misunderstanding to novices > about what is really happening within their equipment. In fact, just > as it has been doing since Joker, Richard Clark, entered the thread. > > Some people force themselves to imagine a 1/4-wavelength transmission > inside the little box in a vain endeavor to explain how an SWR meter > works. > > Actually the meter indicates whether or not the transmitter is loaded > with 50-ohms - and nothing else. I don't think the meter really knows what impedance the transmitter is loaded with. As far as I can tell, it only knows how many volts and amps gozinta one port and/or compared with how many volts and amps gozinta the other port. But I agree that some people read an awful lot into the measurements they make with one of these devices. > It is an HF resistance bridge to > which its circuit reduces. True enough. > But, as I say, it is a very useful, almost indispensible instrument. > It is a TLI. I like to think of it more as a reflectometer. 73 de ac6xg Article: 217622 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 20:31:45 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Reg Edwards wrote: > > > > Perhaps this is a dumb question Reg, but if the transmission line > isn't > > there, how does RF get from the transmitter to the antenna? > > > > Thanks, ac6xg > > > ============================= > The 50-ohm line on which the SWR is supposed to be measured is between > the transmitter and the so-called SWR meter. No, the SWR being measured is on the load side of the meter. > If the transmitter is connected directly to the meter, (as it usually > is, very often it is inside the transmitter on the front panel) there > is no line and no SWR on it which can be measured. Bzzzt, wrong answer. SWR is measured on the output side of the meter, not the input. > Neverthess, the meter still provides a reading of SWR. Obviously it > is telling lies and causes confusion and misunderstanding to novices > about what is really happening within their equipment. In fact, just > as it has been doing since Joker, Richard Clark, entered the thread. > Some people force themselves to imagine a 1/4-wavelength transmission > inside the little box in a vain endeavor to explain how an SWR meter > works. That would be inane. All one need do is realize the meter measures toward the load. > Actually the meter indicates whether or not the transmitter is loaded > with 50-ohms - and nothing else. It is an HF resistance bridge to > which its circuit reduces. > But, as I say, it is a very useful, almost indispensible instrument. > It is a TLI. > ---- > Reg. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Article: 217623 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 20:38:01 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Reg Edwards wrote: > I have not insisted, not even mentioned, that SWR can exist only on > 50-ohm lines. > All I have said, somewhere, is that the usual SWR meter gives the > correct answers only on 50-ohm lines. > ---- > Reg. If I connect a 100 Ohm antenna through a 100 Ohm transmission line to a SWR meter designed for 50 Ohms and then to a transmitter which expects a 50 Ohm load, does the meter read correctly with respect to the desired transmitter loading? Of course it does. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. From Wed Sep 28 23:53:13 EDT 2005 Article: 217624 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 15:55:29 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 19 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-11!sn-xit-05!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22828 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217624 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29538 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208698 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251181 On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 12:27:58 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards" wrote: >> Your belief in no G-d is no different than any belief in G-d. > >==================================== > >It is noticed that you are sufficiently superstitious and afraid of >the deity even to use, in print, the full name and description of >"god". > >How do you manage in normal conversation to convey your ideas? It is a convention that I have adopted as a courtesy to those who have taken a vow to protect the written word. It costs me nothing and relieves a good deal of angst for those who have taken such a vow. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com From Wed Sep 28 23:53:13 EDT 2005 Article: 217625 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 16:09:59 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 46 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!wns13feed!worldnet.att.net!128.230.129.106!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-12!sn-xit-09!sn-xit-08!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22829 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217625 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29539 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208699 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251182 On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 14:33:56 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: >> In all of our science and knowledge, we have yet to find random >> things. > >False. Certain characteristics of entangled particles are >completely random and must remain so in order to avoid faster >than light transfer of information, something presently >considered to be impossible. Can your G-d communicate at >faster than light speeds? > >> Atheists are no different than the religious, they, as do the >> religious themselves, simply believe in different things. > >False. The absence of a belief is the exact opposite of the >existence of a belief. By your logic, the absence of a tree >is exactly the same thing as the presence of a tree. Methinks >you picked the wrong newsgroup to try to flim-flam. Are you >an EH antenna salesman by any chance? :-) Once again, my point has been missed. The absence of belief is exactly that, an absence of belief. I do not claim that an atheist believes because he has an absence of belief. I don't know why anybody would find that in any post I've written unless that was what they were looking for. I do say, that all people believe, religious and atheist alike. The belief or disbelief in G-d is entirely irrelevant to my point. All people, religious and atheist alike, have a fundamental belief system upon which they depend to make choices and to plan their lives. I say belief system, because we cannot know everything that exists. The religious openly declare that their belief system is centered about the concept of G-d. The atheist do not declare what their belief system is centered upon. My point is that it makes no difference if one declares his belief system and the other does not. They both rely upon the unknown to make their choices; they are, in all practical purposes, operating in exactly the same way. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217626 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Owen Duffy Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 21:21:53 GMT On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 20:38:01 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >Reg Edwards wrote: >> I have not insisted, not even mentioned, that SWR can exist only on >> 50-ohm lines. > >> All I have said, somewhere, is that the usual SWR meter gives the >> correct answers only on 50-ohm lines. >> ---- >> Reg. > >If I connect a 100 Ohm antenna through a 100 Ohm transmission line to >a SWR meter designed for 50 Ohms and then to a transmitter which expects >a 50 Ohm load, does the meter read correctly with respect to the desired >transmitter loading? > >Of course it does. Jim, that seems inconsistent with your earlier statemetn "No, the SWR being measured is on the load side of the meter." In the example you quoted with a 100 ohm load on a 100 ohm line, were the line loss low, and the line long enough to be sure to sample a fully developed voltage maximum and voltage minimum it would be found that the VSWR was 1:1. Yet we would expect the "SWR meter designed for 50 Ohms" to which it is connected (on the load side) to read VSWR=2:1, so is it measuring the SWR on the load side of the meter as you earlier stated? Perhaps typical SWR meters are actually sampling current and voltage on a very short section (almost a point sample) of transmission line that is part of the instrument, and they are indicating what the observed SWR would be on an extended line of that type, provided that attenuation was insignificant, and that the extended line was sufficiently long to allow full development of the standing wave pattern. The inference of what is happening on adjacent line is ours, not the instruments, as demonstrated by your example above. Owen -- From Wed Sep 28 23:53:14 EDT 2005 Article: 217627 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 16:38:58 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 60 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!216.196.98.141!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fr.ip.ndsoftware.net!news.cs.univ-paris8.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!in2p3.fr!oleane.net!oleane!freenix!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-12!sn-xit-09!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22830 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217627 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29540 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208700 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251183 On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 13:33:22 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: >> Atheism is exactly the same in all fundamental respects as any other >> religion. > >If an atheist believes only in things that can be proven using >the scientific method, he is the *exact opposite* of a religious >person who substitutes blind faith for scientific inquiry. Nothing can be proven using the scientific method. Science, at its fundamental root has assumptions that are agreed to by convention, not by fact. >> Atheism, in other words doesn't exist, it cannot exist in >> any real sense. > >This is known in scientific logic as begging the question. The >onus of proof is upon you to first prove that a supreme supernatural >being exists. Only after you accomplish that scientific feat of >classic logic would you be in a position to discuss the implications. I believe that there is much that humans, religious and non-religious alike, do not know. I will further say that we humans are only a small part in a much larger system. I see that as supernatural if we define natural as things on a human scale. >> Rather than I proving that an elephant can't fly, why >> don't you prove that it can? > >The onus of proof is upon the person who asserts the positive >premise which is: "God exists." Until you prove your premise, all >of your arguments are easily recognized as logical diversions. >Therefore all of your statements must be prefaced with: >"If and only if my particular God exists, ...". I do not assert that G-d exists. I have never asserted that G-d exists. I have asserted that atheists do not exist. That is an entirely different thing. >If the existence of God were ever proven beyond a reasonable doubt >and atheists continued to disbelieve, then atheism would become a >religion, but not before. Most of the atheists I know and hear from deride the religious for their beliefs. They call it 'voodoo' and 'superstition'. Atheists think that they have the one true path and that all others are based on imaginary creations. That is the same response I hear from evangelists. There is no difference. Atheists have a belief in the unknown just as the religious do. An like religious, they believe that their choice is the only correct choice. >From my perspective, there is not a dime's worth of difference. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217628 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 21:39:27 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Owen Duffy wrote: > On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 20:38:01 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > wrote: > >Reg Edwards wrote: > >> I have not insisted, not even mentioned, that SWR can exist only on > >> 50-ohm lines. > > > >> All I have said, somewhere, is that the usual SWR meter gives the > >> correct answers only on 50-ohm lines. > >> ---- > >> Reg. > > > >If I connect a 100 Ohm antenna through a 100 Ohm transmission line to > >a SWR meter designed for 50 Ohms and then to a transmitter which expects > >a 50 Ohm load, does the meter read correctly with respect to the desired > >transmitter loading? > > > >Of course it does. > Jim, that seems inconsistent with your earlier statemetn "No, the SWR > being measured is on the load side of the meter." The load side is the side with the load, i.e. the antenna, on it. > In the example you quoted with a 100 ohm load on a 100 ohm line, were > the line loss low, and the line long enough to be sure to sample a > fully developed voltage maximum and voltage minimum it would be found > that the VSWR was 1:1. Not for a 50 Ohm system, i.e. a transmitter expecting 50 Ohms and a meter calibrated for a 50 Ohm system. > Yet we would expect the "SWR meter designed for 50 Ohms" to which it > is connected (on the load side) to read VSWR=2:1, so is it measuring > the SWR on the load side of the meter as you earlier stated? Yep. > Perhaps typical SWR meters are actually sampling current and voltage > on a very short section (almost a point sample) of transmission line > that is part of the instrument, and they are indicating what the > observed SWR would be on an extended line of that type, provided that > attenuation was insignificant, and that the extended line was > sufficiently long to allow full development of the standing wave > pattern. The SWR that most people care about is that of the antenna. Usually you have a 50 Ohm transmitter connected to 50 Ohm line, and then to an antenna you hope is 50 Ohms. To accurately measure the antenna SWR without any error being introduced by line losses, you have to put the SWR meter at the end of the line adjacent to the antenna. This is usually impractical and we normally put the SWR meter near the transmitter. In this case the meter measures the SWR of the entire system, i.e. the line going from the meter to the antenna and the antenna. The net practical effect of the line loss for real line and real antennas is that the observed SWR will indicate a lower value than if the meter were directly connected to the antenna. > The inference of what is happening on adjacent line is ours, not the > instruments, as demonstrated by your example above. > Owen > -- -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. From Wed Sep 28 23:53:14 EDT 2005 Article: 217629 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 16:52:19 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <1eadnVR7S-qqMKreRVn-og@comcast.com> <7hifj15mjlbknfp34mdofh9q64us7gh6tj@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 59 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-05!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22831 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217629 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29541 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208701 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251184 On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 11:06:09 -0400, Uncle Ted wrote: >On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 05:27:54 -0500, Matt Osborn <> wrote: > > >>You do have blind faith in something unless you've already discovered >>everything. None of us can say anything of the unknown with >>certainty, yet we all have the faith to tackle the unknown head on and >>to carve from it useful knowledge. > >Of course, if you paint with that broad of a stroke, faith can mean >just about anything you want it to mean. To say that atheists have >"faith" in their beliefs or that such beliefs are actually a religion >is flawed. I can assure you that if some winged being flew down out of >the sun and ended all disease, suffering, and hunger, and brought >peace to the world, and if every person in the world called this being >"god" in their own native tongue, I guarantee even the most hardcore >atheist would have faith in that god. Both sides have their uneducated members. >>BTW, despite the allegations, there is no conflict between science and >>religion. The religious use science just as much as the rest of us. > >No, the conflict is about religionists trying to pass their beliefs >off as science. Science is incomplete and often makes a fool of itself. The fact is that science is self referential but it does not know where the prime datum is. >>>What difference does this make? I don't know how the Universe began and >>>quite possibly no one will ever know exactly, but does that mean we can >>>simply pull the "answers" out of our asses? I am not playing the god of >>>the gaps game either. That's just stupid. >> >>If you don't know everything, than you have to have faith that you can >>operate and archive something in the face of the unknown. How you >>perceive that faith is up to you, but it is there. > >...and the brush strokes become even broader. Where I have a problem with atheism is its meaninglessness. Most human attributes declare what we are, not what we are not. There are behaviors practiced by the religious that non-believers find hilarious, my self among them. I find atheism to be equally hilarious. Atheists have opinions that are just as strong as any religious person I have ever met. Both parties assert that their ways are better than the other. Both parties compete in the world of ideas. Both parties have no basis for their respective beliefs aside form their own faith. They are, in all essential respects, identical. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com From Wed Sep 28 23:53:15 EDT 2005 Article: 217630 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 16:53:05 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <4drgj117hlegehk79o4q89lvuefrjfrqpg@4ax.com> References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 34 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22832 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217630 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29542 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208702 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251185 On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 14:04:18 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: >> You have made no case for atheism. > >Not that I'm an atheist, but here is the case for atheism: The >existence of even one of the following as a supernatural being >has never been proven. > >Allah, Aphrodite, Ares, Athena, Apollo, Artemis, Babaluaye, >Bacchus, Baldur, Bast, Bellona, Brahma, Brigid, Ceres, Cupid, Cerridwen, >Demeter, Diana, Dione, Dionysus, Eris, Eos, Eleggua, , El Shaddai, >Elohim, Eshu, Ereshkigal, Frigga, Frey, Freya, Gaea, Lord Genesa, Hades, >Hebe, Hera, Helios, Hel, Hephaestus, Hermes, Hestia, Horus, Ibeji, Ifa, >Inanna, Indra, Ishana, Ishtar, Isis, Janus, Juno, Jehovah, Jove, >Jupiter, Kali, Krishna, Kronos, Korravai, Loki, Lugh, Lord Indra, >Manitou, Mars, Mercury, Minerva, Mercurius, Morrigan, Nahuiquiahuitl, >Nanahuatzin, Nephthys, Neptune, Obatala, Odin, Ogun, Oshosi, Oshun, >Osiris, Oya, Orunmila, Olokun, Olodumare, Pluto, Persephone, Poseidon, >Proserpina, Quetzalcoatl, Ra, Lord Rama, Rhea, Saturn, Set, Selene, >Shango, Lord Siva, Tammuz, Thor, Tir, Tiw, Uranus, Venus, Vesta, Vishnu, >Vesta, Vulcan, Wotan, Yahweh, Yemaya and Zeus > >Even the very existence of a supernatural dimension or realm has never >been proven. > >Religion is based on blind faith and beliefs in things that cannot be >proven. Atheism is based on an absence of blind faith and beliefs in >things that can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Gravity has never been proven. How much more basic can one get? -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217631 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Walter Maxwell Subject: Re: Hams of FCC's RID Aid Allied Effort in WW2 Message-ID: References: <1gnbj11s90aa1jc5j5cbrgt5i2e00o7k73@4ax.com> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 17:53:13 -0400 On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 15:37:26 -0400, Kenneth Grimm wrote: >On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 10:46:48 -0400, Walter Maxwell >wrote: > >> I'm pleased that the history of radio in WW2 is acceptable on this news >>group. The three threads I've posted so far are from memory, and at the moment >>that's about all there is. >> However, I have files describing many real intelligence transmissions >>involving historic situations that for the most part went unheralded. These >>files are in my library at my home in DeLand, Florida. I'm now at my summer home >>in my home town of Mt. Pleasant, Michigan, but we return to FL Nov 1. I'll dig >>out some of the files when we return. >> Thanks again for the interest. When I posted the first one I thought I might >>be voted off the island. >> >>Walt, W2DU > >Hello Walt, > >I would like to add my voice to the chorus of those who would like to >read more of your reminiscences. > >By the way, Prose Walker's last call was W4BW. There is an obituary >at http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2002/09/26/4/?nc=1 >He was a very interesting fellow and a great friend to our hobby. > >73, >Ken K4XL Thanks for your support, Ken, I appreciate knowing my writing is of interest. However, re Prose's call sign, please refer to my earlier thread, "The Correct Polarization Saves Lives....", and my post beneath the original posting, where I showed his call signs correctly. Incidentally, Prose was a close friend, having worked together both at the Allegan primary station, and in Honolulu. We traveled to Hawaii together in the first group of FCC personnel that arrived there to set up eight new secondary stations. In addition, I was his best man during the wedding to his second wife, and I was also a member of his advisory committee working on WARC 79. Walt, W2DU From Wed Sep 28 23:53:15 EDT 2005 Article: 217632 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 17:02:09 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <8frgj11tlu0q1a8vu9f8ias33mddgtep0b@4ax.com> References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <3k1gj1doq7j8r8s4289jfnnk3k6b6dshg8@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 47 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!elk.ncren.net!news2.wam.umd.edu!nntp.abs.net!newsfeed.gamma.ru!Gamma.RU!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-08!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22833 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217632 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29543 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208703 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251186 On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 10:44:55 -0400, Uncle Ted wrote: >On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 22:35:44 -0500, Matt Osborn <> wrote: > > >>You have made no case for atheism. All you have done is list a series >>of things in which do not believe. You have not listed what you do >>believe or in what you have placed your faith. >> >>Atheism is a logically faulty concept. Being human, you cannot >>possibly know everything. What you may think of the unknown is >>entirely up to you, but whatever that may be, will require just as >>much faith as any other religion. Your religion simply has different >>trappings. > >There are some atheists who say that there is no god, and there are >others who say that the existence of any god can neither be proven nor >disproved. Either way, those asserting a belief in a god have the >burden of proof. It's not up to atheists to prove that a god does not >exist. Of course, you are correct when you say that humans cannot >possibly know everything, but to accept a concept such as "god" is >applying faith without any critical thinking or reason. This is blind >faith. I would suggest that the lack of critical thinking is incorrect. Of course there are those of all faiths, including atheists who lack critical thinking, so that says nothing at all. Some people tack a motivational device on their refrigerator to remind themselves several times each and everyday of some difficult goal that they wish to accomplish. Some people 'dress up' their faith, give it a personality to better enable their faith to counter the whims of the moment. I find no fault with any of these and will use either when I need help maintaining focus. Atheists seem to believe that the religious think the way they do because of their religion. I would suggest they have chosen religion because of the way they think. In other words, the religious would believe as they do even in the absence of any religion. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217633 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Owen Duffy Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 22:03:25 GMT On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 21:39:27 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> Jim, that seems inconsistent with your earlier statemetn "No, the SWR >> being measured is on the load side of the meter." > >The load side is the side with the load, i.e. the antenna, on it. > >> In the example you quoted with a 100 ohm load on a 100 ohm line, were >> the line loss low, and the line long enough to be sure to sample a >> fully developed voltage maximum and voltage minimum it would be found >> that the VSWR was 1:1. > >Not for a 50 Ohm system, i.e. a transmitter expecting 50 Ohms and a >meter calibrated for a 50 Ohm system. I am sorry Jim, the VSWR is a property of the transmission line and its termination, and the VSWR on that 100 ohm line with a 100 ohm termination is 1:1. The VSWR could be *MEASURED* on that line by sampling the magnitude of the voltage at different points on the line and it would be found that the magnitude of the voltage was constant, which means VSWR=1:1. > >> Yet we would expect the "SWR meter designed for 50 Ohms" to which it >> is connected (on the load side) to read VSWR=2:1, so is it measuring >> the SWR on the load side of the meter as you earlier stated? > >Yep. No, it isn't. The SWR meter in your example reads 2:1 when the SWR on the 100 ohm line is 1:1. Your example demonstrates that a typical SWR meter does not measure, or necessarily indicate the SWR of the (actual) transmission line on the load side of itself. Owen -- Article: 217634 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "slow-z" Subject: antenna Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 18:33:39 +0200 Message-ID: Been off the bands about 15yrs, and want to get back on! have forgotten much. Can i feed a long wire antenna with a tuner that only has a unbalanced output. Article: 217635 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Jerry" References: <1gnbj11s90aa1jc5j5cbrgt5i2e00o7k73@4ax.com> <4335f2e1$0$22196$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Subject: Re: Hams of FCC's RID Aid Allied Effort in WW2 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 18:33:35 -0400 "Tom Ring" wrote in message news:4335f2e1$0$22196$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net... > Walter Maxwell wrote: > >> I'm aware that this post is off-topic, except that it is the basis >> for my >> two previous posts that were on topic to antennas. I believe it is time >> to >> reexamine the contributions hams and commercial radio ops made to the WW2 >> effort >> as they were the operating personnel of the FCC's Radio Intelligence >> Division. >> This is their story. > > I would say say, please keep it up, on or off topic. Thanks so much for > these pieces of history. > > tom > K0TAR I would add "dittos" to that. As the "next" generation after WWII I am a big fan of that period's history. I wish I had been born in 1923 instead of '48! To me, info of this sort is much appreciated since I couldn't experience that era for myself. Reckon that's why I still listen to Glenn Miller? :) Jerry > Article: 217636 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Jerry" References: <11htogetcauugb1@news.supernews.com> <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126296865.329405.72430@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4324E0BD.A033E1A@earthlink.net> <6qudnRtjVJhVpLveRVn-tQ@comcast.com> <0ICdncTJkPKeVrveRVn-vA@comcast.com> <30DVe.1556$Nw6.692@bignews6.bellsouth.net> <88WdnbrHqZgpkbreRVn-tg@comcast.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 18:41:17 -0400 "Ham op" wrote in message news:88WdnbrHqZgpkbreRVn-tg@comcast.com... > Jerry wrote: > >> "Ham op" wrote in message >> news:0ICdncTJkPKeVrveRVn-vA@comcast.com... >> >>>Dee Flint wrote: >>> >>>>"Carl / W6VDC" wrote in message >>>>news:bnkVe.8821$mH.8469@fed1read07... >>>> >>>> >>>>>> And then, there are the morons and bigots: >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>I looked at the link and read a couple of the articles. I didn't see >>>>>anything that warranted labelling them bigots. I don't think that the >>>>>HOA took the proper position, but that doesn't make them bigots. >>>> >>>> >>>>However it would seem to indicate that they lack humanitarianism. >>>> >>>> >>> >>>Judgments!!! Would it not be better to read the exact terms of the CC&R, >>>AKA CONTRACT, before judgments are made?? >>> >>>The exact wording of the HOA/CC&R may restrict certain activities [such >>>as external antennas, or temporary housing, etc]. The restriction can >>>only be waived by consent of the members of the HOA. >> >> >> >> That's just it! There ain't gonna BE any HOA's ,covenants, or busybody >> neighbors telling me to do a durned thing unless they got enough rear end >> on 'em to MAKE me! If today, somebody wanted to start an HOA in my >> neighborhood, I'd tell them to kiss my (censored). >> >> I feel VERY strongly about property rights, and if I want to put up an >> American flag, then I'll put up an American flag and I dare some >> schweinhund to come over here and touch it! I DESPISE and detest HOA's! >> :( >> >> Jerry > > Gerry, you said it correctly. Tell your agent "I will not consider, under > any conditions, any HOAs or CC&Rs." If the RE attorney uncovers any > 'hidden' CC&Rs in the title search, the sale is OFF! > > I live in the "Live Free or Die" state [New Hampshire]. When I bought here > three years ago I made that point to our realtor. We bought a very nice > single family home of 2100 square feet on a 1/2 acre only 21 years old, 6 > miles south of the state capital and 12 miles north of the third largest > city. > > I checked town zoning requirements for a tower. I'm allowed 70 feet for > the tower without requesting a variance. Also, if the tower is > professionally installed I need not consult the town building inspector. > Heights from 70 feet 1 inch to 200 feet require plan approval by the > building inspector ONLY for safety issues. BTW: my tower is only 50 feet > [I live on top of a 510 foot hill with height above average terrain of 250 > feet for 5 miles radius]. > > But back to the original issue. The HOA may have a strict rule on > temporary housing. It is a freely entered into contract condition that > requires the consent of the contracting parties to amend. > > So, the term 'BIGOT' is a prejudicial pre judgment. I've always loved that statement "Live Free or Die". Good for New Hampshire!! I would've done well in New Hampshire! Like you, I made 2 requirements. 1) No HOA's. and 2) No "heat" pumps!! I know it gets colder in NH, but it CAN get a bit chilly here in Western NC. I won't have cold air coming out of my registers! LOL! And that, of course, is a story for a different thread! Jerry > Article: 217637 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Walter Maxwell Subject: Re: Hams of FCC's RID Aid Allied Effort in WW2 Message-ID: References: <1gnbj11s90aa1jc5j5cbrgt5i2e00o7k73@4ax.com> <4335f2e1$0$22196$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 18:46:53 -0400 On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 18:33:35 -0400, "Jerry" wrote: > >"Tom Ring" wrote in message >news:4335f2e1$0$22196$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net... >> Walter Maxwell wrote: >> >>> I'm aware that this post is off-topic, except that it is the basis >>> for my >>> two previous posts that were on topic to antennas. I believe it is time >>> to >>> reexamine the contributions hams and commercial radio ops made to the WW2 >>> effort >>> as they were the operating personnel of the FCC's Radio Intelligence >>> Division. >>> This is their story. >> >> I would say say, please keep it up, on or off topic. Thanks so much for >> these pieces of history. >> >> tom >> K0TAR > >I would add "dittos" to that. As the "next" generation after WWII I am a >big fan of that period's history. I wish I had been born in 1923 instead of >'48! > >To me, info of this sort is much appreciated since I couldn't experience >that era for myself. Reckon that's why I still listen to Glenn Miller? :) > > >Jerry >> Anyone who listens to Glenn Miller is A-OK in my book. Walt Article: 217638 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 23:32:20 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Jim says, > No, the SWR being measured is on the load side of the meter. ========================================= Jim, I have difficulty in telling you this without hurting your feelings. Or perhaps you are just joking and pulling my leg. Try the other one - its got bells on. I will assume you are not joking. You clearly havn't the foggiest idea of how the so-called SWR meter works. Although you may be in good company - including not a few professional engineers who have picked up old-wives' tales from radio amateurs. And have been led astray by the meter being called something which it isn't. The meter indicates SWR when placed at the ANTENNA end of the line. It is the antenna which does the terminating. And the meter gives the correct answers only when the line Zo = 50 ohms. If there is a tuner or matching network in the line then the meter will indicate SWR on the line between the transmitter and the tuner - provided the meter is placed next to the tuner. When there is no appreciable length of line between transmitter and tuner (as is the very common case) there is no line on which to measure SWR. But the meter will indicate an SWR - and tells lies. But there's nothing to worry about just because the meter is indicating SWR nonsense. The meter is telling you what you really want to know, its exactly why you placed it there - whether or not the transmitter is loaded with 50 ohms. ---- Reg. Article: 217639 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: chuck Subject: Re: antenna References: <1127775937.243525.150290@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 00:16:32 GMT Yes, but if the long wire is on the order of a half-wavelength, the ground becomes a lot less critical. Chuck, NT3G jgboyles@aol.com wrote: > slow-z wrote: > >>Been off the bands about 15yrs, and want to get back on! have forgotten >>much. Can i feed a long wire antenna with a tuner that only has a >>unbalanced output. > > > For transmitting purposes you will need to provide a good RF ground > at your tuner. This can be ground radials, good, or a ground rod, not > so good. The ground makes up the other (necessary half) of your long > wire antenna. A 1/4 wave counterpoise wire at the operating frequency > will provide a good? RF ground. > The unbalanced tuner should have the "long wire" connected to the > "hot" or rf output of the tuner, and the ground or common connected to > the RF ground. > Gary N4AST > Article: 217640 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 00:24:51 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> "Owen Duffy" wrote - > Your example demonstrates that a typical SWR meter does > not measure, or necessarily indicate the SWR of the (actual) > transmission line on the load side of itself. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- You must have been reading what I've been writing for the last 6 or 7 years. ---- Reg. Article: 217641 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: dplatt@radagast.org (Dave Platt) Subject: Re: antenna Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 00:29:15 -0000 Message-ID: <11jh4ir88hv2ff@corp.supernews.com> References: <1127775937.243525.150290@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> In article , chuck wrote: >Yes, but if the long wire is on the order of a half-wavelength, the >ground becomes a lot less critical. It becomes less critical in terms of the need to provide the "other half" of the radiator. However, if the long wire is roughly a half-wavelength long, its feedpoint impedance is going to be rather high... possibly higher than you can match with a typical "unbalanced" tuner intended for matching coax-fed antennas. And, if you do match it, you'll find a relatively high RF voltage present on the portion of the wire inside the shack. This can lead to "RF in the shack" problems, and you may need a really good RF ground for the tuner and rig just to keep RF voltages on the equipment chassis from being a problem. -- Dave Platt AE6EO Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads! Article: 217642 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Owen Duffy Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 01:02:54 GMT On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 00:24:51 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards" wrote: >You must have been reading what I've been writing for the last 6 or 7 >years. Reg, Yes, I have probably read and learned a good deal from stuff you have written, but I have skipped over a lot of what you have written... probably most noticeably when you and others trade kicks to the groin to see who is the last man standing. Back on topic: A point that you hinted at, but might have been overlooked by some is that it can be relatively unimportant that the SWR bridge's sampling line has the same characteristic impedance as the impedance at which its detector has been nulled. For example, a typical SWR meter designed originally for 75 ohms, with a 0.1m long ideal 75 ohm sampling section, but with the detector adjusted to read nil reflected power with a 50+j0 load on the "antenna" terminals of the meter, will in most cases operate just as well as a 50 ohm SWR meter on 7MHz, as the detector will truly show when it has a 50 ohm load, the indicated VSWR for other loads will substantially correct (ie within typical accuracy for the type of instrument), and the insertion VSWR (~1.02:1) because of the 0.1m of 75 ohm line will be insignificant in practice. In many amateur reflectometer designs (and in some commercial implementations), very little attention has been given to the characteristic impedance of the sampling section, and in some cases to the insertion VSWR (that results). I recall testing a relatively expensive SWR meter rated from 1.8 to 150MHz, and noting that whilst it indicated a VSWR<1.1 at 144MHz on a good dummy load a Bird 43 ahead of it indicated an insertion VSWR > 1.5:1. So whilst it was good at indicating a 50+j0 ohm load on its "antenna" terminals, it was not very capable of delivering that load to its "transmitter" terminals. Owen -- Article: 217643 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 01:19:15 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: "Cecil Moore" wrote > > On my system, there's a 50 ohm cable from the transceiver to > the input of the SWR meter and another 50 ohm cable from the > output of the SWR meter to the balun. Each of these cables > forces the ratio of the voltage to current in each of the > traveling waves to a value of 50 ohms. I have an in-line > Autek WM-1 and no tuner. > -- ==================================== Cec, You can't measure SWR on a line which is less than 1/4-wave long. Preferably it should be as long as 1/2-wavelength to ensure the max and min voltage points both occur on it. But what do you do with the SWR when you have measured it? Of what use it? All anybody needs to know is whether the transmitter is terminated or is not terminated with 50-ohms. This is very important. And when describing to a novice how your station works there's no need to mention SWR or reflections. They are quite unecessary complications and can be dispensed with except perhaps for trolling on newsgroups. ---- Reg. Article: 217644 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <43389FD5.FF87A0F0@earthlink.net> From: "Michael A. Terrell" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <85tbj1hk1oi2gsp5e8dcp82gjpqrisfsfd@4ax.com> <9ZOdndbRttI2zKreRVn-sQ@adelphia.com> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 01:26:14 GMT Reg Edwards wrote: > > > What happened to all the old Bugs Bunny cartoons anyway? > > > > - Mike KB3EIA - > > ================================== > > It is unfortunate that Hollywood so long has dominated the world's > supposedly desirable standards of human behaviour and described, by > countless examples in films, the ficticious and imagined way of life > in the USA. But the truth about real life went to pot after Charlie > Chaplin and others were expelled from your shores. > > Things may be different now that the Japanese wealth and enterprise > have taken over Hollywood. But perhaps it is too late. The Internet, > not Hollywood, is taking over the dissemination of ideas. Big Brother > Rules! > > They who own and control the means of communication will rule the > Earth. > > Makes a change from so-called SWR meters. > ---- > Reg, G4FGQ. Get a life, old man. :( -- ? Michael A. Terrell Central Florida Article: 217645 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <43389FAF.FF2E1799@earthlink.net> From: "Michael A. Terrell" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <85tbj1hk1oi2gsp5e8dcp82gjpqrisfsfd@4ax.com> <9ZOdndbRttI2zKreRVn-sQ@adelphia.com> <43375952.B78B60FB@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 01:25:36 GMT Ken Taylor wrote: > > Me too - where's that store? :-) > > Ken The "Dollar Tree" chain of dollar stores is where I find most of them. I saw some the other day at a "Save-A-Lot" grocery store, too. -- ? Michael A. Terrell Central Florida Article: 217646 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 01:30:22 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Reg Edwards wrote: > Jim says, > > No, the SWR being measured is on the load side of the meter. > ========================================= > Jim, > I have difficulty in telling you this without hurting your feelings. > Or perhaps you are just joking and pulling my leg. Try the other one - > its got bells on. Meaningless babble. > I will assume you are not joking. You clearly havn't the foggiest idea > of how the so-called SWR meter works. Although you may be in good > company - including not a few professional engineers who have picked > up old-wives' tales from radio amateurs. And have been led astray by > the meter being called something which it isn't. I assure you I have a very good understanding of how SWR meters in their various incantations work and how SWR works. > The meter indicates SWR when placed at the ANTENNA end of the line. It > is the antenna which does the terminating. And the meter gives the > correct answers only when the line Zo = 50 ohms. A SWR meter indicates the SWR of whatever is connected to the load side of the meter relative to the reference impedance the meter is designed for. It matters not if the thing connected to the load side of the meter is an antenna, an antenna with a transmission line, a transmission line with a dummy load on the end, or two popsicle sticks and a bubble gum wrapper. If you are only interested in the SWR of the antenna and don't, or can't, correct for the effects of real transmission line in between the meter and the antenna, then you have to connect the antenna to the load end of the meter directly. > If there is a tuner or matching network in the line then the meter > will indicate SWR on the line between the transmitter and the tuner - > provided the meter is placed next to the tuner. Tuners have nothing to do with the issue. You can put a 1956 Buick on the load side of the meter; you still read SWR of the system at the point of measurement. It is you that is trying to confuse the issue with arm waving. > When there is no appreciable length of line between transmitter and > tuner (as is the very common case) there is no line on which to > measure SWR. But the meter will indicate an SWR - and tells lies. Babbling nonsense. > But there's nothing to worry about just because the meter is > indicating SWR nonsense. The meter is telling you what you really > want to know, its exactly why you placed it there - whether or not > the transmitter is loaded with 50 ohms. That is not what I would want to know. I know the output impedance of the transmitter and the line (assuming it is good) impedance. What I want to know is the antenna SWR and the measurement of that is trivial though it seems to have you totally confused. > ---- > Reg. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Article: 217647 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 01:36:15 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Owen Duffy wrote: > On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 21:39:27 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > wrote: > >> Jim, that seems inconsistent with your earlier statemetn "No, the SWR > >> being measured is on the load side of the meter." > > > >The load side is the side with the load, i.e. the antenna, on it. > > > >> In the example you quoted with a 100 ohm load on a 100 ohm line, were > >> the line loss low, and the line long enough to be sure to sample a > >> fully developed voltage maximum and voltage minimum it would be found > >> that the VSWR was 1:1. > > > >Not for a 50 Ohm system, i.e. a transmitter expecting 50 Ohms and a > >meter calibrated for a 50 Ohm system. > I am sorry Jim, the VSWR is a property of the transmission line and > its termination, and the VSWR on that 100 ohm line with a 100 ohm > termination is 1:1. The VSWR could be *MEASURED* on that line by > sampling the magnitude of the voltage at different points on the line > and it would be found that the magnitude of the voltage was constant, > which means VSWR=1:1. No, the measured SWR is relative to the design impedance of the SWR meter which is normally 50 Ohms. If you use a 100 Ohm SWR meter you get 1:1. The SWR is a function of the TOTAL SYSTEM impedance connected to the load side. Replace the 100 antenna with a 100 Ohm resistor and the reading doesn't change. Eliminate the line and connect the 100 Ohm resistor directly to the meter and the reading doesn't change. > > > >> Yet we would expect the "SWR meter designed for 50 Ohms" to which it > >> is connected (on the load side) to read VSWR=2:1, so is it measuring > >> the SWR on the load side of the meter as you earlier stated? > > > >Yep. > No, it isn't. > The SWR meter in your example reads 2:1 when the SWR on the 100 ohm > line is 1:1. Your example demonstrates that a typical SWR meter does > not measure, or necessarily indicate the SWR of the (actual) > transmission line on the load side of itself. The SWR of the SYSTEM, line and antenna, is NOT 1:1 for a 50 Ohm reference. > Owen > -- -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Article: 217648 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 01:38:44 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Owen Duffy wrote: > On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 00:24:51 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards" > wrote: > >You must have been reading what I've been writing for the last 6 or 7 > >years. > Reg, Yes, I have probably read and learned a good deal from stuff you > have written, but I have skipped over a lot of what you have > written... probably most noticeably when you and others trade kicks to > the groin to see who is the last man standing. > Back on topic: > A point that you hinted at, but might have been overlooked by some is > that it can be relatively unimportant that the SWR bridge's sampling > line has the same characteristic impedance as the impedance at which > its detector has been nulled. > For example, a typical SWR meter designed originally for 75 ohms, with > a 0.1m long ideal 75 ohm sampling section, but with the detector > adjusted to read nil reflected power with a 50+j0 load on the > "antenna" terminals of the meter, will in most cases operate just as > well as a 50 ohm SWR meter on 7MHz, as the detector will truly show > when it has a 50 ohm load, the indicated VSWR for other loads will > substantially correct (ie within typical accuracy for the type of > instrument), and the insertion VSWR (~1.02:1) because of the 0.1m of > 75 ohm line will be insignificant in practice. > In many amateur reflectometer designs (and in some commercial > implementations), very little attention has been given to the > characteristic impedance of the sampling section, and in some cases to > the insertion VSWR (that results). > I recall testing a relatively expensive SWR meter rated from 1.8 to > 150MHz, and noting that whilst it indicated a VSWR<1.1 at 144MHz on a > good dummy load a Bird 43 ahead of it indicated an insertion VSWR > > 1.5:1. So whilst it was good at indicating a 50+j0 ohm load on its > "antenna" terminals, it was not very capable of delivering that load > to its "transmitter" terminals. > Owen > -- Inaccurate crap equipment has nothing to do with the arguement. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. From Wed Sep 28 23:53:19 EDT 2005 Article: 217649 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 20:52:55 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <4drgj117hlegehk79o4q89lvuefrjfrqpg@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 15 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.news.ucla.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-10!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22837 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217649 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29547 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208707 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251192 On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 22:30:50 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: >> Gravity has never been proven. > >I know the answer to this one from my hippie days. > >There is no gravity! The earth sucks! So does the wind! -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217650 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <4338A687.8D5B94DF@earthlink.net> From: "Michael A. Terrell" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126296865.329405.72430@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4324E0BD.A033E1A@earthlink.net> <4o4ji1p26o2mcctbkfbuugpan1qmlt05nd@4ax.com> <31f74$43299abf$471c63c6$12083@ALLTEL.NET> <1127271443.195835.320110@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43313df9$0$253$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 01:54:56 GMT Brad wrote: > > wrote in message > news:1127271443.195835.320110@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > From: K?B on Sep 15, 12:09 pm > > >How is "Christian charity" different from other charity, and do I need to > >be a > >member of your cult in order to get through the eye of the needle (and why > >would > >I want to?)? > > Christian Charity is a point scoring exercise with God. It is done for > selfish reasons, to make sure you are noticed by God and he lets you in. Really? Then why does the New Testament say "Not by your works, but by your faith"? -- ? Michael A. Terrell Central Florida Article: 217651 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Frank" References: <5hpl03-3ps.ln1@p400bob.personal.cox.net> Subject: Re: Free space pathloss calcs and factor K Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 01:55:24 GMT "Bob Bob" wrote in message news:5hpl03-3ps.ln1@p400bob.personal.cox.net... > Hi all. > > No doubt I could get this reading lots and lots of text books. It might > however be interesting to air a discussion on it.. > > Have been reading the free space pathloss formula from the ARRL antenna > handbook; > > Loss in dB = K + 20logf + 20logD > > Where f is the freq in GHz and D is the distance in miles > > K is a constant of around 96.6dB > > I have known about a "fixed K" loss in an antenna system for ages. It even > made mention I think in this NG recently when talking about a passive > repeater system. From my own exposure to path modelling (EDX/Pathloss etc) > I noted a very high dB loss per distance rate in the first (say) 100 > wavelengths when looking at graphs of same. (I wasnt doing the actual job, > just providing data to the engineer to compare measured with predicted. > Fascinating stuff!) > > What I wonder is where roughly does the 96dB odd "come from". More > interestingly can it be reduced by any appreciable amount. Is it maybe a > antenna to "air" coupling loss, maybe even that a RX antenna cant possibly > extract all of the energy from the wave as it goes past. I would > appreciate any input on this. > > My initial forays (as a young ham) into LOS paths went through the > isotropic/point source radiators and looking at the surface area of the > covered "sphere" containing all of the radiated power idea. Then the RX > antenna "aperture" area was used to calculate the actual received power. > Needless to say it never met the actual measured values! > > Cheers Bob VK2YQA (in W5) Take the ratio of the destination antenna aperture (0.13*lambda^2 for a half wave dipole), to the surface area of a sphere, of a radius equal to the distance between the source and destination antennas (i.e. Pr/Pt). The assumption is that the source is isotropic. Massaging the above expression will produce a constant and the sum of two logs. Regards, Frank Article: 217652 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Owen Duffy Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 01:59:46 GMT On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 01:36:15 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >Owen Duffy wrote: >> On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 21:39:27 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com >> wrote: > > >> >> Jim, that seems inconsistent with your earlier statemetn "No, the SWR >> >> being measured is on the load side of the meter." >> > >> >The load side is the side with the load, i.e. the antenna, on it. >> > >> >> In the example you quoted with a 100 ohm load on a 100 ohm line, were >> >> the line loss low, and the line long enough to be sure to sample a >> >> fully developed voltage maximum and voltage minimum it would be found >> >> that the VSWR was 1:1. >> > >> >Not for a 50 Ohm system, i.e. a transmitter expecting 50 Ohms and a >> >meter calibrated for a 50 Ohm system. > >> I am sorry Jim, the VSWR is a property of the transmission line and >> its termination, and the VSWR on that 100 ohm line with a 100 ohm >> termination is 1:1. The VSWR could be *MEASURED* on that line by >> sampling the magnitude of the voltage at different points on the line >> and it would be found that the magnitude of the voltage was constant, >> which means VSWR=1:1. > >No, the measured SWR is relative to the design impedance of the SWR >meter which is normally 50 Ohms. The SWR on the line depends on the characteristic impedance of the line and the impedance of the termination of the line. 50 ohms does not come into it. The SWR on your proposed 100 ohm line with a 100 ohm termination is 1:1. If your measurement indicates anything else, then you need to consider your measurement as invalid. Owen -- Article: 217653 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. References: Message-ID: <2N1_e.844$Fi3.75@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 02:04:46 GMT Reg Edwards wrote: > You can't measure SWR on a line which is less than 1/4-wave long. Because your measurements are taken 1/4WL apart, your SWR value will be in error for all feedlines except lossless ones. SWR can be had at any point on a transmission line. Measure the forward power and reflected power at any point. SWR = [SQRT(Pfor)+SQRT(Pref)]/[SQRT(Pfor)-SQRT(Pref)] The transmission line length must only be long enough such that the V/I ratio is forced to the Z0 value. According to some pretty smart guys I asked, that's about 2% of a wavelength. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217654 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 02:15:39 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Reg Edwards wrote: > "Cecil Moore" wrote > > > > On my system, there's a 50 ohm cable from the transceiver to > > the input of the SWR meter and another 50 ohm cable from the > > output of the SWR meter to the balun. Each of these cables > > forces the ratio of the voltage to current in each of the > > traveling waves to a value of 50 ohms. I have an in-line > > Autek WM-1 and no tuner. > > -- > ==================================== > Cec, > You can't measure SWR on a line which is less than 1/4-wave long. > Preferably it should be as long as 1/2-wavelength to ensure the max > and min voltage points both occur on it. Total and absolute nonsense. Where do you come up with this stuff? -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Article: 217655 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 02:25:11 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Owen Duffy wrote: > On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 01:36:15 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > wrote: > >Owen Duffy wrote: > >> On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 21:39:27 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > >> wrote: > > > > > >> >> Jim, that seems inconsistent with your earlier statemetn "No, the SWR > >> >> being measured is on the load side of the meter." > >> > > >> >The load side is the side with the load, i.e. the antenna, on it. > >> > > >> >> In the example you quoted with a 100 ohm load on a 100 ohm line, were > >> >> the line loss low, and the line long enough to be sure to sample a > >> >> fully developed voltage maximum and voltage minimum it would be found > >> >> that the VSWR was 1:1. > >> > > >> >Not for a 50 Ohm system, i.e. a transmitter expecting 50 Ohms and a > >> >meter calibrated for a 50 Ohm system. > > > >> I am sorry Jim, the VSWR is a property of the transmission line and > >> its termination, and the VSWR on that 100 ohm line with a 100 ohm > >> termination is 1:1. The VSWR could be *MEASURED* on that line by > >> sampling the magnitude of the voltage at different points on the line > >> and it would be found that the magnitude of the voltage was constant, > >> which means VSWR=1:1. > > > >No, the measured SWR is relative to the design impedance of the SWR > >meter which is normally 50 Ohms. > The SWR on the line depends on the characteristic impedance of the > line and the impedance of the termination of the line. 50 ohms does > not come into it. We are not talking about SWR on the line, we are talking about SWR at the input END of the line; big difference. > The SWR on your proposed 100 ohm line with a 100 ohm termination is > 1:1. If your measurement indicates anything else, then you need to > consider your measurement as invalid. Once again, we are not talking about SWR *ON* the line, we are talking about SWR as seen at the input *END* of the line; big difference. Furthermore, the SWR *ANYWHERE* on the line is *NOT* 1:1 for a 50 Ohm reference. Try hooking a length of 93 Ohm line (which is easier to get than 100 Ohm line) terminated with a 93 Ohm resistor to any 50 Ohm SWR meter of any type. Then hook just the 93 Ohme resistor to the meter and tell me what the difference is in the readings. > Owen > -- If anything is misnamed it is the term SWR. SWR is nothing more than a dimensionless impedance ratio. You do NOT need a transmission line to have SWR in spite of the W in SWR standing for 'wave'. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Article: 217656 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim Higgins Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <5245a$4335d586$97d56a13$3658@ALLTEL.NET> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 02:30:41 GMT On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 11:51:06 -0700, Jim Kelley wrote: >Reg Edwards wrote: > >> The symbol of Christianity is an instrument of torture. >> >> It's amazing it has so many adherents. > >Especially when they could have just as easily chosen a lion devouring a >man as their symbol. Blaming crucifixion on Christians is a little like >blaming Jews for the Holocaust. It neglects a lot of relevant history, >don't you think? Christians blaming the crucifixion on anyone is what I'd call stuck on stupid. Instead of blaming anyone, Christians should be looking for someone to thank. The crucifixion and following return from the dead is at the very core of Christianity. Without it it's arguable whether Christianity would exist. Those looking to place blame are simply ignorant of the major dogma on which their religion is based. Article: 217657 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Owen Duffy Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 02:38:44 GMT On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 02:25:11 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >SWR is nothing more than a dimensionless impedance ratio. Is that so... Owen -- Article: 217658 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kashe@sonic.net Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: References: <31f74$43299abf$471c63c6$12083@ALLTEL.NET> <1126821476.840433.194860@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <5ujsi196c3dl0l0a7su4uqltnt4u0ql4ko@4ax.com> <3f84j1t6o536tgnekhutv1ruepdo5d5ggs@4ax.com> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 02:49:59 GMT On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 06:42:51 -0400, Uncle Ted wrote: >On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 03:16:14 GMT, kashe@sonic.net wrote: > >>On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 22:22:10 -0400, Uncle Ted >>wrote: >> >>>On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 05:41:38 GMT, kashe@sonic.net wrote: >>> >>>>>It's bad enough that people feel a need to believe in any deities at >>>>>all, but when you have to listen to a bunch of old men in robes half a >>>>>world away tell you how to live your life, you're pretty screwed up. >>>> >>>> Is this a slam against our Muslim brethren? A comment on the >>>>position of Saudi Arabian women? >>> >>>Pope worshipers and Mohamahdists are all the same to me... >> >> That says more about you than about them. > >Such as? If you have to ask .... Article: 217659 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 02:54:31 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Owen Duffy wrote: > On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 02:25:11 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > wrote: > >SWR is nothing more than a dimensionless impedance ratio. > Is that so... Owen > -- Yes, it is so and it is equal to: SWR = (A + B)/(A - B) Where: A = sqrt ( (R + Z)^2 + X^2 ) B = sqrt ( (R - Z)^2 + X^2 ) R = resistive component of load impedance in Ohms. X = reactive component of load impedance in Ohms. Z = reference impedance (purely resistive) in Ohms If you don't believe it, get some resistors, capacitors and a half way decent SWR meter and do some experiments; no transmission line required. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Article: 217660 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim Higgins Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: References: <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <4drgj117hlegehk79o4q89lvuefrjfrqpg@4ax.com> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 02:31:44 GMT On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 16:53:05 -0500, Matt Osborn <> wrote: >Gravity has never been proven. How much more basic can one get? Gravity is very easily demonstrated though. Climb up a 60-foot tower and get back to me for further instructions if you want a first hand demo. ;-) Article: 217661 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <5245a$4335d586$97d56a13$3658@ALLTEL.NET> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 23:24:00 -0400 Message-ID: <430cd$4338bb7e$97d56a13$14782@ALLTEL.NET> Jesus agreed with your view. He admonished Peter, "Get thee behind me Satin", when Peter suggested that being the son of God he could thwart his death. Jim Higgins" wrote in message news:cibhj1hv17ka2ppd2fshsan765tv94l51c@4ax.com... > On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 11:51:06 -0700, Jim Kelley > > Christians blaming the crucifixion on anyone is what I'd call stuck on > stupid. Instead of blaming anyone, Christians should be looking for > someone to thank. The crucifixion and following return from the dead > is at the very core of Christianity. Without it it's arguable whether > Christianity would exist. Those looking to place blame are simply > ignorant of the major dogma on which their religion is based. Article: 217662 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 23:28:03 -0400 Message-ID: <6371f$4338bc6e$97d56a13$15100@ALLTEL.NET> You are correct Cecil, you and Matt exisit only as figments of my imagination. For my own amusement, I sometimes let others think I am a figment of theirs. "Cecil Moore" wrote in message news:jB_Ze.554$lc1.0@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com... > Matt Osborn wrote: > > Nothing can be proven using the scientific method. > > Hey, let me try that same approach. You do not exist. > -- > 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217663 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Uncle Ted Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 23:14:16 -0400 Message-ID: References: <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <4drgj117hlegehk79o4q89lvuefrjfrqpg@4ax.com> On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 20:52:55 -0500, Matt Osborn <> wrote: >On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 22:30:50 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: > >>Matt Osborn wrote: >>> Gravity has never been proven. >> >>I know the answer to this one from my hippie days. >> >>There is no gravity! The earth sucks! > >So does the wind! > No. It blows. Article: 217664 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Uncle Ted Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 23:18:32 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1126296865.329405.72430@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4324E0BD.A033E1A@earthlink.net> <4o4ji1p26o2mcctbkfbuugpan1qmlt05nd@4ax.com> <31f74$43299abf$471c63c6$12083@ALLTEL.NET> <1127271443.195835.320110@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43313df9$0$253$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <4338A687.8D5B94DF@earthlink.net> On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 01:54:56 GMT, "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: >> Christian Charity is a point scoring exercise with God. It is done for >> selfish reasons, to make sure you are noticed by God and he lets you in. > > > Really? Then why does the New Testament say "Not by your works, but >by your faith"? This link should explain it for you... http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/faithalone.html Article: 217665 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Owen Duffy Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 03:52:40 GMT On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 02:54:31 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >Owen Duffy wrote: >> On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 02:25:11 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com >> wrote: > > >> >SWR is nothing more than a dimensionless impedance ratio. The fundamental definition of SWR flows from the behaviour and properties of RF transmission lines. When a transmission line is terminated in an impedance other than its characteristic impedance, there will be both a forward wave and a reflected wave of such magnitude to resolve the conditions that must apply at the termination. The forward wave and the reflected wave sum at all points along the line having regard for their magnitudes and relative phase to produce a "standing wave". The Standing Wave Ratio (SWR or VSWR) is defined to mean the ratio of the maximum to the minimum of the magnitude of the standing wave voltage pattern along the line. The SWR on a lossless line can be calculated knowing the complex characteristic impedance of the line and the complex load impedance. The SWR on the line does not depend in any way on some unrelated independent reference resistance as you suggest in your formula. You seem to be suggesting that your redefined SWR is a really good (obscure) way to talk about an impedance (independently of a transmission line) in terms of some standardised reference value, and you can throw away the fundamental meaning of SWR to support your SWR(50) concept. In your terms (independently of a transmission line), for instance, a Z of 60+j10 would be SWR(50)=1.299, and so would an infinite number of other Zs have SWR(50)=1.299... how is that of value. To know Z is 60+j10 is to know more than to know SWR(50)=1.299. Owen -- Article: 217666 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 04:02:46 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Owen, SWR meters with a sampling line. The only experience I've had has been I once made one for HF. It was of the type where a second wire is drawn alongside the inner conductor of a short length of coaxial line of impedance in the same street as the system it is to work with. Operating frequencies covered the whole of the HF band. That is a very wide band. Which indicates that line length plays no part in measuring accuracy once calibrated. To explain how the thing works it is necessary to return to what it really is. It is a resistance bridge. All so-called SWR meters, whatever the circuit or form of construction, are resistance bridges. The bridge has 3 internal ratio arms. The 4th arm is the variable transmitter load. If all 4 arms are of same resistance we have a very sensitive arrangement suitable for QRP transmitters. However, 3/4 of the TX power is dissipated in the 3 internal bridge arms. For higher power transmitters it is necessary to use high ratios for the ratio arms. In the case of meters which use a little ferrite ring as a current transformer, a resistor of the order of 30 to 100 ohms can be shunted across the current transformer secondary winding while the primary winding has an input resistance of the order of 0.1 ohms which forms the value of the ratio arm in series with the external load. This 0.1-ohm arm is capable of carrying the load current of several amps with only a small power loss. The other two ratio arms can be a pair of high value resistors in the same ratio as occurs via the current transformer. If the input resistance of the current transformer is 0.1 ohms then the bridge ratio is 50 / 0.1 = 500:1 where 50 ohms is the usual value of the load resistance when the bridge is balanced and SWR = 1:1 The two high impedance arms can be capacitors in the same ratio of 500:1 which have zero power dissipation but have a minor effect on accuracy. They introduce a small phase angle into the load as seen by the transmitter through the meter. The error increases with increasing frequency. It will be seen that the take-off point is effectively the same for both current and voltage. Returning to the so-called sampling line. There is a bridge configuration which is not quite so obvious. But instead of a current transformer the current is picked off by means of a short length of wire in parallel with the coaxial inner conductor by virtue of their mutual inductance. The line is too short for propagation effects to play a significant part. Voltage is picked off at the same point by virtue of the capacitance between the wire and coaxial inner conductor. The phase relationship between volts and amps can be reversed just by reversing the direction of propagation through the meter. The bridge ratio is set partially by the ratio of the impedances Zo of the additional wire and inner coax conductor. The length of coaxial line affects only the bridge sensitivity and power dissipated in the meter. As you must be aware, sensitivity falls of fast with decreasing frequency and 160 meters was my favourite band. So the home-brewed meter was soon discarded and I returned to ferrite rings. I was left with the impression it was very easy to make and that almost anything would work. Hope you can understand the foregoing. ---- Reg. Article: 217667 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <4338D057.B9B48493@earthlink.net> From: "Michael A. Terrell" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126296865.329405.72430@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4324E0BD.A033E1A@earthlink.net> <4o4ji1p26o2mcctbkfbuugpan1qmlt05nd@4ax.com> <31f74$43299abf$471c63c6$12083@ALLTEL.NET> <1127271443.195835.320110@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43313df9$0$253$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <4338A687.8D5B94DF@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 04:53:27 GMT Tom Donaly wrote: > > Faith and works are, like voltage and current, inextricably intertwined. > The proof of faith is the good work. Those who do no good have no faith. > 73, > Tom Donaly, KA6RUH I was taught as a child to help others. I have lost count of the things I've done for family, friends and strangers without asking anything in return. I have also had others help me when the tables were turned. They have fed me, given me rides, or paid so I could see a doctor after I was fired for being unconscious for five days with the flu. It works both ways. Today, I am 100% disabled, and only able to work a couple hours a day so I spend most of that time collecting and repairing donated computers for the local "Vets Helping Vets" group, who gives them to other disabled vets who are unable to afford a computer. It gives me something to do, and still helps others. I have offered to help the hams around here to repair their equipment, but they dismissed my offer because I don't have a amateur radio licensee. Its their loss. I have a well equipped shop here at home, and a good stock of parts going to waste. I guess working on a 195 UHF KW transmitter or building commercial microwave equipment isn't good enough for them? It doesn't matter to me anymore. I'll keep restoring early amateur and general coverage receivers as long as I'm able to prop myself up at one of my benches. My current project is a National NC-183R that is taking way too long to restore because it was butchered by an EE with too much time on his hands. There are huge wads of capacitors taped together with wires running everywhere under the chassis so I will make sure I have every part before I clean up that mess. -- ? Michael A. Terrell Central Florida Article: 217668 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 05:08:52 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Jim, Perhaps there's some misunderstanding about location of the meter and what it is measuring. Let's try to clear it up. Would you please do us both a favour by answering the following simple question? There is a 50 ohm line feeding a 100 ohm antenna. There is an SWR meter located at the line-antenna junction. The meter has a reading. Does the reading apply to SWR of the antenna, or does it apply to the SWR along the feedline? Antenna or Feedline? ---- Reg. Article: 217669 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kashe@sonic.net Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: References: <43109$43317117$97d56a13$4287@ALLTEL.NET> <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 06:26:00 GMT On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 15:33:19 -0400, Michael Coslo wrote: > > >Tom Ring wrote: >> Tom Ring wrote: >> >>> Matt Osborn wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> A few thousand compared to 50 million? >>>> >>> >>> Well that certainly makes it ok. You mean you aren't an absolutist? >>> >>> tom >>> K0TAR >>> >> >> The difference between me and you is that I know it's always wrong, and >> you seem to have left an opening for your "religion" to do evil things >> becuase your morality says it's ok. >> >> I'm sorry that you can't understand that an atheist can have morals not >> tied to superstition, but to to true right and wrong. > >First Crusade: > > 12,000 Jews killed in the Rhine valley. > 6000 killed in Jerusalem when they torched the synagogue there > 30,000 Muslims killed at the al Aqsa mosque. > at least 200,000 killed over the length of the crusades. > > Then let us not forget the Iquisitions, witch-hunts and other jollies >that went on. > > And there is plenty more to go around on all sides. Appears > > We're a long way from "a few thousand". > > But as the recent poster Mike has noted, this is pretty off topic, so >I'll refrain from any more posting in this thread. > > - Mike KB3EIA - Typical -- I've had my say, so the discussion is terminated. CS. Article: 217670 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kashe@sonic.net Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: <9jphj11p35trkou22sha53f27rkclo0sru@4ax.com> References: <1127138720_12439@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <4330a9c8$0$22199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43109$43317117$97d56a13$4287@ALLTEL.NET> <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <4334478c$0$9217@dingus.crosslink.net> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 06:28:50 GMT On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 15:21:03 -0700, Zoran Brlecic <...WA7AA...@get.lost> wrote: >Vito wrote: > > >> Not to mention Hitler. > >And we have a Godwin, all... Dumb shit -- the reference is apropos in the midst of a discussion of mass murderers. You lose. > >Btw, Hitler, if you must bring him up, was a Christian. Article: 217671 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kashe@sonic.net Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: <2nphj15rs2cjam36bg7fu9gg2pv3d247gm@4ax.com> References: <1126810780_1703@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <1127138720_12439@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <4330a9c8$0$22199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43109$43317117$97d56a13$4287@ALLTEL.NET> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 06:30:21 GMT On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 20:13:50 -0700, Zoran Brlecic <...WA7AA...@get.lost> wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: > >>>>>I hardly consider myself a fanatic, and am extremely unlike to "hammer" >>>>>anyone over religion, or lack there of. >>>>> >>>>>Some of the most fanatical are those members of the religion of atheism. >>> >>>Yeah? When was the last time an atheist: >> >> >> Ever hear of Stalin? Lenin? Mao? >> >> Can you name three other people who have been responsible for as many >> untimely deaths as these three? > > >This tired old argument??? > >First of all I notice that you haven't addressed any of the specific >examples I gave about *theists* and their religious crimes. >Second, all of the examples I gave are about theists committing crimes >against humanity precisely *because* of their religion, directly and >indirectly. >As far as "Stalin, Lenin and Mao" are concerned, their crimes were most >certainly not committed in order to promote atheism, unless that atheism >was a vehicle for establishing communism, which btw, is de facto a form >of religion. Religion was not outlawed in the USSR and priests were >being prosecuted no more than the rest of the society. Communism and >theism can co-exist and did successfully in most communist countries. >Besides, Stalin spent years in a seminary. Some atheist. >One could just as successfully argue that since "Stalin, Lenin and Mao" >committed crimes and they all ate bread, then by your logic people who >eat bread are murderers. Mother's milk as gateway drug. Article: 217672 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil (J. B. Wood) Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 07:39:01 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> In article , "Reg Edwards" wrote: > Remember the E-H antenna which abused the works of James Clerk > Maxwell? Fractals fall into the same category. They serve only to > increase the complexity of modelling programs! > ---- > Reg. Hello, and I don't think that a comparison between snake-oil antennas (e.g. E-H and crossed-field types) and fractal antennas is justified. What has compelled you to reach this conclusion? Marketing-hype aside, numerous papers with measured data on fractal design have been published in the IEEE's Transactions on Antennas and Propagation. The Electroscience Lab at Ohio State Univ. has been investigating fractal designs for a while now. An sntenna based on a fractal pattern is one method (not the only one) of placing an antenna in a small space but not having it too short electrically. I think it's too early to say whether or not fractal antennas will be the preferred technique for packaging commercial/military antennas into small footprints such as handheld radios. From what I've read the technology shows promise. Sincerely, and 73s from N4GGO, John Wood (Code 5550) e-mail: wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil Naval Research Laboratory 4555 Overlook Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20375-5337 Article: 217673 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 13:16:12 GMT Reg Edwards wrote: > There is a bridge configuration which is not quite so obvious. But > instead of a current transformer the current is picked off by means of > a short length of wire in parallel with the coaxial inner conductor by > virtue of their mutual inductance. The line is too short for > propagation effects to play a significant part. The pickup lines in my Heathkit HM-15 are terminated on one end with a 50 ohm resistor. One pickup line thus attenuates the reflected traveling wave and allows the forward traveling wave to be rectified. The other pickup line attenuates the forward traveling wave and allows the reflected traveling wave to be rectified. Knowing the peak values of both of these two traveling waves allows a calibrated meter to indicate SWR. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217674 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <313030303837383543394FA998@zetnet.co.uk> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 13:56:57 +0100 From: Dave Piggin Subject: Re: Beverage Antenna in WW2 - QCWA092205.txt References: <1sn5j1li0r81h27diiummfql3tuko1m5uu@4ax.com> Can someone please tell me how to 'paste' a copy of text into the 'text' portionof a new message? Walt To copy & paste text or basicly anything into a new page. With your mouse, place the curser on the left hand side of the start of your choosen text. Next, keep your finger on the left mouse button, dragging the curser across your choosen text until it is all highlighted. Now clik with your right mouse button and a drop down box will appear, clik copy. The copied text is now on the clipboard. In your new document, right clik again and the drop down box appears once more. Clik paste, and the copied text will now appear in your new document page. The other explanations in this thread are via the key board. Simple really, have fun. Dave. The drop down box is self explanitary. -- Amateur Radio Call Sign M1BTI, Located in Manchester England. Locator square IO83TK Chairman Of Trafford Radio Club. Club Call Signs G0TRG & M1BBP Located at Umist, University Of Manchester Institute For Science And Technology Share What You Know, Learn What You Dont. Article: 217675 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Richard Fry" References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 08:08:46 -0500 Message-ID: <43394485_3@newsfeed.slurp.net> "Reg Edwards" wrote: > There is a 50 ohm line feeding a 100 ohm antenna. > There is an SWR meter located at the line-antenna junction. > The meter has a reading. Does the reading apply to SWR of the > antenna, or does it apply to the SWR along the feedline? ______________ It applies to the match of the RF network that follows the SWR meter to the impedance for which the SWR meter was calibrated. And if in your example the SWR meter has been calibrated for 50 ohms, and is moved to the input end of that line+antenna RF network, it will also have a reading -- which will be the same as when it was inserted at the antenna-line junction, less the round-trip RF attenuation of the transmission line (assuming that the transmission line is 50 +/- j0 ohms throughout its length). In fact it is a common practice to optimise the transmission line/antenna match of commercial FM and TV broadcast antenna systems by use of a variable transformer inserted at the antenna input, whose adjustment is made by reference to the far-end reflection seen at the sending end of the transmission line, using a high-directivity reflectometer, or SWR meter. The same physics applies to ham antenna systems and methods/means of measurement. RF Visit http://rfry.org for FM transmission system papers. Article: 217676 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 15:21:51 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Owen Duffy wrote: > On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 02:54:31 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > wrote: > >Owen Duffy wrote: > >> On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 02:25:11 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > >> wrote: > > > > > >> >SWR is nothing more than a dimensionless impedance ratio. > The fundamental definition of SWR flows from the behaviour and > properties of RF transmission lines. And power=EI. And it also equals I^2*R and E^2/R. SWR can be expressed in terms of power ratios, current ratios, and impedance ratios. > When a transmission line is terminated in an impedance other than its > characteristic impedance, there will be both a forward wave and a > reflected wave of such magnitude to resolve the conditions that must > apply at the termination. Irrelevant. > The forward wave and the reflected wave sum at all points along the > line having regard for their magnitudes and relative phase to produce > a "standing wave". The Standing Wave Ratio (SWR or VSWR) is defined to > mean the ratio of the maximum to the minimum of the magnitude of the > standing wave voltage pattern along the line. Is is also defined as a current ratio and an impedance ration. > The SWR on a lossless line can be calculated knowing the complex > characteristic impedance of the line and the complex load impedance. What no waves, just impedences!! Now you are contidicting yourself. > The SWR on the line does not depend in any way on some unrelated > independent reference resistance as you suggest in your formula. Read it again. The R is the R of the thing at the end of the line. The X is the X of the thing at the end of the line. The X is the impedance of the line. > You seem to be suggesting that your redefined SWR is a really good > (obscure) way to talk about an impedance (independently of a > transmission line) in terms of some standardised reference value, and > you can throw away the fundamental meaning of SWR to support your > SWR(50) concept. In your terms (independently of a transmission line), > for instance, a Z of 60+j10 would be SWR(50)=1.299, and so would an > infinite number of other Zs have SWR(50)=1.299... how is that of > value. To know Z is 60+j10 is to know more than to know SWR(50)=1.299. The equations given are general and can be derived from first priciples. The Z in the equations is the Z of your reference, i.e. 50 for a 50 Ohm system. SWR is *ALWAYS* relative to some reference impedance. > Owen > -- -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Article: 217677 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 15:44:27 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Reg Edwards wrote: > Jim, > Perhaps there's some misunderstanding about location of the meter and > what it is measuring. Let's try to clear it up. > Would you please do us both a favour by answering the following simple > question? > There is a 50 ohm line feeding a 100 ohm antenna. > There is an SWR meter located at the line-antenna junction. What does this mean? > The meter has a reading. Does the reading apply to SWR of the > antenna, or does it apply to the SWR along the feedline? The reading is the SWR at that point. > Antenna or Feedline? > ---- > Reg. An SWR meter reads the SWR of the thing connected to its output port with respect to the reference impedance the meter was designed for. The SWR meter reads the SWR *AT THE POINT OF CONNECTION* of the connected system. Not the middle of the system, not the other end (if it has one) of the system, but the input point. If you measure a SWR (50 Ohms reference) of 2:1 for a black box, what is in the box? A. A 25 Ohm resistor. B. A 100 Ohm resistor. C. A cable spool of coax with some impedance at the end of it. D. Could be any of the above. In general there is no guarantee that the SWR at any point of a transmission line will be equal to the SWR at any other point on a transmission line other than for special cases. What seems to have you terribly confused is that all the transmission lines, tuners, antennas, connectors and whatevers become a *SYSTEM* and the SWR at the input connector to the *SYSTEM* is not guaranteed to be the same as the SWR at some arbitrary point inside the system. When you measure the SWR of a line with a load on the end, you are measuring the SWR of the entire system relative to your reference, not the load. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Article: 217678 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 15:48:35 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Cec, you have YOUR explanation and I have MY explanation. Which is the most simple? There is a bridge. When the variable arm, the load, is 50 ohms the bridge is balanced and the meter indicates SWR = 1:1 When the variable arm is either 0 ohms or infinite ohms, the meter indicates SWR = infinity :1 What can be more simple than that? How it works can be visualised. But the meter is ambiguous. It cannot distinguish between loads of 0 ohms and infinite ohms. Additional information is required. This serious ambiguity also applies to your weird contraption. ;o) ---- Regards, Reg. Article: 217679 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 15:56:09 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Cec, I notice that you and others have begun to use my description of "indicate" rather than "measure". ---- Reg. Article: 217680 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 16:09:30 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Jim, I'm sorry you are unable to answer the simple question "Feedline or Antenna?". ---- Reg. Article: 217681 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Bob Bob Subject: Re: Free space pathloss calcs and factor K References: <5hpl03-3ps.ln1@p400bob.personal.cox.net> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 11:37:51 -0500 Thank you all for your feedback/comment. So much for an easy answer! Article: 217682 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 17:29:10 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> <43394485_3@newsfeed.slurp.net> Richard, If's and But's are not required. The antenna is just an arbitrary load. Does the meter reading indicate SWR on the feedline (which is what is usually required), or does it not? This is not a "catch question". It is not a troll. "Antenna or Feedline?" please. KISS ---- Reg. ===================================== "Richard Fry" wrote in message news:43394485_3@newsfeed.slurp.net... > "Reg Edwards" wrote: > > There is a 50 ohm line feeding a 100 ohm antenna. > > There is an SWR meter located at the line-antenna junction. > > The meter has a reading. Does the reading apply to SWR of the > > antenna, or does it apply to the SWR along the feedline? > ______________ > > It applies to the match of the RF network that follows the SWR meter to the > impedance for which the SWR meter was calibrated. > > And if in your example the SWR meter has been calibrated for 50 ohms, and is > moved to the input end of that line+antenna RF network, it will also have a > reading -- which will be the same as when it was inserted at the > antenna-line junction, less the round-trip RF attenuation of the > transmission line (assuming that the transmission line is 50 +/- j0 ohms > throughout its length). > > In fact it is a common practice to optimise the transmission line/antenna > match of commercial FM and TV broadcast antenna systems by use of a variable > transformer inserted at the antenna input, whose adjustment is made by > reference to the far-end reflection seen at the sending end of the > transmission line, using a high-directivity reflectometer, or SWR meter. > > The same physics applies to ham antenna systems and methods/means of > measurement. > > RF > > Visit http://rfry.org for FM transmission system papers. > > > > > > > Article: 217683 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Richard Fry" References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> <43394485_3@newsfeed.slurp.net> Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 12:50:19 -0500 Message-ID: <43398682_4@newsfeed.slurp.net> "Reg Edwards" > > "Antenna or Feedline?" please. > KISS ___________ Antenna. And a big smooch to you, too. RF Article: 217684 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 18:08:43 GMT Reg Edwards wrote: > Cec, you have YOUR explanation and I have MY explanation. Mine is a lot simpler. The Heath HM-15 has two pickup elements. If you install a Z0 resistor load at one end it "picks up" the forward wave. If you install a Z0 resistor load at the other end it "picks up" the reflected wave. The two pickup voltages are rectified and compared through a calibration procedure. The parts that came with the HM-15 kit in the 50s-60s included two 72 ohm resistors. RG-ll was very popular at the time. If one wanted a 72 ohm SWR meter, one installed the 72 ohm resistors. If one wanted a 50 ohm SWR meter, one installed the 50 ohm resistors. A switch could be installed that switched between 50 ohms and 72 ohms calibration. > This serious ambiguity also applies to your weird contraption. ;o) Actually, the Heathkit design concept is easier to understand than is the bridge explanation or the toroid-pickup/phasor-addition explanation. The first SWR meter I built in the 50s, used two lengths of insulated wire shoved under the braid of the coax. It worked but, at the time, I had no idea why it worked. Heath's little slotted line pickup device was pretty slick. I sometimes see them for sale at hamfests. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217685 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 18:14:54 GMT Reg Edwards wrote: > Cec, I notice that you and others have begun to use my description of > "indicate" rather than "measure". What a meter movement "measures" is current. What a meter "indicates" can be anything in the world depending upon the calibration scale. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217686 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> <43394485_3@newsfeed.slurp.net> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 18:17:43 GMT Reg Edwards wrote: > "Antenna or Feedline?" please. If the meter is calibrated for the feedline Z0, it will read the SWR on the feedline. If the meter is calibrated for the antenna Z0, it will read the SWR on the antenna. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217687 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim Kelley Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 11:12:02 -0700 Message-ID: References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <5245a$4335d586$97d56a13$3658@ALLTEL.NET> Jim Higgins wrote: > On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 11:51:06 -0700, Jim Kelley > wrote: > > >>Reg Edwards wrote: >> >> >>>The symbol of Christianity is an instrument of torture. >>> >>>It's amazing it has so many adherents. >> >>Especially when they could have just as easily chosen a lion devouring a >>man as their symbol. Blaming crucifixion on Christians is a little like >>blaming Jews for the Holocaust. It neglects a lot of relevant history, >>don't you think? > > > Christians blaming the crucifixion on anyone is what I'd call stuck on > stupid. Instead of blaming anyone, Christians should be looking for > someone to thank. The crucifixion and following return from the dead > is at the very core of Christianity. Without it it's arguable whether > Christianity would exist. Those looking to place blame are simply > ignorant of the major dogma on which their religion is based. Who said anything about looking for someone to blame? Besides you, I mean. Article: 217688 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 19:06:28 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> <43394485_3@newsfeed.slurp.net> <43398682_4@newsfeed.slurp.net> > "Reg Edwards" > > > > "Antenna or Feedline?" please. > > KISS > ___________ > > Antenna. > > And a big smooch to you, too. > -------------------------------------- Rich, thanks for the smooch. But I'm afraid you are wrong. The meter correctly indicates SWR on the feedline when it is located at the antenna end of the line. But don't worry too much about it. It seems you are in good company. So much for the technical education of radio engineers. It all comes about because of so-called SWR meters being called SWR meters - which they are not. At least not when located at the transmitter end of transmission lines as they nearly always are. When located adjacent to the transmitter they are TLI's. Transmitter Loading Indicators. And SWR has very little or nothing to do with it. ---- Reg. Article: 217689 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 19:06:28 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> <43394485_3@newsfeed.slurp.net> Cec, you can make the meter read anything you like just by twiddling the calibration pot. Of what bloody use is that? !**?!! Just answer the obvious question. No If's or But's ---- Reg. "Cecil Moore" wrote in message news:b1g_e.1025$Fi3.925@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net... > Reg Edwards wrote: > > "Antenna or Feedline?" please. > Article: 217690 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 19:13:16 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Rich, your abuse of the English language renders it impossible for me or anybody else to make any sense of what you are waffling about. ---- Punchinello, G4FGQ Article: 217691 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim Kelley Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 12:09:16 -0700 Message-ID: References: <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <5245a$4335d586$97d56a13$3658@ALLTEL.NET> Jim Higgins wrote: > On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 11:12:02 -0700, Jim Kelley > wrote: > > >> >>Jim Higgins wrote: >> >> >>>On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 11:51:06 -0700, Jim Kelley >>>wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>Reg Edwards wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>The symbol of Christianity is an instrument of torture. >>>>> >>>>>It's amazing it has so many adherents. >>>> >>>>Especially when they could have just as easily chosen a lion devouring a >>>>man as their symbol. Blaming crucifixion on Christians is a little like >>>>blaming Jews for the Holocaust. It neglects a lot of relevant history, >>>>don't you think? >>> >>> >>>Christians blaming the crucifixion on anyone is what I'd call stuck on >>>stupid. Instead of blaming anyone, Christians should be looking for >>>someone to thank. The crucifixion and following return from the dead >>>is at the very core of Christianity. Without it it's arguable whether >>>Christianity would exist. Those looking to place blame are simply >>>ignorant of the major dogma on which their religion is based. >> >>Who said anything about looking for someone to blame? Besides you, I mean. > > > You ask who raised the concept of blame? It wasn't me. See above. > I'll give you credit for not snipping it. I'll give you credit for apparently not understanding what it says above. It obviously laments the laying of blame - in this case, on Christians and Jews. Your comment may apply to something, but certainly not to anything I said. Thanks for your input though, Jim. Article: 217692 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison) Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 15:05:08 -0500 Message-ID: <19159-4339A5F4-273@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net> References: Reg Edawds, G4FGQ wrote: "R&B`s cavity magnetron was developed at Birmingham University in the midst of the air raids on that industrial city." Prior to Randall & Boot, magnetrons were low-power devices, outclassed ny klystrons. R & B`s resonant-cavity magnetron, operating at 10 cm exuded 100x more power than previous magnetrons and allowed smaller hardware and imptoved image definition.. The 6 KW GEC manufactured version given to the U.S. in August 1940 was shipped by ordinary parcel post to arouse no suspicion of its importance. It has been called the most important shipment ever to arrive on U.S. shores. The resonant-cavity magnetron was an awesome contribution to victory in WW-2 against both Germany and Japan. Their radar development lagged far behind. My ship in WW-2 had only one spare part kept in the captain`s safe, the Raytheon resonant-cavity magnetron for our Raytheon navigational radar system. Fortunately, we never needed to replace it. After WW-2, Rayrheon shifted production to their bew "Radar Range". The Japanese soon caught up with their ubiquitous microwave ovens. They were more motivated. Our houses were already equipped with oil, gas, and electric ranges aplenty. Everyone, it turned out, was ready for microwave too. Klystrons were not washed up either. The most powerful generators ever built were klystrons. The speed detector used to ticket your car probably uses a laser. All radar isn`t pulsed radar. Radar altometers use separate transmitter and receiver antennas. They transmit an FM signal whose modulation frequency is changing at a certain rate. This is continuously compared with the modulation frequency of the received echo to tell how far away the reflection point is. The television signal you watch off the air was probably generated by a large klystron. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Article: 217693 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Richard Fry" References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> <43394485_3@newsfeed.slurp.net> <43398682_4@newsfeed.slurp.net> Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 15:18:47 -0500 Message-ID: <4339a94f_3@newsfeed.slurp.net> "Reg Edwards" > But I'm afraid you are wrong. The meter correctly indicates > SWR on the feedline when it is located at the antenna end >of the line. ______________ Remove the feedline, and connect the 100 ohm antenna through the SWR meter calibrated for 50 ohms, directly to the transmitter. The meter has a reading. The measurement will have the same value as before, neglecting any adjustment for having no line loss now. But there is no feedline, so how can there be any SWR on it, you write. The fact that there is not enough transmission line length in the system for literal standing wave maxima and minima to develop on it does not mean that reflections do not exist in the output load system. It is the value of those reflections that determines the corresponding value of SWR. Reflections can be measured by appropriate instruments regardless of the length of line in the measured system, or even the existence of any transmission line at all. The convention of the professional engineering community for many decades has been to convert incident and reflected waveform samples into the corresponding value of SWR, no matter if there is insufficient line length in the system for the corresponding maxima and minima to develop fully on it. It doesn't matter, electrically. Your constant diatribes stating that it does is a futile exercise. Disable the SWR protection in your ham tx and key it to full power into an open or short. There is no transmission line where standing wave maxima and minima could exist, but your tx will burn up anyway. Maybe save your response until tomorrow morning, when your Merlot buzz has worn off :) RF Article: 217694 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison) Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 15:41:25 -0500 Message-ID: <21565-4339AE75-966@storefull-3253.bay.webtv.net> References: Teg, G4FGQ wrote: "Err, no, the meter is telling what it sees at the point of measurement." Yes, and that is a ratio depending on "rho", the reflection coefficient. We know that rho equals: the square root of reflected pwr / fwd pwr And: VSWR = 1+rho / 1-rho VSWR is a function of the reflection coefficient You drive an automobile and glance at the speedometer. It is an electrical meter giving an indication proportional to vehicle speed. You look at an SWR (TLI) meter giving an indication calibrated to be proportional to SWR. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Article: 217695 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Richard Fry" References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> <43394485_3@newsfeed.slurp.net> <43398682_4@newsfeed.slurp.net> <4339a94f_3@newsfeed.slurp.net> Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 15:58:48 -0500 Message-ID: <4339b2af_3@newsfeed.slurp.net> >> "Reg Edwards" >> But I'm afraid you are wrong. The meter correctly indicates >> SWR on the feedline when it is located at the antenna end >>of the line. > ______________ PS: In this example the mismatch between the antenna and the line is the source of the reflection that results in system SWR. Convention is to state that the SWR belongs to the antenna, not the line -- although the added stress on components applies only to the line and tx, and not to the antenna. An ideal SWR meter will read that antenna reflection to have the same value when installed at either end of the line, or anywhere along its length (assuming a perfect 50 ohm line, and neglecting line loss). RF Article: 217696 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 21:06:36 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Reg Edwards wrote: > Jim, I'm sorry you are unable to answer the simple question "Feedline > or Antenna?". > ---- > Reg. It appears you have no interest in understanding and simply wish to throw out straw men, red herrings, and who knows what to complicate a very simple concept. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Article: 217697 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Owen Duffy Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Message-ID: <7tcjj1pibskpa8gkpba9tnvu1esikl3ed9@4ax.com> References: Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 21:13:02 GMT On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 15:21:51 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >Owen Duffy wrote: >> On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 02:54:31 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com >> wrote: > >> >Owen Duffy wrote: >> >> On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 02:25:11 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com >> >> wrote: >> > >> > >> >> >SWR is nothing more than a dimensionless impedance ratio. > >> The fundamental definition of SWR flows from the behaviour and >> properties of RF transmission lines. > >And power=EI. And it also equals I^2*R and E^2/R. > >SWR can be expressed in terms of power ratios, current ratios, and >impedance ratios. > >> When a transmission line is terminated in an impedance other than its >> characteristic impedance, there will be both a forward wave and a >> reflected wave of such magnitude to resolve the conditions that must >> apply at the termination. > >Irrelevant. > >> The forward wave and the reflected wave sum at all points along the >> line having regard for their magnitudes and relative phase to produce >> a "standing wave". The Standing Wave Ratio (SWR or VSWR) is defined to >> mean the ratio of the maximum to the minimum of the magnitude of the >> standing wave voltage pattern along the line. > >Is is also defined as a current ratio and an impedance ration. > >> The SWR on a lossless line can be calculated knowing the complex >> characteristic impedance of the line and the complex load impedance. > >What no waves, just impedences!! Now you are contidicting yourself. > >> The SWR on the line does not depend in any way on some unrelated >> independent reference resistance as you suggest in your formula. > >Read it again. > >The R is the R of the thing at the end of the line. > >The X is the X of the thing at the end of the line. > >The X is the impedance of the line. > >> You seem to be suggesting that your redefined SWR is a really good >> (obscure) way to talk about an impedance (independently of a >> transmission line) in terms of some standardised reference value, and >> you can throw away the fundamental meaning of SWR to support your >> SWR(50) concept. In your terms (independently of a transmission line), >> for instance, a Z of 60+j10 would be SWR(50)=1.299, and so would an >> infinite number of other Zs have SWR(50)=1.299... how is that of >> value. To know Z is 60+j10 is to know more than to know SWR(50)=1.299. > >The equations given are general and can be derived from first priciples. > >The Z in the equations is the Z of your reference, i.e. 50 for a 50 >Ohm system. > >SWR is *ALWAYS* relative to some reference impedance. Jim, your comments are full of inconsistencies (like pronumeral X having two different meanings in the same formula, equations described as "general" but which do not allow for a reactance component in your "reference z" which is actually the characteristic impedance of the line in the real world, equations derived from first principles and you state the first principles are "irelevant"). In the absence of logic in your writing, I won't waste anymore time... you have some deeply entrenched misconceptions and seem to have built a large framework of simple views (like power=EI... a DC circuits concept) to support the misconceptions. Owen -- Article: 217698 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. References: <11jgehdqm5rr1c1@corp.supernews.com> <43394485_3@newsfeed.slurp.net> Message-ID: <9aj_e.3180$KQ5.2163@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 21:52:05 GMT Reg Edwards wrote: > Cec, you can make the meter read anything you like just by twiddling > the calibration pot. Of what bloody use is that? !**?!! > > Just answer the obvious question. No If's or But's I did answer the question, Reg. You just didn't like the answer. Let's say we have an SWR meter at point 'x' in the following diagram: XMTR---1WL 50 ohm coax---x---1WL 75 ohm coax---100 ohm load If the meter is calibrated for 50 ohms, it will indicate the SWR on the 50 ohm coax, 2:1, on the source side of the meter. If the meter is calibrated for 75 ohms, it will indicate the SWR on the 75 ohm coax, 1.33:1, on the load side of the meter. An SWR meter samples the magnitude and phase of the voltage, samples the magnitude and phase of the current, assumes it exists in the Z0 environment for which it was calibrated, and accurately reports those results. If the SWR meter is installed in a Z0 environment other than that for which it was calibrated, the instrument is being misused and the operator is at fault, not the instrument. Any instrument can be misused. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217699 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 21:54:09 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <7tcjj1pibskpa8gkpba9tnvu1esikl3ed9@4ax.com> Owen Duffy wrote: > On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 15:21:51 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > wrote: > >Owen Duffy wrote: > >> On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 02:54:31 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > >> wrote: > > > >> >Owen Duffy wrote: > >> >> On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 02:25:11 +0000 (UTC), jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > >> >> wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> >> >SWR is nothing more than a dimensionless impedance ratio. > > > >> The fundamental definition of SWR flows from the behaviour and > >> properties of RF transmission lines. > > > >And power=EI. And it also equals I^2*R and E^2/R. > > > >SWR can be expressed in terms of power ratios, current ratios, and > >impedance ratios. > > > >> When a transmission line is terminated in an impedance other than its > >> characteristic impedance, there will be both a forward wave and a > >> reflected wave of such magnitude to resolve the conditions that must > >> apply at the termination. > > > >Irrelevant. > > > >> The forward wave and the reflected wave sum at all points along the > >> line having regard for their magnitudes and relative phase to produce > >> a "standing wave". The Standing Wave Ratio (SWR or VSWR) is defined to > >> mean the ratio of the maximum to the minimum of the magnitude of the > >> standing wave voltage pattern along the line. > > > >Is is also defined as a current ratio and an impedance ration. > > > >> The SWR on a lossless line can be calculated knowing the complex > >> characteristic impedance of the line and the complex load impedance. > > > >What no waves, just impedences!! Now you are contidicting yourself. > > > >> The SWR on the line does not depend in any way on some unrelated > >> independent reference resistance as you suggest in your formula. > > > >Read it again. > > > >The R is the R of the thing at the end of the line. > > > >The X is the X of the thing at the end of the line. > > > >The X is the impedance of the line. > > > >> You seem to be suggesting that your redefined SWR is a really good > >> (obscure) way to talk about an impedance (independently of a > >> transmission line) in terms of some standardised reference value, and > >> you can throw away the fundamental meaning of SWR to support your > >> SWR(50) concept. In your terms (independently of a transmission line), > >> for instance, a Z of 60+j10 would be SWR(50)=1.299, and so would an > >> infinite number of other Zs have SWR(50)=1.299... how is that of > >> value. To know Z is 60+j10 is to know more than to know SWR(50)=1.299. > > > >The equations given are general and can be derived from first priciples. > > > >The Z in the equations is the Z of your reference, i.e. 50 for a 50 > >Ohm system. > > > >SWR is *ALWAYS* relative to some reference impedance. > Jim, your comments are full of inconsistencies (like pronumeral X > having two different meanings in the same formula, equations described > as "general" but which do not allow for a reactance component in your > "reference z" which is actually the characteristic impedance of the > line in the real world, equations derived from first principles and > you state the first principles are "irelevant"). The last line is obviously a typo, it should be: The Z is the impedance of the line. Z is an impedance. An impedance is an absolute value. The impedance of RG-8 coax, for example, is approximately 50 Ohms. As I said, if you don't believe the equations, go get some resistors and capacitors and do an experiment. Until you do that you have no case. > In the absence of logic in your writing, I won't waste anymore time... > you have some deeply entrenched misconceptions and seem to have built > a large framework of simple views (like power=EI... a DC circuits > concept) to support the misconceptions. Sigh, the power thing was a simple illustration of the fact that a thing can often be represented a number of different ways. How about acceleration is the first derivative of velocity and also the second derivative of position? Do you like this example better? > Owen > -- -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Article: 217700 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <5245a$4335d586$97d56a13$3658@ALLTEL.NET> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 22:00:41 GMT Jim Kelley wrote: > I'll give you credit for apparently not understanding what it says > above. It obviously laments the laying of blame - in this case, on > Christians and Jews. The Romans were responsible for the crucifix. If the Jews had been responsible, we would be wearing stones around our necks. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217701 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. References: <21565-4339AE75-966@storefull-3253.bay.webtv.net> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 22:07:26 GMT Richard Harrison wrote: > You drive an automobile and glance at the speedometer. It is an > electrical meter giving an indication proportional to vehicle speed. And if you think it is calibrated in km/hour when it is actually calibrated in miles/hour, your speed reading will be in error and you may get a ticket. This is akin to an SWR meter being calibrated for the wrong Z0. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217702 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? References: <1127857483.866370.308610@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 22:14:43 GMT Harry wrote: > Would someone please explain that for me? DC steady-state does not cause electrons to emit photons. For RF photons to be emitted from a copper wire dipole, the free electrons must be accelerated and decelerated. The DC component cannot accomplish that feat. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217703 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 22:25:44 GMT Matt Osborn wrote: > The religious openly declare that their belief system is centered > about the concept of G-d. Here's an interesting study on the subject, it says: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1798944,00.html "RELIGIOUS belief can cause damage to a society, contributing towards high murder rates, abortion, sexual promiscuity and suicide, according to research published today. According to the study, belief in and worship of God are not only unnecessary for a healthy society but may actually contribute to social problems. The study counters the view of believers that religion is necessary to provide the moral and ethical foundations of a healthy society." -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217704 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim Kelley Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 15:38:12 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1127857483.866370.308610@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> Cecil Moore wrote: > Harry wrote: > >> Would someone please explain that for me? > > > DC steady-state does not cause electrons to emit photons. Except in flashlights, apparently. > For RF photons to be emitted from a copper wire dipole, the > free electrons must be accelerated and decelerated. The DC > component cannot accomplish that feat. Quantum mechanics is completely unnecessary here, Cecil. I think Faraday still provides the best explanation. ac6xg Article: 217705 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: Lightning Question Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 17:51:52 -0500 Message-ID: References: <1125443164.355999.136830@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <3dmdnRMzg6RrC6XeRVn-jQ@comcast.com> Lightning generally goes wherever it decides. However, I have been advised that it generally dislikes sharp turns in conductors it happens to follow. Think of this as a "quarter turn" and as a result represents some inductance and therefore a little more impedance that the straight path. With these super high currents, that's a lot of magnetic field around the conductor. A look at the mag field and that is must be compressed inside the quarter turn, should help you to see this concept. With this in mind, the turn at the bottom of the tower can be where a coax (shield)ground can go, thus encouraging conduction to ground. Having the required tower ground at this point also 'encourages" the blast of current to take that path rather than the coax. Remember, however, that 1- There will still be significant voltage on the coax, even if the strike goes down to the closer tower ground. This will be up to and can exceed any suppressor placed there. 2- This current can and does produce very large induced currents in ALL near-by conductors, so any and all nearby wires will sustain high voltages. (many a time I have heard a small click in the house which happens along with a near-by strike (not delayed) Flash simultaneous with click, then boom fraction of a second later. 3- Put an analog VOM on your antenna some time - either when rain is near or not. It can be on the ma ranges or volts, doesn't matter because of the way they are made. For a DVM only the ma range, but it's not as dramatic as the needle moving. Watch it gradually build up to some current (micro amps to ma) Then it will collapse or go negative when lightning strikes near by. Try connecting the meter across the antenna feed line or from either/both feedline sides to ground. Tx disconnected. 73, Mr. Wizzard, K9DCI "Ham op" wrote in message news:3dmdnRMzg6RrC6XeRVn-jQ@comcast.com... > rob wrote: > > > N7ZZT - Eric Oyen wrote: > > > >> wizard12342002@yahoo.com wrote: > >> > >> > >>> Suppose I have an antenna some distance from the house. I run the > >>> transmission line down from the antenna, bury the line, run it > >>> underground to the house, place a lightning arrestor and ground just > >>> outside the house, then run the transmission line up the side of the > >>> house to the operating position on the second floor. Does anyone see a > >>> problem with this arrangement? I can't imagine that a lightning would > >>> "want" to travel back up toward the operating position when it has a > >>> good ground (at the arrestor) closer to the antenna. > >>> > >>> -JJ > >> > >> > >> you would be better to place a lightning arrestor at the tower (and > >> ground > >> the tower as well) and perhaps 1 or 2 along the coax to your house (all > >> ground rodded). This method is referred to as "defense in depth" > > > > > > . > > Wouldn't this encourage lightning to go through your tower? (with the > > risk of the concrete holding the tower up being cracked/ or worse) > > I would think that putting earths a safe distance away from the tower's > > support would be better ? (BTW I am not an expert!) > > Not sure how they protect HT Pylons here in the UK - or even that they > > are protected? > > > > Rob > > Here in the USA the National Electrical Code [NEC] requires that each > leg of the tower be grounded at the tower approximately 1 meter from the > tower. Each of the three ground rods shall be 2.5 meters long and > connected together by a #6 AWG wire. The tower shall also be connected > to the house 'earthing' connection at the service entrance. > > The coax from the tower to the house has a directly clamped, not > soldered, connection from the braid to a ground rod [also 2.5 meters > long] where it enters the house. [RF travels on the inside of the braid, > so this connection does not impact RF performance.] This ground rod also > connects to the 'earthing' connection. > > Your requirements in GB may be different. > > Lightning goes wherever lightning wants to go. After installing your > tower disconnect everything from it when not in use; radios, coax cable, > control cable, etc. > Article: 217706 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: Ladder Line and Interference from Metal Objects References: <7iHZe.260$Aw.4524@typhoon.sonic.net> From: Rockinghorse Winner Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 01:11:20 GMT Ham op writes: >The reference to Cecil's web site is VG if you do not want to use a >tuner. Cecil does a great job with tuning stubs. I use a tuner. >Some have stated that multiples of 1/2 wavelength can produce RF in the >shack. In 50+ years I have not experienced this. I may be JUST LUCKY! >Do you plan on using a tuner? Yes, I think I'll buy the MFJ QRP tuner. -- R*Horse rwinner.blogspot.com Article: 217707 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? References: <1127857483.866370.308610@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 01:55:51 GMT Jim Kelley wrote: > Quantum mechanics is completely unnecessary here, Cecil. I think > Faraday still provides the best explanation. In this particular case, quantum mechanics offers the easiest-to-understand explanation. As Feynman put it: "So now, I present to you the three basic actions, from which all the phenomena of light (including RF) and electrons arise. -Action #1: A photon goes from place to place. -Action #2: An electron goes from place to place. -Action #3: An electron emits or absorbs a photon." QED^2 :-) -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217708 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Uncle Ted Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 22:28:34 -0400 Message-ID: References: On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 22:25:44 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: >> The religious openly declare that their belief system is centered >> about the concept of G-d. > >Here's an interesting study on the subject, it says: > >http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1798944,00.html > >"RELIGIOUS belief can cause damage to a society, contributing towards high murder rates, abortion, >sexual promiscuity and suicide, according to research published today. > >According to the study, belief in and worship of God are not only unnecessary for a healthy society >but may actually contribute to social problems. > >The study counters the view of believers that religion is necessary to provide the moral and ethical >foundations of a healthy society." Cecil, if you want a few good laughs, Google the phrase "Flying Spaghetti Monster" and read some of the listed links. Article: 217709 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Gene Fuller Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? References: <1127857483.866370.308610@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 03:09:32 GMT Harry, Forget all the nonsense about photons, continuity of space, and other blather. This is simply a matter of mathematics. In general the initial waveform will consist of a constant DC level and a number of AC components. Any DC component in the original pulse is lost when the pulse is differentiated by the transmitting antenna, leaving only the differentiated AC components. Therefore the integral of the differentiated waveform has a zero DC value. Of course one could always add in a constant to the integrated result, but that would not have much physical meaning in the context under discussion. 73, Gene W4SZ Harry wrote: > It is said that a transmitted UWB pulse should not have any DC because > of the transmitting antenna: > > > > "Without getting into the details of the physical generation of UWB > waveforms, it is sufficient to note in this regard that the > transmitting antenna has the general effect of differentiating the time > waveform presented to it. As a consequence the transmitted pulse does > not have a DC (direct current) value-the integral of the waveform > over its duration must equal zero." > > (page 4, > http://www.antd.nist.gov/wctg/manet/NIST_UWB_Report_April03.pdf) > > Would someone please explain that for me? > > Thanks! > > -- Harry > From Wed Sep 28 23:53:35 EDT 2005 Article: 217710 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 22:33:09 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 24 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.news.ucla.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22851 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217710 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29560 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208726 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251214 On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 22:25:44 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: >> The religious openly declare that their belief system is centered >> about the concept of G-d. > >Here's an interesting study on the subject, it says: > >http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1798944,00.html > >"RELIGIOUS belief can cause damage to a society, contributing towards high murder rates, abortion, >sexual promiscuity and suicide, according to research published today. > >According to the study, belief in and worship of God are not only unnecessary for a healthy society >but may actually contribute to social problems. > >The study counters the view of believers that religion is necessary to provide the moral and ethical >foundations of a healthy society." Maybe we should rebuild New Orleans in England, it would balance the scales. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217711 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 04:07:21 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <43394485_3@newsfeed.slurp.net> <404jj1111vbijsoj8h22342kito60p244p@4ax.com> There is no mystery about the 'required additional information'. The nearest the so-called SWR meter ever gets to measuring anything is the "magnitude of the reflection coefficient", MRC, which arises due to the impedance of whatever is presented to the meter's output terminals. (Recall, this impedance is the 4th variable arm of the meter's RF resistance bridge.) This impedance can have an angle anywhere between 90 and -90 degrees. And the MRC can have an angle in any of the 4 quadrants, ie., anywhere between 0 and 360 degrees. But the meter is capable of indicating ONLY the MRC. All the angle information is lost and gone forever. This is equivalent to losing information about the location along the line of the peaks and troughs in the standing wave. That is, of course, if a long line extending back from the input of the meter to the transmitter actually exists. Now, if the line with standing wave exists, the magnitude of the SWR can be calculated from - SWR = (1 + MRC) / (1 - MRC) or the meter scale can be calibrated in terms of SWR. It is frequently thought the SWR can be used to calculate the power lost in the line. But, particularly when the the line is less than 1/4-wavelength long, this is not so. It requires the location of peaks and troughs to be known - which they are not. It is also thought that by rearranging the equation it is possible to calculate the reflection coefficient from the indicated SWR. Wrong again - can't be done, and in any case the reflection coefficient is useless without an angle. So the indicated SWR is not of much use except to provide a topic of conversation. On the other hand, just by recalibrating the meter scale, you can have a valuable, indispensible TLI. By the way, I hear Californian wine makers have been hijacking the names of French grape-growing districts and have been obliged to re-calibrate their bottles. Ah well, back to the Chilian stuff. ---- Reg. Article: 217712 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 00:36:15 -0400 Message-ID: <6f49f$433a1dec$97d56a13$23945@ALLTEL.NET> The conclusions he draws are a convolution of logic. 1. The US is a religious country. 2. The US has a high murder rate 3. The US has a high rate of VD, drug use, and aids. He concludes that statements 2 and 3 are caused by statement 1. Utter nonsense, at the risk of upsetting liberals I would suggest that 2 and 3 can can more easily be tied to minorities than religion. "Cecil Moore" wrote in message news:IFj_e.3185$KQ5.1068@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com... > Matt Osborn wrote: > > The religious openly declare that their belief system is centered > > about the concept of G-d. > > Here's an interesting study on the subject, it says: > > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1798944,00.html > > "RELIGIOUS belief can cause damage to a society, contributing towards high murder rates, abortion, > sexual promiscuity and suicide, according to research published today. > > According to the study, belief in and worship of God are not only unnecessary for a healthy society > but may actually contribute to social problems. > > The study counters the view of believers that religion is necessary to provide the moral and ethical > foundations of a healthy society." > -- > 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217713 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Wayne P. Muckleroy" References: Subject: Re: Free tv for only 1 euro Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 05:33:24 GMT Not interested...go spam somewhere else! "Christopher O'Callaghan" wrote in message news:dh73mg$moo$1@reader01.news.esat.net... > Might i recommend this to you. Ebay item number 5297402959 > > > 1 euro for tv on your computer.Its very good and thought you might be > interested. > > All the best > > Chris > > > Article: 217714 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil (J. B. Wood) Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 08:07:05 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> In article <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com>, Richard Clark wrote: > Hi John, > > Don't you see a bit of disconnect between these statements? > > How long do you think it took Marconi to go from experimental antennas > to science, to production? And this was from when they banged rocks > together, not after a century of introspection on the subject. > > To answer my question, and to show the perspective of failure for > fractals: > At the age of 19 he was performing his first experiments with antenna > and transmission of RF; > At the age of 22 he had his first patent for same; > At the age of 27 he transmitted across the Atlantic; > At the age of 35 he was awarded the Nobel Prize for all things > considered. > I don't see the point here. Marconi was dealing with rather elementary (and physically large) wire structures and did not have to generally concern himself with design issues such as antenna gain/radiation pattern, efficiency, driving point impedance, size, weight, etc. Back in Marconi's time it might have gone down like this: Try it and see if it works. Wow, it works! Now if we could time-travel to that era we could ask: Could we tweak the antenna for higher gain? Is the transmit antenna optimally matched to our spark-gap transmitter? Gosh I don't know. What's antenna gain? Packing an antenna with required performance, for example, into a cell phone is not as simple as it sounds. I don't see any reason to get in a dither over a particular antenna type if its performance is well documented and its theoretical basis is in concert with (does not violate) electromagnetic theory. Granted, I do see a heck of a lot more papers on patch antennas than I do fractal types but so what? I don't ever remember seeing any papers on E/H or crossed-field antennas in any IEEE pub nor do I ever expect to. I'm also very leery of antenna performance claims and specious explanations provided by websites such as www.antennex.com even though a lot of their contributors are our Canadian ham brothers. An amateur radio license does not make one an antenna engineer. The ham may be a prolific inventor/tinkerer, perhaps with some applicable technical knowledge that facilitates him/her "stumbling" upon a great antenna design. But he/she is not an antenna/electronics/electrical engineer (unless they have pursued that course of study). Sincerely, John Wood (Code 5550) e-mail: wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil Naval Research Laboratory 4555 Overlook Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20375-5337 Article: 217715 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Michael Coslo Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 09:03:11 -0400 Message-ID: References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <85tbj1hk1oi2gsp5e8dcp82gjpqrisfsfd@4ax.com> <9ZOdndbRttI2zKreRVn-sQ@adelphia.com> <1127810010.581113.28990@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> N2EY@AOL.COM wrote: > Mike Coslo wrote: > > >>>"Pardon me while I slip out of these wet clothes >>>and into a dry >>>martini." - Groucho (or was it Bugs Bunny?) > > > I think it was Groucho > >> What happened to all the old Bugs Bunny cartoons anyway? >> > > Warner Bros. has them safely tucked away. Some that were made in the > 1940s are not shown anymore because they contain parodies and > stereotypes now considered racist. > > -- > > I think you were asking about Foghorn Leghorn... > > "Nice girl, but about as sharp as a sack o' wet mice" > > "DAWG! I say, dawg, you look like two miles o' bad road!" > > "That widder hen reminds me of the road from Fort Worth to Dallas - no > curves" > > "No, I better not look - I just might be in there" > > "That dawg reminds me of Paul Revere's ride - a little light in the > belfry.." Son, I SAY, Son! I ain't no chicken! Now that over there, THAT's a chicken!......... Actually, Ol' Foghorn is probably not the problem. There are a number of old WB cartoons that have some rather strong stereotype of the folks we were fighting during WWII (the big one) Considering that they are now our allies, there might be a little sensitivity thing going on. Personally, I think they should be shown, especially when introduced in the proper context. They are of historical value, and in the context of the times, were understandable. Oh - and they were darn funny too! - Mike KB3EIA - Article: 217716 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <433A95E1.9E558364@earthlink.net> From: "Michael A. Terrell" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <85tbj1hk1oi2gsp5e8dcp82gjpqrisfsfd@4ax.com> <9ZOdndbRttI2zKreRVn-sQ@adelphia.com> <1127810010.581113.28990@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 13:09:55 GMT Michael Coslo wrote: > > N2EY@AOL.COM wrote: > > > > Warner Bros. has them safely tucked away. Some that were made in the > > 1940s are not shown anymore because they contain parodies and > > stereotypes now considered racist. > > > > -- > > > > I think you were asking about Foghorn Leghorn... > > > > "Nice girl, but about as sharp as a sack o' wet mice" > > > > "DAWG! I say, dawg, you look like two miles o' bad road!" > > > > "That widder hen reminds me of the road from Fort Worth to Dallas - no > > curves" > > > > "No, I better not look - I just might be in there" > > > > "That dawg reminds me of Paul Revere's ride - a little light in the > > belfry.." > > Son, I SAY, Son! I ain't no chicken! Now that over there, THAT's a > chicken!......... > > Actually, Ol' Foghorn is probably not the problem. There are a number > of old WB cartoons that have some rather strong stereotype of the folks > we were fighting during WWII (the big one) Considering that they are now > our allies, there might be a little sensitivity thing going on. > > Personally, I think they should be shown, especially when introduced in > the proper context. They are of historical value, and in the context of > the times, were understandable. > > Oh - and they were darn funny too! > > - Mike KB3EIA - I used this for my sig file for a while: "I say, the boy is so stupid that he tried to make a back up copy of his hard drive on the Xerox machine!" It took a couple months before someone asked if it was supposed to be Foghorn. :( Talk about big gaps in the modern educational system! -- ? Michael A. Terrell Central Florida Article: 217717 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Michael Coslo Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 09:10:11 -0400 Message-ID: References: <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> Cecil Moore wrote: > Matt Osborn wrote: > >> The religious openly declare that their belief system is centered >> about the concept of G-d. > > > Here's an interesting study on the subject, it says: > > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1798944,00.html > > "RELIGIOUS belief can cause damage to a society, contributing towards > high murder rates, abortion, sexual promiscuity and suicide, according > to research published today. I wouldn't doubt it. The stronger the religion, the worse the evils have to be. They are partners. One must have the other. There was a series a few years ago, called "The Pagan Invasion". It was broadcast on one of the national Religion channels. I used to watch it because there was some pretty decent 3-D animation in it. (for the time) But when you saw what those folk believed in, it was downright scary. If those folk were to come into power, there is no doubt that the Salem Witchcraft trials would be a role model for government. > According to the study, belief in and worship of God are not only > unnecessary for a healthy society but may actually contribute to social > problems. Well, its a pretty good thing if you happen to be worshiping the same God..... > The study counters the view of believers that religion is necessary to > provide the moral and ethical foundations of a healthy society." I cudda toldya that! ;^) - Mike KB3EIA - Article: 217718 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 13:21:15 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <85tbj1hk1oi2gsp5e8dcp82gjpqrisfsfd@4ax.com> <9ZOdndbRttI2zKreRVn-sQ@adelphia.com> <1127810010.581113.28990@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433A95E1.9E558364@earthlink.net> > > Personally, I think they should be shown, especially when introduced in > > the proper context. They are of historical value, and in the context of > > the times, were understandable. > > ================================== Censorship appears to be in action. Who is the censor? ================================== Article: 217719 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 13:34:25 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> Rich, I couldn't care two hoots about fractal antennas. But it's a pleasure to read you when you set your mind to writing in plain English. Keep it up! --- Reg. Article: 217720 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 13:36:34 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> > What's antenna gain? ============================= It's whatever the writer wishes it to be. Article: 217721 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 14:11:38 GMT Matt Osborn wrote: > Maybe we should rebuild New Orleans in England, it would balance the > scales. We indeed should rebuild New Orleans somewhere that is not below sea level. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217722 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Ladder Line and Interference from Metal Objects References: <7iHZe.260$Aw.4524@typhoon.sonic.net> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 14:14:51 GMT Bob Miller wrote: > The instruction book I got with my mfj 989c tuner has a section on > ladder line lengths to gravitate to, or avoid, depending on band. It > can be downloaded free from the mfj web site. Hopefully, the lengths to avoid are associated with specific loads. Avoiding 1/4WL of ladder-line when feeding a 1/2WL dipole may be good advice but 1/4WL of ladder-line is ideal for feeding a one wavelength dipole. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217723 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. References: <43394485_3@newsfeed.slurp.net> <404jj1111vbijsoj8h22342kito60p244p@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 14:23:18 GMT Reg Edwards wrote: > It is frequently thought the SWR can be used to calculate the power > lost in the line. But, particularly when the the line is less than > 1/4-wavelength long, this is not so. It requires the location of peaks > and troughs to be known - which they are not. In my no-tuner system of tuning, the peaks and troughs are known. The purely resistive current maximum point is always located at the balun/choke. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217724 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: The Cavity Magnetron. References: <43394485_3@newsfeed.slurp.net> <404jj1111vbijsoj8h22342kito60p244p@4ax.com> <196kj19n7tkhbgjtior3sdefahom8rn1n4@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 14:31:47 GMT Richard Clark wrote: > Boy, are you late in taking in your newspaper. This has been going on > since the American vineyards saved the French lines from a devastating > rust blight decades ago. There is no original French line that has > not been re-planted from American root cuttings for half a century or > more after the Germans tilled their soil with Stukas. A lot of those American wine-making families had French roots. :-) -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217725 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> <6f49f$433a1dec$97d56a13$23945@ALLTEL.NET> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 14:34:31 GMT Fred W4JLE wrote: > 1. The US is a religious country. > 2. The US has a high murder rate > 3. The US has a high rate of VD, drug use, and aids. > > He concludes that statements 2 and 3 are caused by statement 1. If I was religious enough to believe that God would forgive me of murder, I might have done the deed myself. :-) -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217726 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? References: <1127857483.866370.308610@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1127891612.179165.113960@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 14:36:28 GMT Harry wrote: > What does it mean by "when the pulse is *differentiated* by the > transmitting antenna" ? It means that steady-state DC is incapable of generating photons. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217727 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison) Subject: Re: Lightning Question Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 10:02:31 -0500 Message-ID: <16282-433AB087-21@storefull-3254.bay.webtv.net> References: Dave wrote: "And what is that really supposed to do?" "That" may be the suggestion to run the coax inside the tower or strapped to a leg. Lightning is a transient electric current which follows the path of least impedancee. A conductive tower has more cross section and therefore less inductance per unit length than a coax cable. When the cable is in close proximity with the conductive tower, it is likely the lightning will prefer the tower to the cable for a path to earth. If the tower is wood or plastic, run the coax inside steel conduit. The tower should better support the lightning than the coax. Another good suggestion was to ground each leg of the tower, 3 or 4 usually, to its own substantial ground rod. This lowers impedance of the earth connection. The heavy cables connecting the rods should be run outside the concrete block used as a tower base to bypass lightning current around the concrete which never completely dries. Its contained moisture can form steam from an enormous electric current blasting the block asunder. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Article: 217728 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Michael Coslo Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 11:42:17 -0400 Message-ID: References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <85tbj1hk1oi2gsp5e8dcp82gjpqrisfsfd@4ax.com> <9ZOdndbRttI2zKreRVn-sQ@adelphia.com> <1127810010.581113.28990@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433A95E1.9E558364@earthlink.net> Reg Edwards wrote: >>> Personally, I think they should be shown, especially when > > introduced in > >>>the proper context. They are of historical value, and in the > > context of > >>>the times, were understandable. >>> > > ================================== > > Censorship appears to be in action. > > Who is the censor? It's the new old way. This particular version of censorship probably comes from the left end of the spectrum. But the other end has it's own censor targets! - Mike - Article: 217729 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Michael Coslo Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 11:48:15 -0400 Message-ID: References: Cecil Moore wrote: > Matt Osborn wrote: > >> Maybe we should rebuild New Orleans in England, it would balance the >> scales. > > > We indeed should rebuild New Orleans somewhere that is > not below sea level. Absolutely. I don't support money going to rebuilding NO in it's present spot. The French Quarter is okay where it is. It will eventually become an island, and should last for quite a while yet. Seems like a charming way to get to Mardi Gras - by a boat. But no matter how much money we pour into th erest of NO, it will sink. I suppose that we could try a Netherlands type approach, with huge dikes and all, but I doubt that there is enough room on the sides to do that, and besides, the Netherlands doesn't have to worry about hurricanes either. - Mike KB3EIA - Article: 217730 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Lightning Question Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 16:09:39 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <16282-433AB087-21@storefull-3254.bay.webtv.net> "Richard Harrison" wrote > Lightning is a transient electric current which follows the path of > least impedancee. ================================= A better way of studying and predicting what happens during a lightning stroke is to consider conductors to be transmission lines having R, L, C and G, and a velocity factor. The generator is a high impedance, narrow, pulse of current. Reflections from the ends can be considered. Very crude estimates of system parameters are inevitable but much better than nothing. --- Reg, G4FGQ. Article: 217731 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison) Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 11:16:05 -0500 Message-ID: <4766-433AC1C5-12@storefull-3258.bay.webtv.net> References: Jim Kelley, AC6XG wrote: "I think Farqaday stilll provides the best explanation." Yes. Faraday showed d-c had nothing to do with wireless. It was the a-c motivating wireless electrical coupling. An Englishman, Faraday, constructed a transformer in 1831. He used two isolateed coils of wire wound on the same spool. He connected a galvanometer across one coil. He noticed a brief deflection of the galvanometer each time he connected or disconnected a battery to the second coil. Joseph Henry, a professor at Albany Academy in New York was independently making the same observations at the same time as Faraday. When Henry got news of Faraday`s discoveries, he made no effort to claim credit for his own work but often referred to Faraday`s discovery. It was the change in the magnetic field which induced electricity without a direct connection, not the value of the steady magnetic field itself. Same with antennas. A battery connected to an antenna sends no signal. A varying field is required to produce a signal in an antenna. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Article: 217732 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: tclay@qmc.ph.msstate.edu Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? Date: 28 Sep 2005 12:10:59 -0500 Message-ID: <87br2dxgm4.fsf@qmc.ph.msstate.edu> References: <4766-433AC1C5-12@storefull-3258.bay.webtv.net> >Joseph Henry, a professor at Albany Academy in New York was >independently making the same observations at the same time as Faraday. >When Henry got news of Faraday`s discoveries, he made no effort to claim >credit for his own work but often referred to Faraday`s discovery. > >It was the change in the magnetic field which induced electricity >without a direct connection, not the value of the steady magnetic field >itself. Slight correction: it is the change in the magnetic flux that gives induced EMF. You can get an induced current from a constant magnetic field if the circuit loop moves in or out of the field, changing the flux throught the loop. Tor N4OGW Article: 217733 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 17:15:10 GMT Richard Clark wrote: > These discoveries are still based on CHANCE not prediction. Your own presumably valuable existence was "based on CHANCE, not prediction". -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217734 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 17:20:20 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> I would like to see a design for a 160m fractal which works better than a half-wave dipole or a 5/8-wave vertical. ---- Reg. Article: 217735 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil (J. B. Wood) Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 13:32:51 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> In article <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com>, Richard Clark wrote: > Simply put, "research" it is not. What has been published is and has > always been called "hi-grading." If this term is unfamiliar to you, > it comes from the mining community where a prospector only works the > best deposits and ignores the rest. The "researchers" are not > describing any qualities of the generic fractal form, they have simply > confined their studies to those that have been discovered to have > interesting characteristics and have discarded the rest. They could > have as easily been focused on Penrose tiles and made the same > "discoveries" once they discarded those tiles that were performance > busts. This does not elevate Penrose tiles to the status of "having > promise." > > These discoveries are still based on CHANCE not prediction. Fractals > are the Three Card Monty of antenna research. > > 73's > Richard Clark, KB7QHC Well, Richard I'll certainly be looking forward to your next IEEE paper on the subject where you can set the rest of the antenna design world straight since you clearly have this expertise ;-) I'll state up front that I have definitely not published any fractal-design antenna papers. I choose to keep an open mind on the subject whether or not "hi-grading" takes place or not. Engineering has never been an exact science and quite often you simply cannot easily write an equation for an electrical property as a function of say, frequency. When it comes to antennas things get messy in hurry when you go beyond basic geometries. If you think not, try perusing the pages of "Antenna Theory", Vols. I and II by Collin and Zucker (published by McGraw-Hill) Show me a fractal (or some other type) antenna and some repeatable, measured data. If you have modelled it with an antenna modelling program (e.g. the Numerical Electromagnetics Code (NEC)) and the modelled and measured data compare favorably, that's good. We can then decide if we have a candidate fractal antenna for inclusion into, for example, a cell phone, gps receiver or RFID tag that provides the sought-after antenna characteristics for that application. I should also state that my comments are in consideration of all applications requiring antennas in small spaces, not exclusively those of interest to the amateur radio community. Sincerely, John Wood (Code 5550) e-mail: wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil Naval Research Laboratory 4555 Overlook Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20375-5337 Article: 217736 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim Kelley Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 09:55:16 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1127857483.866370.308610@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1127891612.179165.113960@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Harry wrote: > What does it mean by "when the pulse is *differentiated* by the > transmitting antenna" ? Mathematically it means to take the derivitive, or evaluate the slope of a time varying quantity. Electronically it means the antenna acts as a high pass filter - effectively blocking DC and attenuating low frequency signals. jk Cecil Moore wrote: > It means that steady-state DC is incapable of generating photons. You forgot about the flashlight again, didn't ya Cecil. Photons are generated when the steady state DC source is applied to the light bulb inside. They are allowed to escape through the clear part in the front of the flashlight. :-) By the way, my nephew just graduated from UCSD with a bachelors in Photonics Engineering. He told me that the photonics engineering discipline is virtually all applied wave mechanics. ac6xg Article: 217737 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Bob Miller Subject: Re: Ladder Line and Interference from Metal Objects Message-ID: <73mlj158ae210i2vutdik3hg5t0987jlsn@4ax.com> References: <7iHZe.260$Aw.4524@typhoon.sonic.net> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 17:54:38 GMT On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 14:14:51 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >Bob Miller wrote: >> The instruction book I got with my mfj 989c tuner has a section on >> ladder line lengths to gravitate to, or avoid, depending on band. It >> can be downloaded free from the mfj web site. > >Hopefully, the lengths to avoid are associated with specific >loads. Avoiding 1/4WL of ladder-line when feeding a 1/2WL >dipole may be good advice but 1/4WL of ladder-line is ideal >for feeding a one wavelength dipole. They're fairly specific about loads -- their manual is at http://www.mfjenterprises.com/products.php?prodid=MFJ-989C with pages 7 and 8 talking about feedline lengths. bob k5qwg Article: 217738 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Uncle Ted Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 14:44:28 -0400 Message-ID: <5nolj1h16e03suln9o3jmsf3irv2eta2l5@4ax.com> References: On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 11:48:15 -0400, Michael Coslo wrote: > Absolutely. I don't support money going to rebuilding NO in it's >present spot. > > The French Quarter is okay where it is. It will eventually become an >island, and should last for quite a while yet. Seems like a charming way >to get to Mardi Gras - by a boat. > > But no matter how much money we pour into th erest of NO, it will sink. >I suppose that we could try a Netherlands type approach, with huge >dikes and all, but I doubt that there is enough room on the sides to do >that, and besides, the Netherlands doesn't have to worry about >hurricanes either. > > - Mike KB3EIA - I wonder why they don't rebuild New Orleans the way they built Venice, Italy. Venice was built by people who were trying to get away from Attila the Hun. Attila wanted farmland, so the nomads of that area fled and settled in what was a swamp, and they built a city on a swamp. (Of course, the first one sank into the swamp, so they built a second one. THAT one sank into the swamp, so they built a third one. THAT one burned down, fell over, and then sank into the swamp...but the fourth one stayed up!) Seriously, though, New Orleans as a city of canals has a certain romantic flair to it. Article: 217739 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil (J. B. Wood) Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 16:04:48 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <45mlj11krduvrcc4f49tlsg5j2ljtulhnr@4ax.com> In article <45mlj11krduvrcc4f49tlsg5j2ljtulhnr@4ax.com>, Richard Clark wrote: > On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 13:32:51 -0400, wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil (J. B. Wood) > wrote: > > >Well, Richard I'll certainly be looking forward to your next IEEE paper on > >the subject where you can set the rest of the antenna design world > >straight since you clearly have this expertise ;-) > > Hi John, > > That was done some 4 years ago, several times over by Steve Best, > V9SRB. If you wish to commemorate the fractal's demise, then visit > the scene of that massacre. > Well, Steve Best is no slouch when it comes to antennas. I think he was working for Navy shipboard antenna maker Chu & Associates when I last met him some years back. Sincerely, John Wood (Code 5550) e-mail: wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil Naval Research Laboratory 4555 Overlook Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20375-5337 Article: 217740 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? References: <1127857483.866370.308610@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1127891612.179165.113960@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 20:08:57 GMT Jim Kelley wrote: > You forgot about the flashlight again, didn't ya Cecil. I didn't realize that a UWB pulse involved flashlights but I learn strange new things from you all the time. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217741 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Mike" References: Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 16:13:57 -0400 Message-ID: <433afbcd@news.usenetzone.com> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_004F_01C5C447.A12DC2A0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0050_01C5C447.A12DC2A0" ------=_NextPart_001_0050_01C5C447.A12DC2A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable "Cecil Moore" wrote in message = news:uwx_e.1294$rl1.1292@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net... > Matt Osborn wrote: >> Maybe we should rebuild New Orleans in England, it would balance the >> scales. >=20 > We indeed should rebuild New Orleans somewhere that is > not below sea level. > --=20 > 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ------=_NextPart_001_0050_01C5C447.A12DC2A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
"Cecil Moore" <mycall@arrl.net> = wrote in message=20 news:uwx_e.1294$rl1.1292@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
> Matt Osborn wrote:
>> = Maybe we should=20 rebuild New Orleans in England, it would balance the
>> = scales.
>=20
> We indeed should rebuild New Orleans somewhere that is
> = not=20 below sea level.
> --
> 73, Cecil  http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp
 
------=_NextPart_001_0050_01C5C447.A12DC2A0-- ------=_NextPart_000_004F_01C5C447.A12DC2A0 Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="cv66-001.jpg" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://www.christina-model.com/cv66-001.jpg /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAQEAAAAAAAD/2wBDAAoHCAkIBgoJCAkMCwoMDxoRDw4ODx8WGBMaJSEnJiQh JCMpLjsyKSw4LCMkM0Y0OD0/QkNCKDFITUhATTtBQj//2wBDAQsMDA8NDx4RER4/KiQqPz8/Pz8/ Pz8/Pz8/Pz8/Pz8/Pz8/Pz8/Pz8/Pz8/Pz8/Pz8/Pz8/Pz8/Pz8/Pz8/Pz//wAARCACWAMgDASIA AhEBAxEB/8QAHwAAAQUBAQEBAQEAAAAAAAAAAAECAwQFBgcICQoL/8QAtRAAAgEDAwIEAwUFBAQA AAF9AQIDAAQRBRIhMUEGE1FhByJxFDKBkaEII0KxwRVS0fAkM2JyggkKFhcYGRolJicoKSo0NTY3 ODk6Q0RFRkdISUpTVFVWV1hZWmNkZWZnaGlqc3R1dnd4eXqDhIWGh4iJipKTlJWWl5iZmqKjpKWm p6ipqrKztLW2t7i5usLDxMXGx8jJytLT1NXW19jZ2uHi4+Tl5ufo6erx8vP09fb3+Pn6/8QAHwEA AwEBAQEBAQEBAQAAAAAAAAECAwQFBgcICQoL/8QAtREAAgECBAQDBAcFBAQAAQJ3AAECAxEEBSEx BhJBUQdhcRMiMoEIFEKRobHBCSMzUvAVYnLRChYkNOEl8RcYGRomJygpKjU2Nzg5OkNERUZHSElK U1RVVldYWVpjZGVmZ2hpanN0dXZ3eHl6goOEhYaHiImKkpOUlZaXmJmaoqOkpaanqKmqsrO0tba3 uLm6wsPExcbHyMnK0tPU1dbX2Nna4uPk5ebn6Onq8vP09fb3+Pn6/9oADAMBAAIRAxEAPwDpDFCj 7hEobGQwyD0qGU/uju3EHjBYkfzqd+h+g/lVW5yI6yudSS7CRRwknMKH8KcYYf8Anin5U2Hhafn5 uaYnyjPLhxzCn5VAixsc+UuM9MVLK3y/SoYBk4qjHqSzJENoWJB1J4ojSHOWjTaBk8Uk3+sUe1Vd TuPs1ox/iYED+dQ3ZXNIxTMq/uWuLpVt28pAxJCDqBwBn65/KpB5qgZY1lwsIoleS4SEtyN2Mn0r Vtp0mgyH3kfxetckpS7nfThDZojkaXBw5FY8l1e2+rWxFwzxSSBGRuRzxWnPO2SIdrHuDWVqDlY0 lddjJIrDv0IpwlLqxVIQa0R1+nPHLCVkjQuhwSR196sKsRGPKTP0rE025KXoDZ2Ss6fjkkf1raj5 kb3rqg+ZXPPqLllYljiiK8xJz7UjRw+WSIk/Kgsfuj0pX4iqmKJEFiwP3a1Y8qEAZhT8qqDriroB 2CpuzZKI3y4lG5YlUjkEcYqKaZ1gkcO/yoT98+n1qwRWdfMUsZj6IaExSSJ7OZ3tInZ3JZQSS7f4 0TJEEyI1zUdqNkEa/wB0AU6Q5XFMGlYeiRlMmJPyoVIjGD5SZx6UqH5BTUPyEdxRczsUdQWJtMvF aJCPJbgjNFR6i2NPuf8ArmRRQhM6VzjPptH8qoTNlR7nNXZvlGePu/0rPkb92pPeoLTJ4x+7pHHN EZygGOtP4PNVcT1K0oOzPpSQdSammU7cCooVxnjvT5iUrMbIczY+lZOvfMViz1UKPxPP6Ctjbm5b 2rmvE85il3qR8ksf9KyqbWOimtStc2CTuWZQRjGT6VNb2/2e3IhHy44I6VYZwITv2he5NVJpYWDf vymeMK+MfSua7eh6KjFO6KU9rJMCY3bORyCQR9KZdQyjTZVnfeQuQe/HrWpAyhSQPvck5qhqcu+B kQH5yBVJvYzcIrUmWUiJGXqJC4+owa6uEhlUr0YZrjI2228ZOflIY/TOD/Ouw03myhz1C4/Lit6T 6HBXV9SyvzSn8hTpelIn3qWX7tbGKK+cmr/8NZucNir+/wDd1LNEyRulZGqHbZyL/ewPzIrULZrH 1lsIg5+ZxSQ2WoT+7X6UsnUCnQD9wnuopjn96fwFUD2Jc7R7UxmO6jdmmjk0EWMzUT/oNx/uEUUm p/8AHnc/7popolnT3J/d7R1OBVC5xuAHQdKuXBwRjrgH9KoXBzNj0qEiixEc7QO1WUXBqC2Hc9hV jNDERTcIcdaZEMgdKLg4XvUkC/dqSkRhB57nnrXEeJM3FtdEdQxYfmcV3bf6xvxrh5sO0qt0Zefz /wDr1E3sb00GlXsd/Yo/BcDDr6EVO6En7oxjiud0eN7TUZIskBuldA6XGPlIIrGSs9DspyvHUPkg iYLtBbrisTVbsx48psMCD/StJ4JDkyMK5rVWZbtDxgcY696qCuzOrK0Teb5bZBkZaIn9a67RGEum wMPQ5ri5pgrWqHvFz+NdL4VnzZyRE8xtmtIaM5qmqOg2/OB7c0Ovy/SiJsux+lSSf6utbmBnOPmq zu/dVERlzTsZjGOlO4iRyByKydYGfKb+ENg/lWkRWdqv/HugPGZAAfwNNDuX4TiCPj2pmOSfU0tu SbRM4yMZoHCjP1oGIeDSA80vXmkA55FAzL1E/wCh3H+41FJqnFncEf3TRTREkdLI25yfTAFZ8j7p 2PbdgVblbAZj2AwPwqgoORnqeTSsBowH5M1LnjNQoMKAPSnnhaQEVw44A7c1ZthgJ9BWc7b58Voe YkMQZ2CKEGSTjtSaKjqxszYimf0UnNcKRvaUZ4PA/LiumudWtpYpYICzttJLAfL+dcvK/kwtIeMM OfyzXPPVnVBWRWbi53gcbgwPsRmt1MMgPqKyxHmPPoSP8P0Nadp/x7ru6jispHTTRFMvFc3q1uMq zD5RIBn611EoyCe1ZOtxK2lzE9QARTpuzCrG8SleWb/6M6NgrGFIPtWl4fuDZ3kjT58txg4GaZay LeadDKPvAYb696sxQgc1pztMx9kpI6ezvrWaTbHKu49Acgn8DV2Q/uweM1yRjXFamm37zQtBMSzx 8qx6ke9aRnzGFSi4K6L5OHBFS9I+OmKrjkZqRj+6FaIwI3fPTrWbq5LJCo6lyf0rQIyapX0XmBQe wJH14q0Te5bt3zaqemVFPyNmO5qG2Ja1X3xmrBHNIuzEFHU0fypduOKVykZGrD/Qbn/dNFO1gf6H df7hopoie5tTHMjAZwAB+lVRkzYq9JtEmB0AGfTpVOHmdjz/AI0rl2uW42y+ewApZT8p60Q4AYYH BolxsNMHEoxAmUmqGuuJ7qON+VVQdvYf/XrThX5mrA1Jm/tWYdwwX9BWVV6GlCPvakG3yIpD13cD 6f8A66y9Ul+Xyh3YZrRum7ZO1BkmsK+YyPJj7wXj6/8A6s1jBXZtNnQQgPEvccY96uR8DFU9OO6z hI7qKuYNZPc64bDZOprM1whdImJx0FabDmsjxIwGmsv94gGqp/EhVXaDKWhmSzunsbpTG8ih1U+4 zj24roBxXFTXVxPOty7AzoATIAATjucdT712FjMLuzjnXjcOR6HvWtaNnc5sPO65R0jcUlrKYruN 88E4b6Go7g7OT3OKjb7mRWcdGazV00dZnbGT3wakT/VDNV0fzbeIryZFBqxGeMGuq551hm3Bqtd/ KU/H+lXWHNUdQ+/FjrzVJ3BRHQAIGA6dqmLccd6rqPXPPNSDOfahlpEuRxinFvaoWbBX607PekSy hrY/0C4PYxmil1r/AJBFwfRDRVIiRuyjLngBdozVOMYuRjHWrd18oKjuo/GoEX/Sl9hk1FzZE8Q5 f8KZN9wj1qROpz35NRTZLfypjIoOhP4ViapGF1qcnoQrH/vkVuIMDH41g62//E1uvRQq/oKzqbF0 9GZdw4Y4yOcs39BWRbCBrW5nnba2cQ/NyzemO/BNT6lMUikx95yEX+tZlzaXEFnbXLxsIpd3lk99 pGT+Zopx0JnLU6bSW/0RV9OlaO+sbRXDWikduKt3FwI8ZPJrmkveO6D91MtFqxNaD3JjgjjklZiX KR8thQScVpoSy7ieKwGiudc1xbfTVMkiqfL2nH3QSTn8K1oxvK5jiJWhYv8Agu40y1mvp9Ytw9st uyNJuJPzYGwL3J7emKdY3Vva61cWdttFlK2+1IYsMduTzn19wRXNyRyoN00bpuJ5dSMn8e9W/wCy tQGmjUEt5hGsoTOw5U4yDj0966ZwUkcUJuLubuqTqHjjB+Zmzj2oR90eKx7m6FzPHcDugUj0IzkV etpQyVyuNjtUrnU6PL5ltEG6o22tYAbm/Ouc0eXDSJn0Yf1ro8859RWqd0c0o2kwf7wrPvWP2uBO xBzV9+nWqFz81+vqoAH9auJm9ESpgYBFOFIDk4p4HOKpgpDG5lUduaXsaBzMfUUN0BoEynqpzpV0 pxjyzRRqgH9mXXvGaKpGbub1x/rQR12gZ9KrwYa5JHSp7pueM5IGPyqCzwJG+lZG9yweJKhm4Oel Sqcuc/zqKbG/3+lUUMj6e1ctrEw+3Xbjp5h5/Sujupxa2jzP1H3R6n0rh9SmbyG7knJ+tZz1aRcd Fco3Mwkuo1lnEcKgMzAZI57D19K29e8XjW9CazAksnRwQi4ZZ0/usccEdfQ1Qt/DV5d+G7vV1RyY 3AhiCktIM4Zsf571h3Vrc2cmy7gkhc87XGD+VbRikYSky5pF8tmSJWGxz09PereoXkUk0JWQFNwJ IqLSvDGqasA1ksDoSMt56fL7kA5/Suo1j4dtDpcLaVK9xeLgSrIwVX9Svp+JrOUI817mkaslGxyl /q7SxG3tQVjPDP3P+ArY0HxUfDemtDbSNfTvjajDbDCO+D95ifwH1rmr6ynsJzDchFkHBCSK+PyJ pFsLx4BOlpO8R6OkZYfmK0UIpWRlKcpO7NjxVrMevzx36yTRyBQj2srblT3jPoe+eavaV4ufSdAh sI/NuWdmMxZyvkoeAsZ9e/oDVXUvCV7p3hqHU5s+YWzND3jQ42k+/r6ZrnVRyyqEbc3CjByfpVWT RN2tTXtdP87Sr65hkLrbOp57qe/1/wAKLGTsa63w3orw6FLDdKySXqfOjDBXqBkflXE5a3nkifh0 Yg/UdawmrnRTdjo9PmEV1G5+7nB+hrrxkBfpg15/ZOXXBrvLCXztPgcnLFQCfccGoj2LqK+pI3Tv WYxB1CQ84Tr+QrTJxWYoBurgnOWetoHNMtfiKVTwTzSKCVHTIoB5IqmQhR97d3OKc3NMB54Bp7Uj RFHVD/xLLkH/AJ5mim6rn+zbkf8ATM0VSJmjcuG2sXP8IHH8qgtjiVfdc0X0h+YdAAP6U2M4mjHf bUJFotZxIvqTimuoLdqMZkB4+VaRm+dT60FIxfEM2PLt16D52/p/WuT1Bv3Lhe4zxW7rM2+9nbsG 2j8OK5i5lLOawTvK5u0lCx3Fv45tLYJpt9JOzpAsb38WD+8xycD0Pf1Feb3iGO7kDTrcMWyZlbcH 981eudNe3jhkniZFmTehPcVAEjzhVBP51upRWwlhZzV7ov8Ah/Wk0ASXVtAs+oSrsUyAhIV9fcn9 Kv2njrWEkkF+I763lyHiddnB4IUjp+tZ0GnX04/cWM7j1ERxVpfD2sseNOn/ABAH8zSc0+hf1RLe RgXPk/aJPsocQE5QP1A9D64rf8G6hBo96b671FoIQCPs0OWaY+4HAH15pW8N6zg506U/98n+tQnw 7qmfm0yf/vmn7RNakPC9pI7W28faVdzyQSebaKRiOaZQVJ9wOn4153fy3N1rErajdebIHw0qkEYH TaBxjHTFXf8AhHNR5/4l8wx6gD+tLaaZPFewxzWkka+YoYmM4AyO9JSitgWGk92j0iAs0MLv94xj cOvYV5x4lg+z+I7sDoz7x+PNeltiuL8a2ubqC6XHzAxt9RyP0NJmSMvTh8tdboMpNvNFzhWDD8f/ AK4rmNPjIjroNFO27lHYxj+dYp+8byXuGyeAR/Os7pO2O7E1oMefSqEILoG6k85/nXRA5KmxOpwO nBpobEgPrnNPYACoTwc1ZmSOdsg6c0/cMf1qBzuI9qeWGe+PY0ir2KmqH/iW3POf3Zopup7W0y42 k58s8UVSJk7mleczqo/iIz+lOj+a6GOeMU66A+17+yYA9yetLB8u5z36mpNCVmVYiBnJqJ5diFz/ AAAtim5LLjpkZH9KjvzssJDjlsL+dTLRNlR1aRx+pSkJk5yxyab4d00ajf8AmTD/AEeLBf8A2j2W n6vCzMqopZicADvXS6Rp40yyjhbBlf55D/teg+grOmro3quzsankC5idDGjqqk7WUEDA9K5XR/EN rZQv9utt82QUeGJF49D0rptC1m0TWLyzvJlicsoiLnCnjkZ7HJrQuvCGiXO5jZCNm53RMV/+tRLc qnywXLUuc2njizHWyuT/AMCWpB45sf8Anxuf++lq3L8O7F2JhvbmP0BCt/hUH/CuY/8AoKP/AN+B /jUmnLh+5H/wnNiR/wAeFx/30tMbxvZEcWE//fa1N/wrkdtT/wDIP/16T/hXag86k34Q/wD16Y+X D9yi/jhQD5emc9t8v+ArNsfEF6+uxSyT+TBLIFeJOEAPHeuki+H1op/f307j0VFX/GtSz8K6TYkN Ha+bJ2eY7/06fpQiZSoJNIY7FV7cVjeIbf7Tpz/3oyHH4df0rYuWQBjE4dQSMqcg+tVJcOu1uQ2Q au2hyo5W1G1AK19I/wCPuX/rmP51mKhjkKHqpI/KtPSeLmX/AHB/OudfEdUvgNY8rVK2yBGM89/y qzM22CQjqFOKhhB+Vu4GD710x2OORK3cGoD95qmbFQN35q0S0NOdo5PXFOU9R3FNkBAU0o6k1Rmy nqrYsLgEjBQ0Uasu7TLjPUITRTJZWv8Axbai4kQW03yEDORTW8YWpVR9llwTnqKKKlIptjl8Y2vm A/ZZePcVFfeL7Wa1dBayg7gckj1FFFTJKxUZNNGZJ4kh3o8cMiurAq3HBrWHjO2mEJa1lVv4tpGM +1FFTBJI1qSbepzWravDJqly6RSBHcsAxGQKLTxRe2WPstzcxDPAEnH5HiiilZHX7Wbir/oa8HxJ 1mFeZFl/66RKf5Yq0PilqmMNbW7H12Ef1oop2RDsPHxU1AdbG2/I/wCNNb4p6iellbD8D/jRRRZB ZEE/xM1WThI4Yv8Adiz/ADNZV94y1O+UrcXU5VuCqEIPyFFFFkNPl2L2h+KorbTfsskEjbHO0qR0 Pb86uN4utiR/o0v5iiirsjjnJ87M248Q27XrusEgDHOMirFn4ot4bh2NvKcpjgj1oorJxXMac8uQ tTeL7YxOBay5x6imw+LLZUx9ml6+ooorSKVjG7uOPi62/wCfaX8xUa+KrbH/AB7y/mKKKqwNsD4r tiMfZpePcU1fFdtuP+jS/mKKKZm2R3niW3ntJYhbyBnQjJIxRRRTQm2f/9k= ------=_NextPart_000_004F_01C5C447.A12DC2A0-- _________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 140,000 groups Unlimited download http://www.usenetzone.com to open account Article: 217742 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Mike" References: <42o5j1hr6hcohe06553lvib5epqepnjv50@4ax.com> <6f49f$433a1dec$97d56a13$23945@ALLTEL.NET> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 16:17:24 -0400 Message-ID: <433afca2@news.usenetzone.com> "Cecil Moore" wrote in message news:XRx_e.1305$rl1.973@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net... > Fred W4JLE wrote: > >> 1. The US is a religious country. >> 2. The US has a high murder rate >> 3. The US has a high rate of VD, drug use, and aids. >> >> He concludes that statements 2 and 3 are caused by statement 1. > > If I was religious enough to believe that God would forgive > me of murder, I might have done the deed myself. :-) > -- > 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp begin 666 cv66-004.jpg M_]C_X `02D9)1@`!`0$```````#_VP!#``H'" D(!@H)" D,"PH,#QH1#PX. M#Q\6&!,:)2$G)B0A)",I+CLR*2PX+",D,T8T.#T_0D-"*#%(34A 33M!0C__ MVP!#`0L,# \-#QX1$1X_*B0J/S\_/S\_/S\_/S\_/S\_/S\_/S\_/S\_/S\_ M/S\_/S\_/S\_/S\_/S\_/S\_/S\_/S__P `1" "6`,@#`2(``A$!`Q$!_\0` M'P```04!`0$!`0$```````````$"`P0%!@<("0H+_\0`M1 ``@$#`P($`P4% M! 0```%]`0(#``01!1(A,4$&$U%A!R)Q%#*!D:$((T*QP152T? D,V)R@@D* M%A<8&1HE)B7J#A(6&AXB)BI*3E)66EYB9FJ*CI*6FIZBIJK*SM+6VM[BYNL+#Q,7& MQ\C)RM+3U-76U]C9VN'BX^3EYN?HZ>KQ\O/T]?;W^/GZ_\0`'P$``P$!`0$! M`0$!`0````````$"`P0%!@<("0H+_\0`M1$``@$"! 0#! <%! 0``0)W``$" M`Q$$!2$Q!A)!40=A<1,B,H$(%$*1H;'!"2,S4O 58G+1"A8D-.$E\1<8&1HF M)R@I*C4V-S@Y.D-$149'2$E*4U155E=865IC9&5F9VAI:G-T=79W>'EZ@H.$ MA8:'B(F*DI.4E9:7F)F:HJ.DI::GJ*FJLK.TM;:WN+FZPL/$Q<;'R,G*TM/4 MU=;7V-G:XN/DY>;GZ.GJ\O/T]?;W^/GZ_]H`# ,!``(1`Q$`/P#H"D2MN6-0 M>.1D&C(.0^64]06)'\Z5QS^ I%Z\UGO85&ZD(WYFBX5&?)3D<\4T10=X4_*I4!\B// MH:83@UFVS515A3#;X_U,>?I4<,4+19,*9&0>*>SYZ=*AMG_UB^C4KL'%$ODP M_P#/&/\`*D:*#'$,8_"ESQ4;.=WM3NQ\J'O##Y38A08'6J:M"F6D1 H&23P` M.YJUOW*V!Q@\UR_B&9?(CMV?:LAS(,XW*.V?<_RHO9!RIZ#;CQ#]H9_L%EL@ M&0LK@9;W`]*YXZMJGFMB5BQY`. /RKHX8D,`9 `N.!6;JMLIA,BX$B0X7U.`:LQ',8'X479-D.5(\_ZM:ANPJ&+:B@%B#CZ M&IA]^H-1^[#Z@D@?A57!1(+]$.CW0>-6W1-U&:*2_;&CS]_W)HIZCE&QT#KP M?P_I4@CR>*?(GR?@*>G(4@=NM9MEH@\L"4D]`!4$P(B=C] *ML0"S!^%10Y\MO:IV'R*/850[(K7!^7CO4<"_(*?<_=/M M21?=`]>:8G$MQG$"^_Z5&??)J2/_`(]U'YU%GTJ!C00!4%L?WDHSSNR*>I.] MO:HXEV7&/7)_E0)EC=CTJ!S4DGW>U5G../6FD%R9&R<=NUPKI82=V>Q-1G#8.02HSW[BLZAM1U;(+GS4ME%N1M3(P1UJA>RR"P8 MOD8!!!Y_(^E7U=X@QVY3C'O^%8NJ7)G<1 X!/2LXZFT[)7-"$_N;&3U=?_0, M5H^'O]4WKM"G\":SH0/L]JJ\J)5Q^6*N>'Y,/(ONQQ^-7!ZG+-:&VH\VXP>, M#M5VWSM]^E4+=P+G\Q6C'P6'OFM6S)#F^\/I574#GRAWYJV_4=*SM3'[V$CT M_J*([CV#45QI%P,G_5FBG:G_`,@FY.3_`*LT5HB).YU#C,>/0"FQC*CV_6AF M^@.T?RH@Y0C/>L66A&QYH%5YOFD^AYJ?_EXY_NU!.<*YZ#D_6@M$,(_=-[M4 MI;C/?M381^XI">H`XJD,KS L2/SH3M[4LW YP!Z&D7[HSWZ4P+(_U2BFG &* M`?E4>U-9L#^52(C51\_7[QJ%L_:E/3..*DS\^#4&\&5>O6@3+3]*IS#YO>K; MOA3[],57QWQR::)'1C"\=JQ]0@_=S2H[(PR3C&#SZ?C6N72&U+2,%4#)).*Q M+B]CN%>.W#,K<%R,#\*F35M2Z?-S>Z8-P)CG,Q/X5C3[HG+A=WU%=:L2@5%8QE8ZITVT5K5L6]MZ\L?R_\`KU:T/BX)]C5,+Y)C7^%015W2&VS, M?P_G51W,)+2QJHQ\S/.0V:UE/S\?C661^_\`][&*TAGX4$CVYJH$R>@NI972K@=?W9HI-3_Y!-P?^F9HK0S9 MT;'L<]!_*E@;"U%(Q_("G0Y(';U%9R1HF21@!V)))%5[MLJ5'8\U/&1M;!.3 MS56Y(5<'J_\`*H+'JV(%P3@TU?N_X5' V8%-*IX89&:H:(I:- MN33G'R_A3*$#\X]*8[\8[FF2/M.>YJ$LM5X\*&'. QS18FYI;AL7&.E5+FZCMH2TAP3P .2?I5*YU5805AQ M(_3.?E7_`!K*)DN)"[G+'J:RE)(UA3?NBM$M:(.5![=C68>4 R MPP0:T(C\BD=,<^U;&"1*Y^7UJF^#>%B/X!@_G5L]!W!]:JS?+*Q[@"M(;D5% MH1WY/]EW0/3RR114=^V=*N#SGRS15F1TLP[#T%.!_=T]TSD>PJ*4;8^.]9MF MJ0J.`&Z51N)-]PHP,YG\I3N M7.6"\ ?6E!DNG.,[2U6!L1>*K3S@ M,.*IS7PW!-P7/&3VK*S9T7C$MW-['"C,S `=37.:EK!N8VC@9EYZ^HIVMK&U MM#(DCMR0<8(W<'!].*U/"=MHD=K)?ZJQ5#F$"<#8Q/4KCDX'MQFNF%-15V<= M2O*3LC%L-0&GA F)PPRX(V[3Z ]ZUH_$5LPQ)&\9_,5F^(+"SL+T1Z?+)/ R M[DF+*RL/08]/?FLGO5NE&6IE&K.&B.DN-2M)T(27YCT!!%:%H=P;TV\?E7&* M<,#Z5T^D3F2T+-G()%93IJ.QHJCGN=(_W(S].:NPL5!]#R*HQG=:HW4`]9& MR(@GR8SSU-9).%E;NSD0X'&*S]9F M\J%=S?)DE@#SC@#^=1)V5RX+FE8J7EVF#\VQ!_&V3D]@`*I?8Y)I"TY)![&G MI<<.%7YU16QW8]OTK/GU&YEE$=N%R>I/;WKGM4;W3WVDKG=6] P M9?:GR1!E]J%*P.',CAUMY "N&P^"54YSZ9%7;;0]0NP/(L;B0*.#C@?G5O5K M&0(9+9F5QS@=ZHPNT=JL[WDR2,2HV$YR.QY&*Z%)R5T8I)/E:0^ZTBYLUQ=V MFW+> M\URR_P#H+4P7$=[YI-6X6^3& M:IV^#!M/8X!JQ$1G&>13:.4MKU^HS5?)99F&0=Y!%6$ZYJO&,;P3R6)JHB8W M4 /[%F [1&BEU($:5<#TC-%6C.2.FF<+(,#G:*J.6:1LG+=*EN#F4GCD`?0< M56G;8H7G!SUJ+%BS;FCVCC/!-9:$">9OX5_R*OO*7B"IC!XZ_K68/]=(H[G( M%4B&/W$H7/4MP*LQ85?YU79OF"_W?2K,*Y.WTZTPV+'..*H:K;"YL7P2'7O_ M`#JZ7VY)XICJ&A96S@C!J9*Z*A/E=SBK&WN/(E#;E5'*[F)P!Z#UJ6WB$2[L M'+<\]?QK8U1@JK OW>"?I6<6!/MVKGGIH=L/>U',_P`O6N>U:X(N$*'E3FM. MZN5CC;G]:R;*`WUZ9) 3$G)]_044XW8JDK(V].GWP+D$$@'![5IQMN&":RV_ M=RJ_9N#5M).!43C9V-*?:G9*O/0'^?>NB4[A4,T6Y* M49.+*E%2,>Q\1ZK @"7.0.SKFM%O%<]PFS4-.L+Q>^^,AOSK&OHVM+Q9`/W; M\-['UJZ0E.FM&C8MO$>D6XRGANW!]=P;\B127=^FI7 M'VN&#R$*A5CXXQGTK->&`(-L:^QZU:A4);# `[#%53=V95W&VAHV1'D*#UZU M8 P_L:KV0Q"OMQ5DCIU%6SG+*=*KPGY\GD%B:D1OD/M5>V/R@-T/.::V(>Y8 MU0?\2NY/_3,T4NI?\@>X[_NS15(B1KW#$S[>>V!^'6JET"\H4=35N4_Z2WT! M_2H44;R[?G21;(W_`'<[]S#DGA15"8!9V]@#3)M8F!' MF.?>IK<\-S]35?JV1WJQ`"%()QZT(ACI3QCN>!3;B<00,[=!T'J?2FS3)#\\ MA `X'/6J<\^T[$& M6/85(TW(0$OUW'O]:Y+]ST+::'/7-O,Y4-]]SA1 M[UMQVBV<*P(<[1DGU/#73#8XZN]BI*@*; MA!KH=H\I!VQUK#U+_CUF; ^8KCWK87*VL:_Q;0!^5=4+-7..I>+L M7+)L(3QR:M%AC#9'O5"V.U"O:KID`(%.Q*EH2%@(W/& #4=J0R<=08'X5:ETJ!C-.&)/IW%0CPS%N MWOJ19O>3_P"O5F/1(HAQJ! _ZZ?_`%ZB\2E)=2A(HM[E]N,.M59G#>E;(TJW M1F8WB/GNT@/]:1].LFZWT _X&*VC5BE8Y:D'*5T8#]*='@#DULG3+''.HP#_ M`(&/\:;_`&9IX/.I0_\`?0J_;1,_9,QKB)5^>,_+W'I_]:H0Y%;S6&GE<#4X MA[AA54Z+II_YC"K]"*RYXRW].*MJ MFC 8_M!"/QK6-515D<\Z;D[F;&&*CU[U9.XX(Z]Q5Q9-&0?\?R_D?\*?Y^DX MR+Y?R/\`A3]N3[$SY8RRD?HN.;_`#[!6/\`2HQ>Z,#@ M73X_W&_PH]L-4BKJ6?[+N!@_ZLXHI=6OM+_LV=89W9BA&#&W^%%73G=&X\4V$S RV,C87 SCUHHK.HDT:4Y-,C'B+3/(D7^SCDJ><+0/ M$.F!1_Q+CT'9:**Y^2)OSR%_X2/3,?\`(/?\EJ(Z_IW:P8?E111R1#GD+_PD M6GC_`)<7_2@>)+#_`)\G_2BBCDB/VDA?^$DL,?\`'B_Z4#Q'8#K8OU]J**.2 M(>TD+_PDEA_SXO\`F*!XEL03BQ?]***.2(>TD.'B:Q'WK)_PQ0?$]AVL7_,4 M44TD,_X2:RZ_9)/IQ1_PD]G_`,^DGYBBBGR1'[20H\468ZV Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 20:18:44 GMT Reg Edwards wrote: > I would like to see a design for a 160m fractal which works better > than a half-wave dipole or a 5/8-wave vertical. A fractal antenna is a space-saving device and cannot "work better than" full sized antennas. A comparison of fractal antennas and small loops would be much more interesting. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217744 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <5nolj1h16e03suln9o3jmsf3irv2eta2l5@4ax.com> Message-ID: <2_C_e.7387$6e1.1775@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 20:24:30 GMT Uncle Ted wrote: > Seriously, though, New Orleans as a city of canals has a certain > romantic flair to it. Canals below sea level have a habit of becoming big lakes. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217745 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Jim Kelley Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 12:47:23 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1127857483.866370.308610@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1127891612.179165.113960@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Cecil Moore wrote: > I didn't realize that a UWB pulse involved flashlights > but I learn strange new things from you all the time. You didn't learn that from me. What you should have learned is that DC can generate photons, contrary to your repeated assertions. ac6xg Article: 217746 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? References: <1127857483.866370.308610@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1127891612.179165.113960@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 20:54:39 GMT Jim Kelley wrote: > > Cecil Moore wrote: >> I didn't realize that a UWB pulse involved flashlights >> but I learn strange new things from you all the time. > > You didn't learn that from me. What you should have learned is that DC > can generate photons, contrary to your repeated assertions. My repeated assertions are about the *SUBJECT* of this thread, i.e. UWB pulses. Do I need to quote the meaning of the word, "context", for you? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217747 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <433B0CA1.2388ED9F@earthlink.net> From: "Michael A. Terrell" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <85tbj1hk1oi2gsp5e8dcp82gjpqrisfsfd@4ax.com> <9ZOdndbRttI2zKreRVn-sQ@adelphia.com> <1127810010.581113.28990@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 21:34:14 GMT Cmdr Buzz Corey wrote: > > Some of the 'Little Rascals' can't be show today because they aren't PC, > shame, because they are funny. No, but you can find a lot of them on "Dollar Store" DVDs. ;-) -- ? Michael A. Terrell Central Florida Article: 217748 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison) Subject: Re: Lightning Question Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 16:22:24 -0500 Message-ID: <13319-433B0990-119@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net> References: Reg, G4FGQ wrote: "A better way of studying and predicting what happens during a lightning strike is to consider conductors to be transmission lines having R, L, C, and G, and a velocity factor." Could be. I reiterate that experience shows lightning taking the easy accessible path. If you don`t want lightning traveling on the outside of your coax, hide the coax from the lightning, increase the impedance of the coax exterior, and give the lightning a lower impedance alternate path. A conductor can offer inductive reactance in addition to its resistance. Put some twists and turns in the coax. A coil`s inductance is proportional to the square of its number of turns. The inductance of a straight wire is directly proportional to its length and varies inversely with its diameter. Terman says connecting wire inductance can be minimized by making the diameter large (1955 edition, page 13). If you want to know the inductance of anything, a good place to start looking is Terman`s 1943 "Radio Engineers` Handbook". Someone asked the impedance of a link couplling loop a few days ago. You can find its inductance using the handbook and if you know the frequency the calculation is easy. In my previous posting, I suggested placing the coax in close proximity with the much larger diameter radio tower. I reasoned that the larger tower has proportionally less inductance and would likely take a lion`s share of the lightning current. The coax would be better off inside the tower where it is somewhat screened from strikes. Working decades with radio towers and cables, I`ve seen this protection work. Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Article: 217749 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 21:38:00 GMT Reg Edwards wrote: > I would like to see a design for a 160m fractal which works better > than a half-wave dipole or a 5/8-wave vertical. Reg, I just modeled a 160m dipole (246 ft) Vs a 150 ft. overall length fractal dipole, both at 100 ft. The gain of the full sized dipole was 5.54 dBi at 45 deg TOA and the gain of the fractal dipole was 5.24 dBi at 45 deg TOA. You think you could tell the difference on the air? Looking from above, it looks like this: -----+ +-----x-----+ +----- | | | | +----+ +-----+ Each section is 25 ft. It's just a way of folding an antenna that meets the fractal specifications. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp From Wed Sep 28 23:53:45 EDT 2005 Article: 217750 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 16:51:33 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <5nolj1h16e03suln9o3jmsf3irv2eta2l5@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 41 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.news.ucla.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22869 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217750 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29574 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208744 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251239 On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 14:44:28 -0400, Uncle Ted wrote: >On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 11:48:15 -0400, Michael Coslo > wrote: > > >> Absolutely. I don't support money going to rebuilding NO in it's >>present spot. >> >> The French Quarter is okay where it is. It will eventually become an >>island, and should last for quite a while yet. Seems like a charming way >>to get to Mardi Gras - by a boat. >> >> But no matter how much money we pour into th erest of NO, it will sink. >>I suppose that we could try a Netherlands type approach, with huge >>dikes and all, but I doubt that there is enough room on the sides to do >>that, and besides, the Netherlands doesn't have to worry about >>hurricanes either. >> >> - Mike KB3EIA - > >I wonder why they don't rebuild New Orleans the way they built Venice, >Italy. Venice was built by people who were trying to get away from >Attila the Hun. Attila wanted farmland, so the nomads of that area >fled and settled in what was a swamp, and they built a city on a >swamp. > >(Of course, the first one sank into the swamp, so they built a second >one. THAT one sank into the swamp, so they built a third one. THAT one >burned down, fell over, and then sank into the swamp...but the fourth >one stayed up!) > >Seriously, though, New Orleans as a city of canals has a certain >romantic flair to it. I don't mind as long as THEY pay for it. It soon becomes tiresome to replace houses every few years for those who like living by the sea. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217751 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kashe@sonic.net Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: References: <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <4drgj117hlegehk79o4q89lvuefrjfrqpg@4ax.com> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 22:14:56 GMT On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 16:53:05 -0500, Matt Osborn <> wrote: > >Gravity has never been proven. How much more basic can one get? > How about you let us know after you return from your walk on the ceiling. Article: 217752 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kashe@sonic.net Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: <4f5mj1pmlba815ke74cku2nikc6o1ll6gp@4ax.com> References: <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <4drgj117hlegehk79o4q89lvuefrjfrqpg@4ax.com> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 22:17:16 GMT On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 22:30:50 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: >> Gravity has never been proven. > >I know the answer to this one from my hippie days. > >There is no gravity! The earth sucks! With one exception. I've heard that helicopter pilots say helicopters can't really fly -- they're so ugly the earth repels them. Article: 217753 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 23:08:27 GMT K wrote: > Boy, you guys are 'playing' with fire. You're gonna get the 'dragon' out of > his lair yet, and that 'mess' will start all over again! har. Heh, heh, the 'F' word on this newsgroup is "fractal". :-) -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217754 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <433B2A70.99249279@earthlink.net> From: "Michael A. Terrell" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <4drgj117hlegehk79o4q89lvuefrjfrqpg@4ax.com> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 23:41:26 GMT kashe@sonic.net wrote: > > On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 16:53:05 -0500, Matt Osborn <> wrote: > > > > >Gravity has never been proven. How much more basic can one get? > > > > How about you let us know after you return from your walk on > the ceiling. Don't be silly! He can't walk in the ceiling, because it blows! ;-) -- ? Michael A. Terrell Central Florida Article: 217755 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? References: <1127857483.866370.308610@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1127891612.179165.113960@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 23:45:13 GMT Richard Clark wrote: > On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 14:36:28 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >>It means that steady-state DC is incapable of generating photons. > > We can guess which dictionary changes the meanings. I'm obviously, in context, referring to coherent photons, Richard. Would you care to explain the physics behind coherent DC photons? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217756 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kashe@sonic.net Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: References: <1126821476.840433.194860@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <5ujsi196c3dl0l0a7su4uqltnt4u0ql4ko@4ax.com> <3f84j1t6o536tgnekhutv1ruepdo5d5ggs@4ax.com> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 23:52:00 GMT On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 11:11:12 -0400, Uncle Ted wrote: >On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 03:13:56 GMT, kashe@sonic.net wrote: > >>>>>>>It's bad enough that people feel a need to believe in any deities at >>>>>>>all, but when you have to listen to a bunch of old men in robes half a >>>>>>>world away tell you how to live your life, you're pretty screwed up. >>>>>> >>>>>> Is this a slam against our Muslim brethren? A comment on the >>>>>>position of Saudi Arabian women? >>>>> >>>>>Pope worshipers and Mohamahdists are all the same to me... >>>> >>>> That says more about you than about them. >>> >>>Such as? >> >> If you have to ask .... > >Ambiguity will get you nowhere. If that's ambiguous, you should get back whatever money you wasted on an education. Article: 217757 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kashe@sonic.net Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: References: <11htogetcauugb1@news.supernews.com> <1126247960.516709.218910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1126296865.329405.72430@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4324E0BD.A033E1A@earthlink.net> <6qudnRtjVJhVpLveRVn-tQ@comcast.com> <0ICdncTJkPKeVrveRVn-vA@comcast.com> <30DVe.1556$Nw6.692@bignews6.bellsouth.net> <88WdnbrHqZgpkbreRVn-tg@comcast.com> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 23:54:01 GMT >"Ham op" wrote in message >news:88WdnbrHqZgpkbreRVn-tg@comcast.com... >> Jerry wrote: >> > So, the term 'BIGOT' is a prejudicial pre judgment. Just as that's a tautological redundancy. Article: 217758 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kashe@sonic.net Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: References: <4o4ji1p26o2mcctbkfbuugpan1qmlt05nd@4ax.com> <31f74$43299abf$471c63c6$12083@ALLTEL.NET> <1127271443.195835.320110@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43313df9$0$253$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <4338A687.8D5B94DF@earthlink.net> <4338D057.B9B48493@earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 23:56:11 GMT >Tom Donaly wrote: >> >> Faith and works are, like voltage and current, inextricably intertwined. They are not. >> The proof of faith is the good work. Those who do no good have no faith. Your logic book get lost in the hurricane? Come back when you can name the logical fallacy you just committed. Article: 217759 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? References: <1127857483.866370.308610@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1127891612.179165.113960@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <6hG_e.3369$KQ5.1335@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 00:09:38 GMT Jim Kelley wrote: > Cecil Moore wrote: >> I didn't realize that a UWB pulse involved flashlights >> but I learn strange new things from you all the time. > > You didn't learn that from me. What you should have learned is that DC > can generate photons, contrary to your repeated assertions. Just in case someone doesn't understand your silly humor, Jim, here's the original posting: "It is said that a transmitted UWB pulse should not have any DC because of the transmitting antenna:" Antennas emit coherent photons. As far as I know, there's no such thing as a DC coherent photon, but if I'm wrong, please enlighten us. It's obvious that I was talking about coherent photons but just for you I will repeat with the context included this time: Steady-state DC is incapable of generating coherent photons from an antenna. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217760 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "David G. Nagel" Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 19:11:29 -0500 Message-ID: <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> Cecil Moore wrote: > K wrote: > >> Boy, you guys are 'playing' with fire. You're gonna get the 'dragon' >> out of his lair yet, and that 'mess' will start all over again! har. > > > Heh, heh, the 'F' word on this newsgroup is "fractal". :-) Let the games begin...... Article: 217761 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Michael" Subject: Re: antenna Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 17:56:06 -0700 Message-ID: <11jmccok8luhte3@corp.supernews.com> References: <1127775937.243525.150290@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <11jh4ir88hv2ff@corp.supernews.com> <4OednblHo-PBtaTeRVn-hQ@bright.net> I have a remote tuner in my garage, about 100 feet from my shack. The fluorescent lights flicker in the garage when I transmit with the amplifier on. I suspect this means there are high voltages in the garage. It still works. I us the metal interior of the garage for a ground. The steel sheets that form the interior of the garage are wired together. Michael W0EZI "Scott" wrote in message news:4OednblHo-PBtaTeRVn-hQ@bright.net... > Nah, RF is good for burning off warts and such ;) > > Scott > N0EDV > > Dave Platt wrote: > > This can lead to >> "RF in the shack" problems, and you may need a really good RF ground >> for the tuner and rig just to keep RF voltages on the equipment >> chassis from being a problem. >> Article: 217762 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: ml Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal fuzzy References: <1127857483.866370.308610@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1127864911.304163.64680@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 00:14:53 GMT Iok so i am confused on a few things the photo part so regardless of weither or not there is or isn't ac or dc , when i xmit (ham or other freq's) are photons being generated?? where would they be?? nearfield? around the antenna? how would i measure the presence/qty of such?? the other thing i got fuzzy on static polar field as Mr. clark mentions so why does the battery produce it /how?? are you referring to the fact that is has 'mass' and therefore.... or did i miss the obvious thanks fuzzylogic fuzzynavels fuzzypeaches From Wed Sep 28 23:53:48 EDT 2005 Article: 217763 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 20:20:14 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <4drgj117hlegehk79o4q89lvuefrjfrqpg@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 17 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-08!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22877 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217763 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29582 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208756 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251247 On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 22:14:56 GMT, kashe@sonic.net wrote: >On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 16:53:05 -0500, Matt Osborn <> wrote: > > >> >>Gravity has never been proven. How much more basic can one get? >> > > How about you let us know after you return from your walk on >the ceiling. You're walking on an assumption that is called gravity. Just like G-d, plenty of evidence but no proof. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217764 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Gene Fuller Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? References: <1127857483.866370.308610@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1127891612.179165.113960@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <6hG_e.3369$KQ5.1335@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 01:29:05 GMT Cecil Moore wrote: [snip] > Steady-state DC is incapable of generating coherent photons from an > antenna. Cecil, Have you ever heard of a laser diode? You may well use one every day. Billions of them are made every year for CD players and many other gadgets. DC goes in; coherent photons come out. This item is actually a transducer in which electromagnetic fields in a conductor are converted to electromagnetic fields in space. Hmmmm, sounds a lot like the function of an antenna. 73, Gene W4SZ Article: 217765 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Tom Donaly" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <4o4ji1p26o2mcctbkfbuugpan1qmlt05nd@4ax.com> <31f74$43299abf$471c63c6$12083@ALLTEL.NET> <1127271443.195835.320110@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43313df9$0$253$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <4338A687.8D5B94DF@earthlink.net> <4338D057.B9B48493@earthlink.net> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 02:54:34 GMT kashe@sonic.net wrote: >>Tom Donaly wrote: >> >>>Faith and works are, like voltage and current, inextricably intertwined. > > > They are not. > > >>>The proof of faith is the good work. Those who do no good have no faith. > > > Your logic book get lost in the hurricane? Come back when you > can name the logical fallacy you just committed. Some of the lower forms of American Christianity try to separate faith and works. That allows them salvation without substance, the lazy man's path to life without end. My last two sentences are statements of truth, not a logical progression. Each has to be taken alone, by itself. (A religious fundamentalist insisting on logical consistency constitutes a pretty good joke.) Let me repeat: Those who do no good have no faith. Next time you and your friends are sitting around speaking in tongues, you should discuss this. Maybe, if you all think real hard, together, you can puzzle out what it means. 73, Tom Donaly, KA6RUH Article: 217766 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Tom Donaly" Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal fuzzy References: <1127857483.866370.308610@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1127864911.304163.64680@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <7iJ_e.1076$Y_5.969@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 03:35:31 GMT ml wrote: > Iok so i am confused on a few things > > the photo part > > so regardless of weither or not there is or isn't ac or dc , when i > xmit (ham or other freq's) are photons being generated?? > > > where would they be?? nearfield? around the antenna? > > how would i measure the presence/qty of such?? > > > the other thing i got fuzzy on > > static polar field as Mr. clark mentions so why does the battery > produce it /how?? are you referring to the fact that is has 'mass' and > therefore.... or did i miss the obvious > > > > thanks > > > fuzzylogic > fuzzynavels > fuzzypeaches Don't listen to these guys. They're changing the subject by changing the scale of the argument in order to digladiate with one another. The truth is, that if an antenna really differentiates a signal so that what it radiates is based on the rate of change of the original signal, then the DC part of the original signal won't contribute to the radiation because the rate of change of a constant(the DC part)is zero. It isn't any more complicated than that. 73, Tom Donaly, KA6RUH Article: 217767 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? References: <1127857483.866370.308610@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1127891612.179165.113960@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <6hG_e.3369$KQ5.1335@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> <8uemj1lgp1di9n1lot8rsi1hijmjp2v7r4@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 03:26:28 GMT Richard Clark wrote: > On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 00:09:38 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >>Steady-state DC is incapable of generating coherent photons from an antenna. > > My Flashlight does it every time. Maybe you need new batteries. Your flashlight is NOT generating DC coherent photons. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217768 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? References: <1127857483.866370.308610@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1127891612.179165.113960@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <6hG_e.3369$KQ5.1335@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 03:31:58 GMT Gene Fuller wrote: > DC goes in; coherent photons come out. An RF antenna emits photons coherent with the RF supply frequency. An LED does not emit photons coherent with the DC supply frequency and neither do flashlights. This is what I have been trying to say. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217769 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: N7ZZT - Eric Oyen Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 20:44:15 -0700 Richard Clark wrote: > On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 07:39:01 -0400, wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil (J. B. Wood) > wrote: > >>numerous papers with measured data on fractal design have been published > ... >>I think it's too early to say whether or not fractal antennas will be.... > > Hi John, > > Don't you see a bit of disconnect between these statements? > > How long do you think it took Marconi to go from experimental antennas > to science, to production? And this was from when they banged rocks > together, not after a century of introspection on the subject. > > To answer my question, and to show the perspective of failure for > fractals: > At the age of 19 he was performing his first experiments with antenna > and transmission of RF; > At the age of 22 he had his first patent for same; > At the age of 27 he transmitted across the Atlantic; > At the age of 35 he was awarded the Nobel Prize for all things > considered. > > Well, we won't go as far as the Nobel; after all, it requires some > demonstration of a unique contribution to science. But on the other > hand, "research" on fractal things are all expressed in the same > breathless excitement of "discovery" and yet they've been circling the > same arid landscape like vultures in search for carrion. > > Let's simply look at the science stripped from these gushing claims, > and the teary-eyed exultation that attends fractals. The simple > dipole or monopole have a not to complex formula for the description > of their drive point Z. Name one formula (that is not my own) that > does so for fractal antennas. There is a very simple formula for > correlating the resonance of a wire antenna frequency/length. Name > one formula (that is not my own) that does so for fractal antennas. > > I've read a lot of this tripe that endlessly re-discovers the Koch > Triadic/Quadratic/.... Unless you've come across some remarkable > treatise that reveals correlations that uniquely associates the > fractal math with the technical outcome, then such fluff pieces are > academic masturbation. > > The golden glow on the horizon: >>the technology shows promise. > as sincere as it is, has no justifiable basis beyond the same emotion > stirred with the promise of snake-oil curing ____. This field has > been tilled for a decade (cohen keeps inflating his resume to push > that further back) and no new age has grown from that effort. As > such, Marconi captured the world's imagination in less time, and we > have the math to correlate the reality of that achievement. Clearly > the sum of the 21st century researchers of fractal antennas do not > equal the total of one 19th century Italian gentleman dabbler. > > 73's > Richard Clark, KB7QHC can you send me an e-mail on this subject in private. I am working on a small project that seeks to tune in HDTV signals (or standard tv in general) and I would like some input on how to design a good fractal that would work with a minimum of complexity... e-maik in sig... -- DE N7ZZT Eric Oyen Phoenix, Arizona e-mail: n7zzt(at)hotmail(dot)com the difference between intelligence and stupidity is that intelligence has its limits. Article: 217770 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: N7ZZT - Eric Oyen Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 21:40:22 -0700 J. B. Wood wrote: > In article <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com>, Richard Clark > wrote: > >> Hi John, >> >> Don't you see a bit of disconnect between these statements? >> >> How long do you think it took Marconi to go from experimental antennas >> to science, to production? And this was from when they banged rocks >> together, not after a century of introspection on the subject. >> >> To answer my question, and to show the perspective of failure for >> fractals: >> At the age of 19 he was performing his first experiments with antenna >> and transmission of RF; >> At the age of 22 he had his first patent for same; >> At the age of 27 he transmitted across the Atlantic; >> At the age of 35 he was awarded the Nobel Prize for all things >> considered. >> > > I don't see the point here. Marconi was dealing with rather elementary > (and physically large) wire structures and did not have to generally > concern himself with design issues such as antenna gain/radiation pattern, > efficiency, driving point impedance, size, weight, etc. Back in Marconi's > time it might have gone down like this: Try it and see if it works. Wow, > it works! Now if we could time-travel to that era we could ask: Could we > tweak the antenna for higher gain? Is the transmit antenna optimally > matched to our spark-gap transmitter? Gosh I don't know. What's antenna > gain? > > Packing an antenna with required performance, for example, into a cell > phone is not as simple as it sounds. I don't see any reason to get in a > dither over a particular antenna type if its performance is well > documented and its theoretical basis is in concert with (does not violate) > electromagnetic theory. Granted, I do see a heck of a lot more papers on > patch antennas than I do fractal types but so what? I don't ever remember > seeing any papers on E/H or crossed-field antennas in any IEEE pub nor do > I ever expect to. I'm also very leery of antenna performance claims and > specious explanations provided by websites such as www.antennex.com even > though a lot of their contributors are our Canadian ham brothers. An > amateur radio license does not make one an antenna engineer. The ham may > be a prolific inventor/tinkerer, perhaps with some applicable technical > knowledge that facilitates him/her "stumbling" upon a great antenna > design. But he/she is not an antenna/electronics/electrical engineer > (unless they have pursued that course of study). Sincerely, > > John Wood (Code 5550) e-mail: wood@itd.nrl.navy.mil > Naval Research Laboratory > 4555 Overlook Avenue, SW > Washington, DC 20375-5337 well, I am of the old school on this one myself: try it out, measure it and then duplicate the results (scientific method). personally, I'd like to get some of the math down first, and then get some building ideas and see what can be made to work for the average home user/ham... I've built many an antenna since before I became a ham. There is walys something new to be learned from the building (such as math, construction techniques and the like). I agree with what Richard Clarke says on this, any marketing hype is just that: snake oil salesmanship. I want to see real numbers and real results before I believe what someones marketing dept. printed up. -- DE N7ZZT Eric Oyen Phoenix, Arizona e-mail: n7zzt(at)hotmail(dot)com the difference between intelligence and stupidity is that intelligence has its limits. Article: 217771 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: N7ZZT - Eric Oyen Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <45mlj11krduvrcc4f49tlsg5j2ljtulhnr@4ax.com> Message-ID: <8iK_e.9981$GK2.2615@lakeread07> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 21:43:55 -0700 Richard Clark wrote: > As is so painfully obvious, if fractals were a good idea, we would be > using them now. > > 73's > Richard Clark, KB7QHC its not that we can't use them, its just that we don't yet know how to use them (let alone design one that works, or so my searching seems to indicate). -- DE N7ZZT Eric Oyen Phoenix, Arizona e-mail: n7zzt(at)hotmail(dot)com the difference between intelligence and stupidity is that intelligence has its limits. Article: 217772 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Uncle Ted Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 00:40:50 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1126821476.840433.194860@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <5ujsi196c3dl0l0a7su4uqltnt4u0ql4ko@4ax.com> <3f84j1t6o536tgnekhutv1ruepdo5d5ggs@4ax.com> On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 23:52:00 GMT, kashe@sonic.net wrote: >>>>>>Pope worshipers and Mohamahdists are all the same to me... >>>>> >>>>> That says more about you than about them. >>>> >>>>Such as? >>> >>> If you have to ask .... >> >>Ambiguity will get you nowhere. > > If that's ambiguous, you should get back whatever money you >wasted on an education. YOU are the one that wants to play games and won't answer my question. You also wait several days before posting any response, which leads me to believe that you have to wait until mommy and daddy are out of the house before you can get on the computer. Article: 217773 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Charlie" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 01:30:20 -0500 Message-ID: <11jn2gsmlkkkjcf@news.supernews.com> References: <4o4ji1p26o2mcctbkfbuugpan1qmlt05nd@4ax.com> <31f74$43299abf$471c63c6$12083@ALLTEL.NET> <1127271443.195835.320110@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43313df9$0$253$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <4338A687.8D5B94DF@earthlink.net> <4338D057.B9B48493@earthlink.net> Tom if what you say is true about no works = no faith and subsequently no salvation...where were the good works from the thief on the cross who, according to Christian scripture, was saved and is already in heaven? -- Charlie "Tom Donaly" wrote in message news:KHI_e.1509$rl1.1349@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net... > kashe@sonic.net wrote: >>>Tom Donaly wrote: >>> >>>>Faith and works are, like voltage and current, inextricably intertwined. >> >> >> They are not. >> >> >>>>The proof of faith is the good work. Those who do no good have no faith. >> >> >> Your logic book get lost in the hurricane? Come back when you >> can name the logical fallacy you just committed. > > Some of the lower forms of American Christianity try to separate faith > and works. That allows them salvation without substance, the lazy man's > path to life without end. > My last two sentences are statements of truth, not a logical > progression. Each has to be taken alone, by itself. (A religious > fundamentalist insisting on logical consistency constitutes a > pretty good joke.) Let me repeat: Those who do no good have no > faith. Next time you and your friends are sitting around speaking > in tongues, you should discuss this. Maybe, if you all think real > hard, together, you can puzzle out what it means. > 73, > Tom Donaly, KA6RUH Article: 217774 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? References: <1127891612.179165.113960@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <6hG_e.3369$KQ5.1335@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> <8uemj1lgp1di9n1lot8rsi1hijmjp2v7r4@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 06:56:26 GMT Richard Clark wrote: > On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 03:26:28 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >>Your flashlight is NOT generating DC coherent photons. > > Mine does. Like I said, yours probably needs batteries, or perhaps it > is suffering a dimbulb behind the on/off switch. Assuming your flashlight does generate photons with a frequency of zero Hz, how do you detect them? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217775 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Rasputin IV" References: <43109$43317117$97d56a13$4287@ALLTEL.NET> <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <5245a$4335d586$97d56a13$3658@ALLTEL.NET> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 07:53:54 -0400 Message-ID: <165cf$433bd5e4$d1cc41b8$20958@snip.allthenewsgroups.com> "Zoran Brlecic" <...WA7AA...@get.lost> wrote in message news:v8udndGEGeWRzareRVn-jA@comcast.com... > Even if you don't believe in Allah, Aphrodite, Ares, Athena, Apollo, > Artemis, Babaluaye, Bacchus, Baldur, Bast, Bellona, Brahma, Brigid, > Ceres, Cupid, Cerridwen, Demeter, Diana, Dione, Dionysus, Eris, Eos, > Eleggua, , El Shaddai, Elohim, Eshu, Ereshkigal, Frigga, Frey, Freya, > Gaea, Lord Genesa, Hades, Hebe, Hera, Helios, Hel, Hephaestus, Hermes, > Hestia, Horus, Ibeji, Ifa, Inanna, Indra, Ishana, Ishtar, Isis, Janus, > Juno, Jehovah, Jove, Jupiter, Kali. Krishna Kronos, Korravai, Loki, > Lugh, Lord Indra, Manitou, Mars, Mercury, Minerva, Mercurius, Morrigan, > Nahuiquiahuitl, Nanahuatzin, Nephthys, Neptune, Obatala, Odin, Ogun, > Oshosi, Oshun, Osiris, Oya, Orunmila, Olokun, Olodumare, Pluto, > Persephone, Poseidon, Proserpina, Quetzalcoatl, Ra, Lord Rama, Rhea, > Saturn, Set, Selene, Shango, Lord Siva, Tammuz, Thor, Tir, Tiw, Uranus, > Venus, Vesta, Vishnu, Vesta, Vulcan, Wotan, Yahweh, Yemaya, Zeus, and > thousands of others, they believe in you! But you forgot the most important Deity in your list above: "Bob" ! Learn about "Bob" here -----> www.subgenius.com "You'll pay to know what you really think" - JR "Bob" Dobbs 1959 "Act like a dumbshit and they'll treat you like an equal" - JR "Bob" Dobbs 1961 Article: 217776 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Michael Coslo Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 08:25:52 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1127958744.838040.32970@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> N2EY@AOL.COM wrote: > Michael Coslo wrote: > >>Cecil Moore wrote: >> >> >>>Matt Osborn wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Maybe we should rebuild New Orleans in England, it would balance the >>>>scales. >>> >>> >>>We indeed should rebuild New Orleans somewhere that is >>>not below sea level. > > > How about Death Valley? > >> Absolutely. I don't support money going to rebuilding NO > in it's >>present spot. > > > I agree 100%. But you watch, the money will be poured into it just like > the water. > >>The French Quarter is okay where it is. It will >>eventually become an >>island, and should last for quite a while yet. >>Seems like a charming way >>to get to Mardi Gras - by a boat. >> >>But no matter how much money we pour into th erest of >>NO, it will sink. >>I suppose that we could try a Netherlands type approach, >>with huge >>dikes and all, but I doubt that there is enough room on the >>sides to do >>that, and besides, the Netherlands doesn't have to worry about >>hurricanes either. > > > The levees are dikes, aren't they? The Netherlands version of dikes are to levees as a FT-9000 is to a Rock Mite. I watched a documentary on the things once, and they are quite a feat of engineering. They are considered one of the seven woncers of the modern world. > There are some important other differences. > > It's my understanding that the Dutch built their dikes and filled > in/pumped out the polders as a way of getting more farmland without > fighting wars with their neighbors, and as a way of *reducing* storm > damage. They don't build cities on below-sea-level land. And the way > they deal with the reclaimed land results in it slowly but surely > rising, not sinking. > > But they don't put cities there. http://geography.about.com/library/weekly/aa033000a.htm According to this link over 60 percent of the population if the Netherlands is living beneath sea level. > -- > > There's a bigger problem even than Katrina behind all this... > > Modern technology has made almost anything possible from a theoretical > point of view. NO could be rebuilt with levees and pumps capable of > withstanding a Cat 5 storm, for example. > > But the problem is that such solutions, while technically possible, are > often prohibitively expensive, particularly on a large scale. Not just > to build, but to maintain. Who is going to pay the taxes so that a > rebuilt NO can be kept dry? > > Or to put it another way - *why* should NO be built in such a highrisk > location when there are so many better alternatives? Darned if I know. I don't want my tax money going to rebuilding it in the same place. > Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done. > > I wonder if Shrub ever played SimCity? The Sims are evil and promote all kinds of sexual abberations. http://www.electricvenom.com/2005/07/26/sims2-sinful/ An amazing link, that! I guess we better cover up the dirty bits on the "Justice" statues again..... - Mike KB3EIA - Article: 217777 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Michael Coslo Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 08:29:17 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1126821476.840433.194860@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <5ujsi196c3dl0l0a7su4uqltnt4u0ql4ko@4ax.com> <3f84j1t6o536tgnekhutv1ruepdo5d5ggs@4ax.com> Uncle Ted wrote: > On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 23:52:00 GMT, kashe@sonic.net wrote: > > > >>>>>>>Pope worshipers and Mohamahdists are all the same to me... >>>>>> >>>>>> That says more about you than about them. >>>>> >>>>>Such as? >>>> >>>> If you have to ask .... >>> >>>Ambiguity will get you nowhere. >> >> If that's ambiguous, you should get back whatever money you >>wasted on an education. > > > YOU are the one that wants to play games and won't answer my question. > You also wait several days before posting any response, which leads me > to believe that you have to wait until mommy and daddy are out of the > house before you can get on the computer. kashe is just using us as his/her straight men. You know, toss out a few insults, make irrelevant comments. I like to read them because a few are funny. - Mike KB3EIA - Article: 217778 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Asimov" Subject: Re: Lightning Question Message-ID: References: <13319-433B0990-119@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:31:35 GMT "Richard Harrison" bravely wrote to "All" (28 Sep 05 16:22:24) --- on the heady topic of "Re: Lightning Question" RH> From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison) RH> Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217540 RH> A conductor can offer inductive reactance in addition to its RH> resistance. Put some twists and turns in the coax. A coil`s inductance RH> is proportional to the square of its number of turns. I think you are missing one thing that seems to be much too obvious. Air conducts 10 times better than the plastic insulation in the coax and the lightning will simply jump over the twists and turns, without the slightest effort. What you really want to do is to give lightning an alternate path that conducts better than the air, so that your coax is ignored. However, I think you are right in giving the coax path more inductance because the lightning leader is a high frequency phenomenon and it is the leader that initiates the path for the lightning strike. A*s*i*m*o*v ... Always remember you're unique - just like everyone else. Article: 217779 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Asimov" Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? Message-ID: References: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:31:36 GMT "Cecil Moore" bravely wrote to "All" (27 Sep 05 22:14:43) --- on the heady topic of "Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why?" CM> From: Cecil Moore CM> Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217466 CM> Harry wrote: > Would someone please explain that for me? CM> DC steady-state does not cause electrons to emit photons. CM> For RF photons to be emitted from a copper wire dipole, the CM> free electrons must be accelerated and decelerated. The DC CM> component cannot accomplish that feat. Very true on the macro scale but even a DC potential becomes discontinuous at a microscopic level. Remember that there is a distance between atoms, electrons, molecules and are not continuous. How is it done except if not by photons, virtual or otherwise, whether the context is AC or DC? A*s*i*m*o*v ... Pandora's Law: Never open a box you didn't close yourself Article: 217780 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Asimov" Subject: Re: 73 Ohms, How do you get it? Message-ID: References: <1127140206_12465@spool6-east.superfeed.net> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:31:37 GMT "Cecil Moore" bravely wrote to "All" (19 Sep 05 09:27:25) --- on the heady topic of "Re: 73 Ohms, How do you get it?" CM> Subject: Re: 73 Ohms, How do you get it? CM> Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:216868 CM> pezSV7BAXdag wrote: > The limit for Z does not exist > or is (in general) the complex infinity. CM> As the length of a dipole is increased, for the same CM> power input, more energy is radiated during the first CM> transcient cycle and less is available for reflection CM> from the ends of the dipole. Reflected energy is what CM> is causing the feedpoint impedance to change. As the CM> length of the dipole is incrementally increased, the CM> magnitude of the reflected energy is incrementally CM> decreased. I believe Balanis alludes to this characteristic CM> of standing-wave antennas. CM> The feedpoint impedance is Zfp =3d (Vfor+Vref)/(Ifor+Iref) CM> using phasor addition. CM> The limit of that equation as Vref and Iref go to zero CM> is Vfor/Ifor. That's what happens for an infinitely CM> long dipole. That's also what happens during the transient CM> phase of a finite dipole. Thus, Vfor/Ifor can be thought CM> of as the characteristic impedance of the dipole. Seems CM> to me, Vfor/Ifor could actually be measured during the CM> transient phase of a long finite dipole. Will a TDR CM> report the ratio of V/I for an RF pulse? Cecil, an infinitely long antenna is simply an impedance transformation between different mediums. i.e. wire to free space. A*s*i*m*o*v Article: 217781 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Asimov" Subject: Re: cell phone antenna Message-ID: References: <431dd5e3_3@news1.prserv.net> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:31:38 GMT "tjs" bravely wrote to "All" (06 Sep 05 13:29:42) --- on the heady topic of "Re: cell phone antenna" Say we point a yagi cut for 900MHz or 2.4GHz at the tower and instead of using a coax to connect to the cellphone we use a balun to match a small vertical directly connected to it. Then use the cellphone in proximity to the yagi/balun/vertical combined antenna. If the yagi has say +12dB gain then won't the vertical reradiate and recieve with that added gain or is this one of those perpetual motion impossible gizmos? A*s*i*m*o*v tj> From: "tjs" tj> Services Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:216297 tj> If your OK with the possibilty of ruining the phone! tj> .. you can try to solder a short pigtail of coax to the antenna points tj> you see in the phone. Put a BNC on the end of the pigtail and use this tj> to connect any type of experimental antenna you like. tj> I dont know about in the Phillipines, but most cell phone operate on tj> several frequency bands, so the antenna is a compromise. If for tj> instance the frequencies are 900mhz and 2400mhz then you need to force tj> the phone to operate on say 900 then attach a properly tuned antanna tj> for 900mhz. Likewise for 2400mhz. A resonant half wave dipole for 900 tj> mhz will be about 33cm (or a quarter wave vertical would be about 16cm tj> tall with radials of 16cm). Directional antennas would be better but tj> they are more critical to build and adjust. tj> One way to solve your problem might be to sit on the roof to talk, tj> that way you get gain by your height. tj> Another way might be locate the phone up high, and use a remote tj> headset, and use voice commands to dial out. You still get the benefit tj> of height but can stay inside. tj> You could put the phone in the focus of a corner reflector or tj> parabolic dish pointed at the cell tower. The phone is the radiator and tj> the dish gives you gain. This is probably the ideal setup if you are tj> stationary in not mobile. tj> Note: Any time you try to remote the antenna you need a length of coax tj> between the phone and the antenna. At these frequencies, 50ft of even tj> excellent coax (1/2" diameter) will likely completly ruin any gain the tj> antenna may give you. You would only be eliminating some sources of tj> noise by getting up away from the house. Directional antennas give tj> +gain and the neccessary coax gives -gain but hopefully not as much, so tj> you come out ahead. tj> "yhan" wrote in message tj> news:1125902678.882565.61710@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > greetings, > > i am trying to build an external antenna for my cp. i have found ... Bad day: When the bird singing outside is a buzzard! Article: 217782 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Asimov" Subject: Trying to get AM broadcast at job Message-ID: References: <1125736373.469540.275780@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:31:39 GMT "Fedthecat" bravely wrote to "All" (03 Sep 05 01:32:53) --- on the heady topic of "Trying to get AM broadcast at job" Fe> From: "Fedthecat" Fe> Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:216151 Fe> Bought a small boombox. It has no antenna connection screws, just a Fe> built-in antenna. It gets no AM stations at all, just static. I work Fe> in a big GM plant (all steel building). Nobodies radios get AM. Fe> I mounted a car antenna on a bracket (isolated from the bracket with a Fe> rubber gromet) and mounted the bracket to a chain link fence 20ft from Fe> the plant. I hooked a coax center wire to the antenna base. I clamped Fe> the braided wire to the bracket. At the other end, inside the plant, I Fe> connected the center wire to the built-in antenna on the radio via an Fe> alligator clip. I still get no AM. I haven't hooked the braided wire Fe> to anything because I have no terminals on the radio. Do I hook it to Fe> any ground, such as an eletrical conduit or can I hook it to the radios Fe> battery ground terminals(I am not using the battery terminals because Fe> I am plugged into an outlet)? Am I far enough from the building? Do I Fe> need to be above the building? Is there a limit to how long my coax Fe> can be? Any advice is more than I currently have. Thanks... The radio's built-in whip antenna only works for the FM tuner. The AM antenna is a ferrite loopstick directly mounted on the circuit board. There is no connection between the two antennas. What you might try is to make a coupling loop with some turns of wire (10+). Connect the ends of this to the coax, center and braid. Then place the loop vertically near the radio oriented so that the AM loopstick points at the center of the loop (taped to side of case). You might improve it by adding a variable trimmer cap in series with the coax or in parallel across the loop to tune sensitivity. Other than this try leaving the radio outside and extend the speaker wire instead. A*s*i*m*o*v ... <- Grains Of Salt. Take As Needed With Above Message. Article: 217783 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Asimov" Subject: Re: Amplfier opinion Message-ID: References: <%MIRe.5270$_84.3397@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:31:40 GMT "Ralph Mowery" bravely wrote to "All" (01 Sep 05 19:38:35) --- on the heady topic of "Re: Amplfier opinion" RM> From: "Ralph Mowery" RM> Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:216043 RM> "Ham op" wrote in message RM> news:NqOdnbmOQvihpIveRVn-jA@comcast.com... > 7.78 Db BETTER [+1 1/4 S unit] than 100 watts. > > Upgrade the vertical to a beam and the net gain can be as high as +19.78 > dB [3+ S units] on the path: > 1] + 6 dB in receive > 2] + 6 dB in transmit > 3] + 7.78 dB for the amplifier. > > For $1400, a beam has a much better return on investment than an > amplifier by itself. > > The #1 rule I teach new or aspiring hams is "Your station efficiency, > and your enjoyment, is directly proportional to your antenna." > RM> I will agree that it is best to go with a beter antenna, sometimes it RM> is just not practical. Not many can put up a beam for 80 meters and RM> not that many for ever 40 meters. Most amps will do 80 to 15 meters. Just wondering if it wouldn't be possible to compensate for antenna size, by actively driving the reflective, directive elements using correctly phased amounts of power from the xmtr output. I'm probably preaching heresy in the midst of this bunch of laurelled gurus but I don't mind being told I'm thinking laterally, so shoot your best flames. A*s*i*m*o*v ... Firemen are proud of their hoses. Article: 217784 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Asimov" Subject: OT - Oscilloscope Message-ID: References: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:31:41 GMT "Al" bravely wrote to "All" (26 Aug 05 11:26:49) --- on the heady topic of "OT - Oscilloscope" Al> From: "Al" Al> Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:215746 Al> I acquired a Tektronix 2430A digital oscilloscope and I'm having Al> problems with it. Is there a newsgroup that would be proper to post Al> such a question to? Thanks. Al> Al KA5JGV Al> San Antonio, TX Try s.e.r (sci.electronics.repair), there are ex-Tek workers there who know them inside out. A*s*i*m*o*v ... Tool: a toy that's profitable to play with. Article: 217785 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Asimov" Subject: Re: Antenna improvements? Message-ID: References: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:31:41 GMT "Dave" bravely wrote to "All" (25 Aug 05 12:48:54) --- on the heady topic of "Re: Antenna improvements?" Physicists bounce radar off meteor trails in the upper atmosphere. This ionized air path reflects radio waves and can be detected. Da> From: "Dave" Da> Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:215723 Da> you missed cfa, and plasma antennas i think. Da> "CD" wrote in message Da> news:1124971591.454857.181250@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > Hey all, > > I was curious if you are aware of any new antenna developments / > techniques in regards to AM broadcasting. I'm specifically interested > in smaller AM antennas with high power ratings and a broadband response > between the AM channels. > > I've already stumbled upon DLM from the University of Rhode Island, > Fractal Antennas from UCLA, EH Antennas from Ted Hart, Isotron, etc. > > Thanks! > > CD ... Acme Corp: Unlimited credit for disadvantaged coyotes. Article: 217786 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Dr Nancy Kohen PhD Freaktal Genius" References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 11:17:34 -0400 Message-ID: After consultashun with my atorney, I am sooing the entire news group. You have used the word FRACTAL (Pat. Pending) and have made nasty remarks that hurt my feelings. You will all be served and my atorney says you will all be banned from news grups as well as being enjoyined from ever speaking the word FRACTAL (Pat. Pending). Govern yourselfes accordianly Dr Nancy Kohen PhD Fractal Genius DXCC and the insperation for the janitor in "Contact" "David G. Nagel" wrote in message news:11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com... > Cecil Moore wrote: > > K wrote: > > > >> Boy, you guys are 'playing' with fire. You're gonna get the 'dragon' > >> out of his lair yet, and that 'mess' will start all over again! har. > > > > > > Heh, heh, the 'F' word on this newsgroup is "fractal". :-) > > Let the games begin...... Article: 217787 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? References: Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 15:23:22 GMT Asimov wrote: > How is it done except if not by photons, virtual or otherwise, whether > the context is AC or DC? DC applied to an antenna no doubt creates virtual photons. My statements should be considered to exclude such virtual photons. They are meant to include only detectable photons coherent with the frequency of the driving signal capable of propagation through free space which are emitted by the acceleration/deceleration of free electrons in a copper wire antenna. (Contexts nowadays are sure complicated.) -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217788 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: 73 Ohms, How do you get it? References: <1127140206_12465@spool6-east.superfeed.net> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 15:25:42 GMT Asimov wrote: > Cecil, an infinitely long antenna is simply an impedance transformation > between different mediums. i.e. wire to free space. We know one of the impedances to be 377 ohms. Question is, what is the other impedance? -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217789 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Bad News for Hams? Message-ID: <88U_e.693$sL3.385@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 15:55:48 GMT http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050929/D8CTUA3O7.html Article: 217790 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 16:02:38 GMT Dr Nancy Kohen PhD Freaktal Genius wrote: > You will all be served and my atorney says you will all be banned from news > grups as well as being enjoyined from ever speaking the word FRACTAL (Pat. > Pending). But, but, but, Nancy, I like fractals and recently posted a 160m fractal dipole that is within 0.3 dB of the performance of a full-sized 160m dipole. I don't have a life so I spend a lot of time on this newsgroup. I'll waste away to nothing if I don't get my r.r.a.a fix. Article: 217791 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <1128006269.858078.317850@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: UWB Antennas, why these shapes? Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 12:09:52 -0400 Message-ID: <2a32$433c1249$97d56a13$3240@ALLTEL.NET> To make an antenna wideband, you have to decrease the Q, Making the antenna "fatter" is one of the approaches. For example a standard 12 gauge wire dipole at 3.8 MHz has a bandwidth of about 120 KHz (defined as the 2:1 SWR points) . Making a cage 12" in diameter with 6 wires and depending on height you can cover almost 300 KHz. Use two dipoles with the ends separated by 15 feet and you can cover almost all of the band. What specific frequencies are you trying to cover? How much SWR can you stand, and what is the link budget? "Harry" wrote in message news:1128006269.858078.317850@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > What is the key factor that will make an antenna wide-band? > (compared with narrow-band antennas) > > The more I read about UWB antennas, the more I get confused. > (For example: http://www.uwbgroup.ru/pdf/37schantz.pdf > http://ultra.usc.edu/New_Site/MURI/Schaubert0502pptpdf.pdf > ) > > I believe there must be a simple principle behind all these different > wide-band antennas. Am I right? > > -- Harry > Article: 217792 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 12:21:18 -0400 Message-ID: <73063$433c14ac$97d56a13$3806@ALLTEL.NET> Any antenna that only requires an additional 10 towers to support is worthy of attention. "Cecil Moore" wrote in message news:yeU_e.694$sL3.173@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com... > Dr Nancy Kohen PhD Freaktal Genius wrote: > > You will all be served and my atorney says you will all be banned from news > > grups as well as being enjoyined from ever speaking the word FRACTAL (Pat. > > Pending). > > But, but, but, Nancy, I like fractals and recently posted > a 160m fractal dipole that is within 0.3 dB of the > performance of a full-sized 160m dipole. I don't have a > life so I spend a lot of time on this newsgroup. I'll > waste away to nothing if I don't get my r.r.a.a fix. Article: 217793 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: N7ZZT - Eric Oyen Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <5brmj11a47ct0pdv1trsr4s40i7etepemu@4ax.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 09:32:54 -0700 Richard Clark wrote: > On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 20:44:15 -0700, N7ZZT - Eric Oyen > wrote: > >>can you send me an e-mail on this subject in private. I am working on a >>small project that seeks to tune in HDTV signals (or standard tv in >>general) and I would like some input on how to design a good fractal that >>would work with a minimum of complexity... > > Hi Eric, > > Yes, but the purpose of a newsgroup is to enlarge the general > understanding of a topic. > > As for your topic of HDTV signals, the simple answer is one of the > oldest fractals (which is one of those claim grabs where the bastard > technology adopts its own grandparents for legitimacy's sake alone). yeah. well, opinions can do that. > > Try the Log Periodic Dipole Array. It is certainly wide band, but I'm > not so sure this equates to phase distortion free - if that is a > problem. I cannot say the problem interests me because I'm of the > opinion that HDTV will be serving HD crap. I long ago gave up on > cable because I was no more interested in 200 channels of crap than a > dozen or so over the air. Netflix is cheaper. The application I am looking at makes an LPDA impractical (I am talking fortable/hand held operation here). > > As for wide band fractals: > > Bandwidth goes contrary to small size. Fractals boast of being small. > Widebandedness does not come with small, even if it does come with > being fractal. The design alluded to in another posting with this > kind of wide bandwidth: > http://www.qsl.net/kb7qhc/antenna/fractal/Constant%20Fractal/2nd%20Order/Sierpinski%2016M%20wire%202nd%20order%20377%20Ohm%20SWR%20Special.gif > covers EVERY VHF TV channel with below 2:1 SWR. ok. something to look at..... > > This design comes with a huge price. It consumes 64 meters of wire! thats a lot of wire man...... > > If you are looking for gain, you are looking at size again. If not in > the overall spread, then in the overall outline. Fractals only boast > of size (when they are smaller) because they can be tailored for a > match. TV antennas, for years, have long solved matching problems. not so much gain and usability in portable (read that as unobtrusive) operation. > > If you are looking for radiation lobe characteristics, fractals are > not notably intuitive models of symmetry. In fact they are as > perverted in their kinky patterns as they are with their kinky wire. not planning for transmit with one of these things. strictly a receiver sty;e setup. > > You could build an array from these loops: > http://www.qsl.net/kb7qhc/antenna/fractal/Square%20Gasket/index.htm > which performs just as well or better than its larger, conventional > design, but you clearly state above: >>would work with a minimum of complexity... > which negates nearly the entire topic. > > If none of this dissuades you, write me offline and we will keep it > there. Certainly there is a limit to the interest online, and it > usually dies at about the 5 or 6th post in the thread as it did here. > The only thing that kept it alive in times past was the carnival > atmosphere and hucksterism. well, let me do a little reading and I'll get back to you. -- DE N7ZZT Eric Oyen Phoenix, Arizona e-mail: n7zzt(at)hotmail(dot)com the difference between intelligence and stupidity is that intelligence has its limits. Article: 217794 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: UWB Antennas, why these shapes? Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 16:40:18 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1128006269.858078.317850@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> > What is the key factor that will make an antenna wide-band? > (compared with narrow-band antennas) > > I believe there must be a simple principle behind all these different > wide-band antennas. Am I right? ==================================== Harry, Yes, you are right. Simply suppress resonant tendencies. Make antenna Q = 1 such that the feedpoint impedance is always a pure resistance at all working frequencies. The most simple, most wide-band antenna is just a wire terminated in its characteristic impedance Zo. Simpicity Rules. Unfortuately and inevitably, at least 50% of the Tx power is dissipated in the termination. But if power is inexpensive, who cares? There are compromises between bandwidth, directional properties, service area, power-efficiency and physical construction. But there is always more lost on the roundabouts than is gained on the swings. At HF, when it comes to compromises, you can't beat a 1/2-wave horizontal dipole or a 1/4-wave vertical. I trust the above somewhat vague information will be of interest. Perhaps further details can be provided by people having practical experience of particular cases such as Fractal and E-H antennas. ---- Reg, G4FGQ. Article: 217795 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> <73063$433c14ac$97d56a13$3806@ALLTEL.NET> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 16:42:21 GMT Fred W4JLE wrote: > Any antenna that only requires an additional 10 towers to support is worthy > of attention. That's the basic reason one will not see many fractal antennas used for HF antennas and practicality was not the context. But on a higher frequency, with self supporting material, and bending it down instead of out, it makes more sense, e.g. 6m, ~5 ft. long instead of ~9 ft. long. Consider the turning radius for a 6m fractal beam Vs a full-sized one. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217796 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 17:07:55 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> <73063$433c14ac$97d56a13$3806@ALLTEL.NET> The standard of discussion on Fractals on this newsgroup certainly relegates the Fractal antenna to the place it deserves. But it has not yet descended to the level of the E-H. Get yourselves organised, Try harder! ---- Reg. Article: 217797 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: 73 Ohms, How do you get it? Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 17:12:59 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1127140206_12465@spool6-east.superfeed.net> It's so simple to derive the value of 73 ohms. Just divide 146 by 2. Or multiply 36.5 by 2. There are other ways of doing it. Article: 217798 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "David Thompson" References: <88U_e.693$sL3.385@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> Subject: Re: Bad News for Hams? Message-ID: <%yV_e.6858$q1.5550@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 17:32:43 GMT BPL sound so nice until you get to the pollution aspect (RFI). As I told the Atlanta based Earthlink CEO, hams will be a nuisance until one of us ingresses (not really as its not inside a cable) and blocks out the entire system. Then the stuff will really hit the fan. A national article stating that ham radio op KX3XXX imterfered with the city of YYYYY's cable system would do it, 73 Dave K4JRB "Cecil Moore" wrote in message news:88U_e.693$sL3.385@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com... > http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050929/D8CTUA3O7.html Article: 217799 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: 73 Ohms, How do you get it? Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 17:40:04 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1127140206_12465@spool6-east.superfeed.net> Cec, if you divide the well-known 377 ohms by 5.164, which is the square-root of 26.67, you get precisely 73 ohms. What's the problem? --- Reg Article: 217800 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Dick, AA5VU" Subject: Re: Metal Roof and Vertical Antenna References: <11j8isc2vp1so0f@corp.supernews.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 17:44:42 GMT In article <11j8isc2vp1so0f@corp.supernews.com>, "Rod Maupin" wrote: > I posted this on the wrong newsgroup a few days ago and no one has answered, > so I'll try here. > > I have a Butternut Vertical (as a secondary antenna) and a regular radial > system set up with it. I also have a metal roof on my house (here in the > country in Western Washington). I have been wondering if I can use the > metal roof as the radial system/ground plane for this antenna. Haven't > tried it yet. Would this work or would it detune the antenna? > > What do you guys think? > > Rod KI7CQ Rod, Several years ago I tried a 14AVQ vert next to the house with a big jumper to the tin roof. Boy was that a mistake! It did not work at all. I gave up on the vert and installed a tower and beam. FYI, the best improvement ever made to the beam was when we replaced the tin roof with normal singles. It was like getting a new antenna too. Good luck with the tin roof. BTW, it did work pretty good with a mag mount VHF/UHF antenna. HiHi Dick AA5VU Article: 217801 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Win Subject: KenPro 050 Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 12:48:02 -0500 Message-ID: <3i9oj15r6qcu4anpc9g947cm5o0dlmpsnl@4ax.com> Has anyone had any experience with the KenPro 050 thrust bearing? I am thinking of using one on a 40 lb monobander, with a K of about 700, three feet above the roator, on a 2" mast, with the antenna extending four feet above the bearing. Since the antenna is lights, I really don't need the bearing to support the vertical weight of the antenna and mast. They are about a quarter of the price of a TB-2. Win, w0lz Article: 217802 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> <73063$433c14ac$97d56a13$3806@ALLTEL.NET> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 17:57:27 GMT Cecil Moore wrote: > Consider the turning radius for a 6m fractal > beam Vs a full-sized one. Just modeled a quickie using EZNEC. The fractal beam has two elements with 6 ft. tip to tip spaced two feet apart. Each element looks like this typical fractal with the reflector slightly longer than the driven element: 1' 1' 1' 1' 1' 1' ----+ +----x----+ +---- 1'| | | | +----+ +----+ Each line is one foot long and the feedpoint is at 40 ft. On 53 MHz, this two element fractal beam has a gain of 12.6 dBi at 7 deg. TOA with a F/B ratio of 18.5 dB. Looks pretty functional to me. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217803 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> <73063$433c14ac$97d56a13$3806@ALLTEL.NET> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 18:00:02 GMT Reg Edwards wrote: > The standard of discussion on Fractals on this newsgroup certainly > relegates the Fractal antenna to the place it deserves. Reg, take a look at my 2-el fractal 6m beam and tell me what's wrong with 12.6 dBi gain, TOA=7 deg, F/B=18.5 dB. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217804 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: 73 Ohms, How do you get it? References: <1127140206_12465@spool6-east.superfeed.net> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 18:04:22 GMT Reg Edwards wrote: > Cec, if you divide the well-known 377 ohms by 5.164, which is the > square-root of 26.67, you get precisely 73 ohms. But, but, but, Reg, you said the feedpoint impedance of an infinite dipole is 1200 ohms, or some such. That's very close to 377 ohms times pi. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217805 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "David G. Nagel" Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 13:07:11 -0500 Message-ID: <11jobam4aet5f5f@corp.supernews.com> References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> Dr Nancy Kohen PhD Freaktal Genius wrote: > After consultashun with my atorney, I am sooing the entire news group. You > have used the word FRACTAL (Pat. Pending) and have made nasty remarks that > hurt my feelings. > > You will all be served and my atorney says you will all be banned from news > grups as well as being enjoyined from ever speaking the word FRACTAL (Pat. > Pending). > > Govern yourselfes accordianly > > Dr Nancy Kohen PhD Fractal Genius DXCC and the insperation for the janitor > in "Contact" > > > "David G. Nagel" wrote in message > news:11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com... > >>Cecil Moore wrote: >> >>>K wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Boy, you guys are 'playing' with fire. You're gonna get the 'dragon' >>>>out of his lair yet, and that 'mess' will start all over again! har. >>> >>> >>>Heh, heh, the 'F' word on this newsgroup is "fractal". :-) >> >>Let the games begin...... > > > Hay I just said, and I quote, "Let the games begin.....". Any threats to sue will be considered meritless and a counter suit will be initiated. Article: 217806 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Win Subject: Re: Metal Roof and Vertical Antenna Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 13:09:30 -0500 Message-ID: References: <11j8isc2vp1so0f@corp.supernews.com> Years ago in Europe I installed a phased quarter wave vertical array for 20 meters on an appartment house complex metal roof pointed to the states. It was very close to 50 ohms at the feed point. The antenna worked great. The metal was actually under about an inch of roofing compound, but was well grounded. Surely, it is worth a try with the Butternut. Win, w0lz On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 11:38:03 -0700, "Rod Maupin" wrote: >I posted this on the wrong newsgroup a few days ago and no one has answered, >so I'll try here. > >I have a Butternut Vertical (as a secondary antenna) and a regular radial >system set up with it. I also have a metal roof on my house (here in the >country in Western Washington). I have been wondering if I can use the >metal roof as the radial system/ground plane for this antenna. Haven't >tried it yet. Would this work or would it detune the antenna? > >What do you guys think? > >Rod KI7CQ > Article: 217807 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Bad News for Hams? Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 18:28:42 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <88U_e.693$sL3.385@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> <%yV_e.6858$q1.5550@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> Ham radio is gradually on its way out. The authorities will not allow it to interfere with other forms of radio transmission. In any case, insofar as the authorities are concerned, ham radio is an insecure means of communication. It is difficult to intercept, monitor and control the traffic which passes over it. Even radio broadcasting is being pushed onto the Internet. It will be noticed the BBC international broadcasts are not now beamed to the USA but are advertised as being readily available to USA listeners via the Internet. The Internet is easily intercepted, monitored and controlled by the authorities. Whoever THEY may be. They who own and control the means of communication, including that via satellites, will rule the Earth. ---- Reg. Article: 217808 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: 73 Ohms, How do you get it? Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 18:41:02 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1127140206_12465@spool6-east.superfeed.net> > But, but, but, Reg, you said the feedpoint impedance of > an infinite dipole is 1200 ohms, or some such. That's > very close to 377 ohms times pi. ================================ Cec, for once, you ageed with me. But, but, but, coincidences in arithmetic are certain to occur. ---- Reg. Article: 217809 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Michael Coslo Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:45:32 -0400 Message-ID: References: <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <4drgj117hlegehk79o4q89lvuefrjfrqpg@4ax.com> Zoran Brlecic wrote: > Matt Osborn wrote: > >> You're walking on an assumption that is called gravity. Just like >> G-d, plenty of evidence but no proof. > > > What pisses me off about your posts is this almost deliberate attempt to > obfuscate by equivocating, word playing and substituting terms which are > incompatible. You keep doing it in almost every post and it gets tired > fast. > Like, for instance, in the example above: "plenty of evidence but no > proof" is meaningless drivel. Of all the scientific disciplines, only > mathematics deals with proof. Others, physics included, deal with > evidence which is derived from a direct or indirect observation of > certain phenomena and is the basis for a theory, such as the > gravitational theory, for example. > Therefore, to say that there is "no proof" for gravity is gibberish, > even in the solipsist sense. Actually, something that we call gravity undeniably exists. While our understanding of it is incomplete, there is no doubt that it exists. It is there, we see what happens if we drop someting in an area where "gravity" is strong, and in areas where it is virtually nonexistant. The "proof" if you will, is in the explanation and understanding of what we call gravity, not it's existance. Now God on the other hand, gives no real evidence at all for existence. Miracles are manifestations of chance, and many things that were once attributed to divine intervention have found ready explanations after we learn more about the universe. So the statement was incorrect in the first place. - Mike KB3EIA - Article: 217810 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Michael Coslo Subject: Re: Bad News for Hams? Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:51:00 -0400 Message-ID: References: <88U_e.693$sL3.385@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> Cecil Moore wrote: > http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050929/D8CTUA3O7.html One of the strangest things I've seen in the computer world is that now that we have all been sold on wireless, they now want us to connect to a wall outlet again! For the non-computer savvy, being disconnect from the wall is an important thing (probably is for a lot of the savvy also) - mike KB3EIA - Article: 217811 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Michael Coslo Subject: Re: Bad News for Hams? Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:52:09 -0400 Message-ID: References: <88U_e.693$sL3.385@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> <%yV_e.6858$q1.5550@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> Reg Edwards wrote: > Ham radio is gradually on its way out. The authorities will not allow > it to interfere with other forms of radio transmission. > > In any case, insofar as the authorities are concerned, ham radio is an > insecure means of communication. It is difficult to intercept, monitor > and control the traffic which passes over it. > > Even radio broadcasting is being pushed onto the Internet. It will be > noticed the BBC international broadcasts are not now beamed to the USA > but are advertised as being readily available to USA listeners via the > Internet. The Internet is easily intercepted, monitored and > controlled by the authorities. Whoever THEY may be. > > They who own and control the means of communication, including that > via satellites, will rule the Earth. Reg! So gloomy today.... - Mike KB3EIA - Article: 217812 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Michael Coslo Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 15:01:43 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> <73063$433c14ac$97d56a13$3806@ALLTEL.NET> Cecil Moore wrote: > Cecil Moore wrote: > >> Consider the turning radius for a 6m fractal >> beam Vs a full-sized one. > > > Just modeled a quickie using EZNEC. The fractal beam > has two elements with 6 ft. tip to tip spaced two > feet apart. Each element looks like this typical > fractal with the reflector slightly longer than the > driven element: > > 1' 1' 1' 1' 1' 1' > ----+ +----x----+ +---- > 1'| | | | > +----+ +----+ > > Each line is one foot long and the feedpoint is at > 40 ft. On 53 MHz, this two element fractal beam has > a gain of 12.6 dBi at 7 deg. TOA with a F/B ratio > of 18.5 dB. Looks pretty functional to me. Isn't that straining the definition of fractal a bit? Is it possible then that my latest antenna, an OCF dipole, is a fractal? _______ x ___________________ | | | | | | It has those hangy-down ends, so it sure looks a good bit like yours. I don't really consider an antenna as fractal until the wires start folding back toward the center feed in their meandering. Hey! is a folded dipole a fractal antenna? - Mike KB3EIA - Article: 217813 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:22:28 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> <73063$433c14ac$97d56a13$3806@ALLTEL.NET> > Reg, take a look at my 2-el fractal 6m beam and tell me > what's wrong with 12.6 dBi gain, TOA=7 deg, F/B=18.5 dB. > -- ================================ Cec, You know as well as I do, take-off angles are meaningless regarding who might, by some remote coincidence, be at a distance and in a direction to receive. Front-to-back ratios are equally meaningless. Nobody takes any notice of them when a slight change in frequency, a minute change in antenna dimensions, or the wind direction acting on an antenna is taken into account. Hardly parameters which can sensibly be used to compare one antenna with another. I mention this here only for the benefit of novices who may be misled by your comments. ;o) ---- Reg. Article: 217814 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> <73063$433c14ac$97d56a13$3806@ALLTEL.NET> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:26:35 GMT Michael Coslo wrote: > Isn't that straining the definition of fractal a bit? Nope, that's a well known fractal pattern. It even has a name within the fractal community but it slips my mind at the moment. It might be a Koch or Hilbert pattern, I forget. I haven't looked at this stuff in a coon's age. ----+ +----x | | +----+ That's a first level iteration pattern. The second level iteration would replace each of those one foot lines with the same overall pattern as above - something like: ----+ +----+ +----+ +----x | | | | | | +----+ +----+ +----+ +----+ | | +----+ +----+ | | +----+ +----+ | | +----+ There were five wires in the first level iteration. Each of those five wires is replaced with the original basic pattern. Do you see five repeats of the original pattern in the above? -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217815 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Pat Stevens" References: <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <4drgj117hlegehk79o4q89lvuefrjfrqpg@4ax.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:33:06 GMT Why is it you guys insist on continuing this conversation? Take it to e-mail or take it to a newsgroup where it would be not off-topic. "Michael Coslo" wrote in message news:dhhcoc$1fj0$1@f04n12.cac.psu.edu... > > Actually, something that we call gravity undeniably exists. While our > understanding of it is incomplete, there is no doubt that it exists. It is > there, we see what happens if we drop someting in an area where "gravity" > is strong, and in areas where it is virtually nonexistant. > > The "proof" if you will, is in the explanation and understanding of what > we call gravity, not it's existance. > > Now God on the other hand, gives no real evidence at all for existence. > Miracles are manifestations of chance, and many things that were once > attributed to divine intervention have found ready explanations after we > learn more about the universe. > > So the statement was incorrect in the first place. > > - Mike KB3EIA - > Article: 217816 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> <73063$433c14ac$97d56a13$3806@ALLTEL.NET> Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 15:43:44 -0400 Message-ID: Is that you Phil? "Cecil Moore" wrote in message news:bWV_e.1535$Fi3.341@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net... > Cecil Moore wrote: > > Consider the turning radius for a 6m fractal > > beam Vs a full-sized one. > > Just modeled a quickie using EZNEC. The fractal beam > has two elements with 6 ft. tip to tip spaced two > feet apart. Each element looks like this typical > fractal with the reflector slightly longer than the > driven element: > > 1' 1' 1' 1' 1' 1' > ----+ +----x----+ +---- > 1'| | | | > +----+ +----+ > > Each line is one foot long and the feedpoint is at > 40 ft. On 53 MHz, this two element fractal beam has > a gain of 12.6 dBi at 7 deg. TOA with a F/B ratio > of 18.5 dB. Looks pretty functional to me. > -- > 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217817 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison) Subject: Re: 73 Ohms, How do you get it? Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:40:33 -0500 Message-ID: <13320-433C4331-78@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net> References: <5MOAq4S9pIKDFwB+@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> Ian Jackson wrote: "What is the impedance at the centre of an infinitely long dipole in free space? It is the antenna`s Zo. This depends on the size of the conductor used to make the dipoole. Arnold B. Bailey has already worked all this out and presents it in his 1950 edition from Rider`s of "TV and Other Receiving Antennas". Like the Zo of a transmission line, antenna Zo has nothing to do with reflections and terminations. When you first apply power, energy must flow into the antenna at some definite voltage to current ratio. This is the surge impedance or Zo. If the antenna or line is uniform and infinitely long, the energy sent away is never heard from again. Zo is the only impedance anywhere. Page 345 gives the surge impedance in ohms for a balanced antenna as: Zo = 276 log 1/P P is the circumference of the antenna rod, or periphery, expressed as a fraction of the free-space wavelength (see page 342) This may sound goofy but Bailey has his reasons. Bailey`s graph on page 345 gives dipole impedances from 70 ohms to 680 ohms for rod peripheries from 1 wavelength down to 0.00001 wavelength If you have no reflections or standing waves, the impedance you calculate should be the Zo. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Article: 217818 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> <73063$433c14ac$97d56a13$3806@ALLTEL.NET> Message-ID: <5NX_e.1591$Fi3.75@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 20:04:17 GMT Fred W4JLE wrote: > Is that you Phil? :-) I actually attended a meeting with the Fractenna folk at Intel back in the 90's and did some experiments with small fractal antennas inside an anechoic chamber. -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217819 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> <73063$433c14ac$97d56a13$3806@ALLTEL.NET> <5NX_e.1591$Fi3.75@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 16:23:43 -0400 Message-ID: Like the old joke about the goat, I don't think I would have told that! "Cecil Moore" wrote in message news:5NX_e.1591$Fi3.75@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net... > Fred W4JLE wrote: > > Is that you Phil? > > :-) I actually attended a meeting with the Fractenna > folk at Intel back in the 90's and did some experiments > with small fractal antennas inside an anechoic chamber. > -- > 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217820 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: 73 Ohms, How do you get it? References: <5MOAq4S9pIKDFwB+@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> <13320-433C4331-78@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net> Message-ID: <8dY_e.1601$Fi3.1037@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 20:34:12 GMT Richard Harrison wrote: > Page 345 gives the surge impedance in ohms for a balanced antenna as: > > Zo = 276 log 1/P > > Bailey`s graph on page 345 gives dipole impedances from 70 ohms to 680 > ohms for rod peripheries from 1 wavelength down to 0.00001 wavelength Is the graph impedance looking into 1/2 of the dipole? 276 log 1/0.00001 = 1380 ohms, just about double the 680 ohm value. -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217821 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Explain Balun References: Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 20:39:11 GMT Jennie wrote: > Would someone be kind enough to explain a balun both voltage and current? http://www.w2du.com/r2ch21.pdf http://eznec.com/misc/ibalun.txt -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217822 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Explain Balun References: Message-ID: <_yY_e.1606$Fi3.1408@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 20:57:30 GMT Jennie wrote: > Would someone be kind enough to explain a balun both voltage and current? Also http://www.eznec.com/Amateur/Articles/Baluns.pdf -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217823 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Asimov" Subject: Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why? Message-ID: References: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 21:11:04 GMT "Cecil Moore" bravely wrote to "All" (29 Sep 05 06:56:26) --- on the heady topic of "Re: UWB pulse signal has no DC? Why?" CM> From: Cecil Moore CM> Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217576 CM> Richard Clark wrote: > On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 03:26:28 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >>Your flashlight is NOT generating DC coherent photons. > > Mine does. Like I said, yours probably needs batteries, or perhaps it > is suffering a dimbulb behind the on/off switch. CM> Assuming your flashlight does generate photons with a frequency CM> of zero Hz, how do you detect them? With a field mill or a moving coil of wire? A*s*i*m*o*v ... I installed a sky-light; now the folks above me are mad! From Sat Oct 1 13:29:29 EDT 2005 Article: 217824 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 17:01:07 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <4drgj117hlegehk79o4q89lvuefrjfrqpg@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 52 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!tethys.csu.net!nntp.csufresno.edu!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-12!sn-xit-09!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22892 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217824 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29594 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208765 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251265 On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:45:32 -0400, Michael Coslo wrote: > > >Zoran Brlecic wrote: > >> Matt Osborn wrote: >> >>> You're walking on an assumption that is called gravity. Just like >>> G-d, plenty of evidence but no proof. >> >> >> What pisses me off about your posts is this almost deliberate attempt to >> obfuscate by equivocating, word playing and substituting terms which are >> incompatible. You keep doing it in almost every post and it gets tired >> fast. >> Like, for instance, in the example above: "plenty of evidence but no >> proof" is meaningless drivel. Of all the scientific disciplines, only >> mathematics deals with proof. Others, physics included, deal with >> evidence which is derived from a direct or indirect observation of >> certain phenomena and is the basis for a theory, such as the >> gravitational theory, for example. >> Therefore, to say that there is "no proof" for gravity is gibberish, >> even in the solipsist sense. > > > Actually, something that we call gravity undeniably exists. While our >understanding of it is incomplete, there is no doubt that it exists. It >is there, we see what happens if we drop someting in an area where >"gravity" is strong, and in areas where it is virtually nonexistant. > > The "proof" if you will, is in the explanation and understanding of >what we call gravity, not it's existance. > > Now God on the other hand, gives no real evidence at all for existence. >Miracles are manifestations of chance, and many things that were once >attributed to divine intervention have found ready explanations after we >learn more about the universe. > > So the statement was incorrect in the first place. > > - Mike KB3EIA - I'm afraid you're still working with assumptions. You believe your assumptions of gravity are accurate, but for all we know they may be entirely incorrect. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com From Sat Oct 1 13:29:29 EDT 2005 Article: 217825 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 18:14:57 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <4drgj117hlegehk79o4q89lvuefrjfrqpg@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 105 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!216.168.1.162.MISMATCH!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-12!sn-xit-09!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22893 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217825 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29595 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208767 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251266 On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 01:16:51 -0700, Zoran Brlecic <...WA7AA...@get.lost> wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: > >> You're walking on an assumption that is called gravity. Just like >> G-d, plenty of evidence but no proof. > >What pisses me off about your posts is this almost deliberate attempt to >obfuscate by equivocating, word playing and substituting terms which are >incompatible. You keep doing it in almost every post and it gets tired fast. >Like, for instance, in the example above: "plenty of evidence but no >proof" is meaningless drivel. Of all the scientific disciplines, only >mathematics deals with proof. Others, physics included, deal with >evidence which is derived from a direct or indirect observation of >certain phenomena and is the basis for a theory, such as the >gravitational theory, for example. >Therefore, to say that there is "no proof" for gravity is gibberish, >even in the solipsist sense. > > >73 .... WA7AA > > >P.S. I am dying to hear some "evidence" of what you call "G-d". I am >sure the Nobel committee would be interested as well. You may not like have your faith pointed out to you, but there it is. All you can say about gravity is that "It is as if...". That's it, you can say no more than that. You expect that your 'facts' be taken at face value. I reject your facts as they are merely one of an infinite number of other possible interpretations of our observations. I'm not a proponent of G-d, so you're asking of me something that I don't have. I'll borrow a little something from Spinoza. I live in Minneapolis, Minneapolis is contained by Minnesota, Minnesota is contained by the USA, the USA is contained by the Northern Hemisphere, the Northern Hemisphere is contained by the planet Earth, the planet Earth is contained by the solar system, the solar system is contained by the Milky Way Galaxy, the Galaxy is contained by the Universe, the Universe is contained by what? I don't know. We can take this the other way. I am made up of chemicals and water, which consist of molecules which are made up of atoms which consist of sub-atomic particles, which are made up of what? Again I don't know. Spinoza has a bit of a tautology that basically says that the way perceive the world is limited by the way we can perceive the world. We don't have one-ended sticks for instance, because we couldn't comprehend the concept. He goes on to argue that the faculties with which perceive, our 5 (or possibly 6) senses are only a few of the infinite variety of senses possible. We cannot understand those that we lack, just as a person blind from birth cannot conceive of the color blue. But Spinoza, points out, we do have senses whether or not we understand them correctly (just as with your gravity). We do exist whether or not we understand our existence correctly, and the universe within which we live our lives whether or not we understand it correctly. Spinoza's final point is that while we cannot understand even the most mundane of things with certainty, we can be certain that those senses with which we perceive exist despite out ability to know them as do the things which they perceive. Given all that, Spinoza proposes that we find ourselves, we know not where, on scale that measures infinitely. So where do we exist? Are we on the small end of the scale of things, someone else's sub-atomic particles if you will, or are we on the larger end of things where our sub-atomic particles are made up of sentient beings much the same as we? What is it that an atheist would like to declare about such a system? That it doesn't exist? That there are no rules being followed? That there is no point to the system? Those who are not atheists make no such presumptions. Most conclude, wisely in my opinion, that our experience should be our guide. That if we don't eat we starve, that if we jump off to high a platform we die, that if we stay under water too long we drown. That there are rules that we disobey at our own peril. The above are the simple rules, those that are readily perceived and accepted by most. They were not, however, always so well known or so well understood, like hygiene for instance. So in what context do we contain poorly understood rules and perceptions? How do we speak of them? We could always resort to obtuse phrases such as 'that which cannot be contained', or 'that which is smaller than smallest small' or 'that which is larger than largest large'. Mankind has historically ascribed the above to G-d. Just as with science, our understanding of G-d has changed over the millennia. and I would expect it to continue to change. That anyone could declare that G-d does not exist would be the same as declaring that gravity does not exist. A particular interpretation of either may, eventually, be proven to be right or wrong, but to declare that there is no such thing seems absurd. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217826 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kashe@sonic.net Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: References: <5nolj1h16e03suln9o3jmsf3irv2eta2l5@4ax.com> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 23:26:21 GMT On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 14:44:28 -0400, Uncle Ted wrote: >On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 11:48:15 -0400, Michael Coslo > wrote: > > >> Absolutely. I don't support money going to rebuilding NO in it's >>present spot. >> >> The French Quarter is okay where it is. It will eventually become an >>island, and should last for quite a while yet. Seems like a charming way >>to get to Mardi Gras - by a boat. >> >> But no matter how much money we pour into th erest of NO, it will sink. >>I suppose that we could try a Netherlands type approach, with huge >>dikes and all, but I doubt that there is enough room on the sides to do >>that, and besides, the Netherlands doesn't have to worry about >>hurricanes either. >> >> - Mike KB3EIA - > >I wonder why they don't rebuild New Orleans the way they built Venice, >Italy. Venice was built by people who were trying to get away from >Attila the Hun. Attila wanted farmland, so the nomads of that area >fled and settled in what was a swamp, and they built a city on a >swamp. > >(Of course, the first one sank into the swamp, so they built a second >one. THAT one sank into the swamp, so they built a third one. THAT one >burned down, fell over, and then sank into the swamp...but the fourth >one stayed up!) > >Seriously, though, New Orleans as a city of canals has a certain >romantic flair to it. I'm not hearing any interest in turning streets near me into canals. Article: 217827 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kashe@sonic.net Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: References: <1127958744.838040.32970@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 23:35:09 GMT On 28 Sep 2005 18:52:24 -0700, N2EY@AOL.COM wrote: > >Michael Coslo wrote: >> Cecil Moore wrote: >> >> > Matt Osborn wrote: >> > >> >> Maybe we should rebuild New Orleans in England, it would balance the >> >> scales. >> > >> > >> > We indeed should rebuild New Orleans somewhere that is >> > not below sea level. > >How about Death Valley? How much of Death Valley is not below sea level? From http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2000/MichaelLevin.shtml The hottest temperature on Earth ever recorded most likely occurred in Death Valley, California during 43 consecutive days between July 6 and August 17, 1917. During those days, the temperature was over 48 degrees Celsius (120 degrees Fahrenheit). The national weather service recorded 56.7 °C (134 °F). The date reported there was July 10, 1913. The elevation in the lowest point is 86 meters below sea level. >> >> Absolutely. I don't support money going to rebuilding NO > in it's >> present spot. > >I agree 100%. But you watch, the money will be poured into it just like >the water. >> >> The French Quarter is okay where it is. It will >> eventually become an >> island, and should last for quite a while yet. >> Seems like a charming way >> to get to Mardi Gras - by a boat. >> >> But no matter how much money we pour into th erest of >> NO, it will sink. >> I suppose that we could try a Netherlands type approach, >> with huge >> dikes and all, but I doubt that there is enough room on the >> sides to do >> that, and besides, the Netherlands doesn't have to worry about >> hurricanes either. > >The levees are dikes, aren't they? > >There are some important other differences. > >It's my understanding that the Dutch built their dikes and filled >in/pumped out the polders as a way of getting more farmland without >fighting wars with their neighbors, and as a way of *reducing* storm >damage. They don't build cities on below-sea-level land. And the way >they deal with the reclaimed land results in it slowly but surely >rising, not sinking. > >But they don't put cities there. Article: 217828 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: 73 Ohms, How do you get it? Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 23:34:33 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <5MOAq4S9pIKDFwB+@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> <13320-433C4331-78@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net> The impedance looking into the feedpoint of an infinite dipole is TWICE Zo. Zo + Zo = 2*Zo. The formula for Zo doesn't seem right. When the circumference of the antenna rod is one wavelength, Zo = 0. And when the circumference is greater than one wavelength, Zo becomes negative. For an 18 gauge wire, at a frequency of 183 GHz, something funny happens. ---- Reg. Article: 217829 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kashe@sonic.net Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: References: <43109$43317117$97d56a13$4287@ALLTEL.NET> <52n6j1ltspei2qc17vnhelkaccvsvuolfr@4ax.com> <4334478c$0$9217@dingus.crosslink.net> <9jphj11p35trkou22sha53f27rkclo0sru@4ax.com> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 23:42:08 GMT On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 01:05:30 -0700, Zoran Brlecic <...WA7AA...@get.lost> wrote: >kashe@sonic.net wrote: > > >>>>Not to mention Hitler. >>> >>>And we have a Godwin, all... >> >> >> Dumb shit -- the reference is apropos in the midst of a >> discussion of mass murderers. You lose. > >Discussion of mass murderers who were allegedly atheists. Reductio ad >Hitlerum. Nice -- make it up as you go to support your own childishness fantasies. Godwin, etc. is a cute little piece of usenet lore, with no bearing on the acual discipline of logic. Correct comparisons are another matter entirely, dipshit. > >And also Guy's corollary, asshole. > >>>Btw, Hitler, if you must bring him up, was a Christian. Well, at least you finally got the point. Article: 217830 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kashe@sonic.net Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: References: <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <85tbj1hk1oi2gsp5e8dcp82gjpqrisfsfd@4ax.com> <9ZOdndbRttI2zKreRVn-sQ@adelphia.com> <1127810010.581113.28990@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 23:45:59 GMT On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 09:03:11 -0400, Michael Coslo wrote: >N2EY@AOL.COM wrote: >> Mike Coslo wrote: >> >> >>>>"Pardon me while I slip out of these wet clothes >>>>and into a dry >>>>martini." - Groucho (or was it Bugs Bunny?) >> >> >> I think it was Groucho >> >>> What happened to all the old Bugs Bunny cartoons anyway? >>> >> >> Warner Bros. has them safely tucked away. Some that were made in the >> 1940s are not shown anymore because they contain parodies and >> stereotypes now considered racist. >> >> -- >> >> I think you were asking about Foghorn Leghorn... >> >> "Nice girl, but about as sharp as a sack o' wet mice" >> >> "DAWG! I say, dawg, you look like two miles o' bad road!" >> >> "That widder hen reminds me of the road from Fort Worth to Dallas - no >> curves" >> >> "No, I better not look - I just might be in there" >> >> "That dawg reminds me of Paul Revere's ride - a little light in the >> belfry.." > > Son, I SAY, Son! I ain't no chicken! Now that over there, THAT's a >chicken!......... > > > Actually, Ol' Foghorn is probably not the problem. There are a number >of old WB cartoons that have some rather strong stereotype of the folks >we were fighting during WWII (the big one) Considering that they are now >our allies, there might be a little sensitivity thing going on. > > Personally, I think they should be shown, especially when introduced in >the proper context. They are of historical value, and in the context of >the times, were understandable. > > Oh - and they were darn funny too! > > - Mike KB3EIA - Anyone recently seen an old (40s or so) copy of the Stephen Foster Songbook? Nearly every facing page with a sketch of happy, carefree, little darkies, havin' a wunnerful time, singin', dancin' and playin' their fiddles. Article: 217831 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kashe@sonic.net Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: References: <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <85tbj1hk1oi2gsp5e8dcp82gjpqrisfsfd@4ax.com> <9ZOdndbRttI2zKreRVn-sQ@adelphia.com> <1127810010.581113.28990@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <433A95E1.9E558364@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 23:48:32 GMT On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 13:21:15 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards" wrote: >> > Personally, I think they should be shown, especially when >introduced in >> > the proper context. They are of historical value, and in the >context of >> > the times, were understandable. >> > >================================== > >Censorship appears to be in action. > >Who is the censor? > >================================== > Showing something in its historical context is not censorship. Would you set up an exhibit of historical KKK robes on your front porch without an explanation? Article: 217832 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kashe@sonic.net Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: <5fvoj1hrhntk8at0od8pqjm03kap1lkse9@4ax.com> References: <4drgj117hlegehk79o4q89lvuefrjfrqpg@4ax.com> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 23:51:48 GMT We're trying to embarrass your delete key into admitting it's impotent. On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:33:06 GMT, "Pat Stevens" wrote: > Why is it you guys insist on continuing this conversation? Take it to >e-mail or take it to a newsgroup where it would be not off-topic. > >"Michael Coslo" wrote in message >news:dhhcoc$1fj0$1@f04n12.cac.psu.edu... >> >> Actually, something that we call gravity undeniably exists. While our >> understanding of it is incomplete, there is no doubt that it exists. It is >> there, we see what happens if we drop someting in an area where "gravity" >> is strong, and in areas where it is virtually nonexistant. >> >> The "proof" if you will, is in the explanation and understanding of what >> we call gravity, not it's existance. >> >> Now God on the other hand, gives no real evidence at all for existence. >> Miracles are manifestations of chance, and many things that were once >> attributed to divine intervention have found ready explanations after we >> learn more about the universe. >> >> So the statement was incorrect in the first place. >> >> - Mike KB3EIA - >> > Article: 217833 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 18:51:54 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <43336e29$0$22206$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <43336f99$0$32203$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <4drgj117hlegehk79o4q89lvuefrjfrqpg@4ax.com> Message-ID: <433c7e1a$0$3767$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Pat Stevens wrote: > Why is it you guys insist on continuing this conversation? Take it to > e-mail or take it to a newsgroup where it would be not off-topic. > > "Michael Coslo" wrote in message > news:dhhcoc$1fj0$1@f04n12.cac.psu.edu... > Why not just click your "Ignore Thread" button? tom K0TAR Article: 217834 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: David Subject: Source of SO-239 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 23:55:25 GMT Does anyone know where I could find a source of 3/8 to SO-239 mount (SO-239 female socket on one side and 3/8 threaded stud on other side connected to centre pin). Prefer Australian source if you know of one otherwise anywhere I can purchase in bulk at wholesale. Thanks in advance Regards David Article: 217835 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kashe@sonic.net Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: References: <1126821476.840433.194860@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <5ujsi196c3dl0l0a7su4uqltnt4u0ql4ko@4ax.com> <3f84j1t6o536tgnekhutv1ruepdo5d5ggs@4ax.com> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 23:56:14 GMT On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 00:40:50 -0400, Uncle Ted wrote: >On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 23:52:00 GMT, kashe@sonic.net wrote: > > >>>>>>>Pope worshipers and Mohamahdists are all the same to me... >>>>>> >>>>>> That says more about you than about them. >>>>> >>>>>Such as? >>>> >>>> If you have to ask .... >>> >>>Ambiguity will get you nowhere. >> >> If that's ambiguous, you should get back whatever money you >>wasted on an education. > >YOU are the one that wants to play games and won't answer my question. >You also wait several days before posting any response, which leads me >to believe that you have to wait until mommy and daddy are out of the >house before you can get on the computer. Mommy and Daddy have been dead since 95 and 61, respectively. If you think you're important enough that I should leap to the keyboard daily, you're sadly mistaken. I may only look in once a week. Live with it. So, you're not only full of shit on both counts, you're also wrong. And just how hollow is your life that you have to track my posting delays? Get a hobby. Article: 217836 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: kashe@sonic.net Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: <8rvoj19bp6umuvfefeo6v87enpmg18pd8m@4ax.com> References: <31f74$43299abf$471c63c6$12083@ALLTEL.NET> <1127271443.195835.320110@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43313df9$0$253$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <4338A687.8D5B94DF@earthlink.net> <4338D057.B9B48493@earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 00:08:41 GMT On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 02:54:34 GMT, "Tom Donaly" wrote: >kashe@sonic.net wrote: >>>Tom Donaly wrote: >>> >>>>Faith and works are, like voltage and current, inextricably intertwined. >> >> >> They are not. >> >> >>>>The proof of faith is the good work. Those who do no good have no faith. >> >> >> Your logic book get lost in the hurricane? Come back when you >> can name the logical fallacy you just committed. > >Some of the lower forms of American Christianity try to separate faith >and works. That allows them salvation without substance, the lazy man's >path to life without end. in your narrow view. > My last two sentences are statements of truth "I fear the man who has all the answers." -- Father James Marien, S.J. -- 1961 -- in my presence. >, not a logical >progression. As written, they beg to be read as an incomplete syllogism. >Each has to be taken alone, by itself. (A religious >fundamentalist insisting on logical consistency constitutes a >pretty good joke.) Let me repeat: Those who do no good have no >faith. Repitition does not include leaving off the first half of the line you wrote. In a humorous logic treatise, your statement would be named "The Proof from Blatant Assertion". > Next time you and your friends are sitting around speaking >in tongues, you should discuss this. Maybe, if you all think real >hard, together, you can puzzle out what it means. >73, >Tom Donaly, KA6RUH Article: 217837 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Buther Boy Subject: Miracle Whip Antenna Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:17:31 -0500 Message-ID: <3v0pj1h66mvi1c2unrrhc43t9eadjcuthj@4ax.com> Hi, just ordered this awesome antenna. Anyone have any experiences they'd like to share regarding its use? Buther Boy -- Remove the word Spam from my e-mail to contact me... http://www.PrivacySig.com/SIGbutherboySpam-gmail-black.png ~ Article: 217838 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Bob Miller Subject: Re: Bad News for Hams? Message-ID: References: <88U_e.693$sL3.385@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 00:52:27 GMT On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 15:55:48 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050929/D8CTUA3O7.html Little confusing -- the story doesn't explain how the signal gets to the house -- via power lines, cable, phone, wireless? Regardless, guess the house would be a buzz bomb of hash. bob k5qwg From Sat Oct 1 13:29:32 EDT 2005 Article: 217839 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:57:13 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <4drgj117hlegehk79o4q89lvuefrjfrqpg@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 40 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.news.ucla.edu!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22903 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217839 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29606 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208778 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251278 On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 17:10:52 -0700, Richard Clark wrote: >On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 18:14:57 -0500, Matt Osborn <> wrote: > >>So in what context do we contain poorly understood rules and >>perceptions? How do we speak of them? We could always resort to >>obtuse phrases such as 'that which cannot be contained', or 'that >>which is smaller than smallest small' or 'that which is larger than >>largest large'. >> >>Mankind has historically ascribed the above to G-d. > >This is called Nihilism - but with your bets hedged in case you are >wrong (which, of course, is Narcissistic, an amusing contradiction). > >73's >Richard Clark, KB7QHC Hi Richard, Not even close. From my limited study, this seems to be the seed from which psychology and psychiatry arose. >From the OED: Nihilism 1. Negative doctrines in religion or morals; total rejection of current religious beliefs or moral principles. 2. An extreme form of scepticism, involving the denial of all existence. 3. Nothingness, non-existence. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217840 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John - KD5YI Subject: OT: Reconcile Qs using SPICE Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 01:23:47 GMT Forgive the OT posting, but I know a lot of RF experts hang out here. I am trying to learn about Q. I know there is a difference in component Q and circuit Q. To study this thing, I am using SPICE so that I will have no instrument loading to affect my setup. I can make things as perfect as I wish, almost. My problem is that I cannot reconcile the two ways of obtaining Q: 1. Q = X/R (reactance divided by resistance) 2. Q = Fo/BW (resonant frequency divided by bandwidth) In spice, I have a 1V source, one end connected to ground and the other end applied to a series string composed of L = 24.833 mH, 458 ohms, and 102 pF and then to ground. Essentially, I have a series circuit consisting of a source, inductor, resistor, and capacitor. The resonant frequency should be 100 kHz. Using SPICE, I examine the current in the loop. I find that the current 6dB down points are about +/- 2.5 kHz away from 100 kHz. This is a Q of about 20. But, the reactance is about 15.6 kohms and the resistance is 458 ohms, so the calculated Q is about 34. Can someone explain where I'm going wrong here? Thanks. John - KD5YI Article: 217841 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Miracle Whip Antenna Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 01:22:14 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <3v0pj1h66mvi1c2unrrhc43t9eadjcuthj@4ax.com> > Hi, just ordered this awesome antenna. Anyone have any experiences > they'd like to share regarding its use? > ================================ Don't you think you should have asked for opinions BEFORE ordering a miracle? Article: 217842 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Jack" References: <3v0pj1h66mvi1c2unrrhc43t9eadjcuthj@4ax.com> Subject: Re: Miracle Whip Antenna Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 21:33:32 -0400 Message-ID: I bought one last year....Sent it back 2 days later It sucked swampwater! Wasnt worth the price of a postage stamp! Jack "Reg Edwards" wrote in message news:dhi406$luq$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... > > Hi, just ordered this awesome antenna. Anyone have any experiences > > they'd like to share regarding its use? > > > ================================ > > Don't you think you should have asked for opinions BEFORE ordering a > miracle? > > Article: 217843 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John - KD5YI Subject: Re: Bad News for Hams? References: <88U_e.693$sL3.385@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> <%yV_e.6858$q1.5550@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 01:57:56 GMT Reg Edwards wrote: > Ham radio is gradually on its way out. The authorities will not allow > it to interfere with other forms of radio transmission. > > In any case, insofar as the authorities are concerned, ham radio is an > insecure means of communication. It is difficult to intercept, monitor > and control the traffic which passes over it. > > Even radio broadcasting is being pushed onto the Internet. It will be > noticed the BBC international broadcasts are not now beamed to the USA > but are advertised as being readily available to USA listeners via the > Internet. The Internet is easily intercepted, monitored and > controlled by the authorities. Whoever THEY may be. > > They who own and control the means of communication, including that > via satellites, will rule the Earth. > ---- > Reg. When I learned that the BBC wasn't available on shortwave, I made no effort to listen to it on the Internet. The magic was gone. I could no longer take my battery-powered HF radio out in the country or in my car (no, I don't have satellite radio) and listen to BBC. The programming was fantastic. What a loss. There goes another thing I really enjoyed. John Article: 217844 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Gene Fuller Subject: Re: OT: Reconcile Qs using SPICE References: Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 02:06:37 GMT John, It is customary to use 3 dB points for defining the bandwidth when considering resonance phenomena and Q. If you do so, I believe you will find your numbers match more closely. 73, Gene W4SZ John - KD5YI wrote: > Forgive the OT posting, but I know a lot of RF experts hang out here. > > I am trying to learn about Q. I know there is a difference in component > Q and circuit Q. To study this thing, I am using SPICE so that I will > have no instrument loading to affect my setup. I can make things as > perfect as I wish, almost. > > My problem is that I cannot reconcile the two ways of obtaining Q: > > 1. Q = X/R (reactance divided by resistance) > 2. Q = Fo/BW (resonant frequency divided by bandwidth) > > In spice, I have a 1V source, one end connected to ground and the other > end applied to a series string composed of L = 24.833 mH, 458 ohms, and > 102 pF and then to ground. Essentially, I have a series circuit > consisting of a source, inductor, resistor, and capacitor. The resonant > frequency should be 100 kHz. > > Using SPICE, I examine the current in the loop. I find that the current > 6dB down points are about +/- 2.5 kHz away from 100 kHz. This is a Q of > about 20. > > But, the reactance is about 15.6 kohms and the resistance is 458 ohms, > so the calculated Q is about 34. > > Can someone explain where I'm going wrong here? > > Thanks. > > John - KD5YI Article: 217845 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John - KD5YI Subject: Re: OT: Reconcile Qs using SPICE References: Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 02:57:52 GMT Gene Fuller wrote: > John, > > It is customary to use 3 dB points for defining the bandwidth when > considering resonance phenomena and Q. If you do so, I believe you will > find your numbers match more closely. > > 73, > Gene > W4SZ \ Thanks, Gene. Then my misunderstanding is with Decibels (or SPICE) instead of Q. You are correct that, if I check the bandwidth between the 3dB *current* points, the numbers come out about right. However, I thought 3dB was a power thing and 6dB was a current (or voltage) thing. In any case, if I use the 3dB down points of either voltage or current, it works out as calculated. So I checked the current at the 3dB points and that put the Q very close to the X/R point. Thanks for your help. John > > John - KD5YI wrote: > >> Forgive the OT posting, but I know a lot of RF experts hang out here. >> >> I am trying to learn about Q. I know there is a difference in >> component Q and circuit Q. To study this thing, I am using SPICE so >> that I will have no instrument loading to affect my setup. I can make >> things as perfect as I wish, almost. >> >> My problem is that I cannot reconcile the two ways of obtaining Q: >> >> 1. Q = X/R (reactance divided by resistance) >> 2. Q = Fo/BW (resonant frequency divided by bandwidth) >> >> In spice, I have a 1V source, one end connected to ground and the >> other end applied to a series string composed of L = 24.833 mH, 458 >> ohms, and 102 pF and then to ground. Essentially, I have a series >> circuit consisting of a source, inductor, resistor, and capacitor. The >> resonant frequency should be 100 kHz. >> >> Using SPICE, I examine the current in the loop. I find that the >> current 6dB down points are about +/- 2.5 kHz away from 100 kHz. This >> is a Q of about 20. >> >> But, the reactance is about 15.6 kohms and the resistance is 458 ohms, >> so the calculated Q is about 34. >> >> Can someone explain where I'm going wrong here? >> >> Thanks. >> >> John - KD5YI From Sat Oct 1 13:29:33 EDT 2005 Article: 217846 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 21:58:14 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <4drgj117hlegehk79o4q89lvuefrjfrqpg@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 39 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!news.glorb.com!newscon02.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!216.168.1.162.MISMATCH!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-01!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22905 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217846 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29608 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208781 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251279 On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 18:56:14 -0700, Richard Clark wrote: >On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:57:13 -0500, Matt Osborn <> wrote: > >>Not even close. From my limited study, this seems to be the seed from >>which psychology and psychiatry arose. >> >>From the OED: > >The OED is fine if you include the historical tag citations, >contemporary dictionaries (unless you are arguing from the perspective >of a 19th century monk) allow: > > 1. An extreme form of skepticism that denies all existence. > 2. A doctrine holding that all values are baseless and that nothing >can be known or communicated. > >>>>So in what context do we contain poorly understood rules and >>>>perceptions? How do we speak of them? >fits perfectly fine in the second context and dovetails with your >rather amorphous logic. In fact, this second usage is almost your >manifesto here - with the aforementioned insurance policy against >damnation. My post confirmed the extensive existence of the universe both large and small. It also pointed to the limited tools at our disposal to analyze and understand that immense world. There was no denial of anything in the post, let alone denial of existence itself. In fact, the little of that post yet remaining laments of how little of that world we understand and how difficult it is for us to speak of it. How could you possibly read the denial of existence itself? -- msosborn at msosborn dot com From Sat Oct 1 13:29:34 EDT 2005 Article: 217847 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 22:03:41 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <1fapj15ak7m141v59cujnf0sj21tid6c2t@4ax.com> References: <4drgj117hlegehk79o4q89lvuefrjfrqpg@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 15 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22906 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217847 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29609 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208782 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251280 On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 02:23:51 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: >> You may not like have your faith pointed out to you, but there it is. >> All you can say about gravity is that "It is as if...". > >Heh, heh, I now understand. You equate faith to ignorance. >I couldn't have said it better myself. Ignorance is curable; faith helps us bridge the gap. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217848 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: UWB Antennas, why these shapes? Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 03:28:25 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1128006269.858078.317850@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Richard, Everybody says that thickening the antenna conductor increases the bandwidth. And indeed it does. But nobody ever says by how much the bandwidth is increased. I think this is because bandwidth is increased by such a small proportion that it's not worth the trouble and expense of erecting another antenna. Otherwise everybody would have giant, unsightly, neighbor-offending, cages in their back yards. But they don't. I have a program, DIPCAGE2, which calculates the increase in bandwith due to increase in dipole diameter which demonstrates this disappointing point. I would like confirmation that my calculations are correct. Do you have, or know of, any reliable measurements of bandwidth versus dipole conductor diameter. One serious, accurate example might be good enough. These days I don't have the facilities to make measurements myself. It doesn't matter how bandwidth is defined but I am not happy with the usual 'SWR/bandwidth' definition because of unreliability of SWR meters plus the misplaced confidence in them. In practice, accurate knowledge of antenna bandwidth is not of great use since the system operating bandwidth is affected by the transmission line and matching network, if there is one. I don't know why I'm bothered about it! But I WOULD like to see an appropriate degree of importance attached to the subject on these walls. ---- Reggie, G4FGQ. From Sat Oct 1 13:29:34 EDT 2005 Article: 217849 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 23:16:50 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> References: <4drgj117hlegehk79o4q89lvuefrjfrqpg@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 43 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!wn12feed!worldnet.att.net!207.115.63.142!newscon02.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!newsfeed.icl.net!proxad.net!freenix!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-12!sn-xit-06!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22908 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217849 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29611 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208783 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251282 On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 20:49:53 -0700, Richard Clark wrote: >On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 21:58:14 -0500, Matt Osborn <> wrote: > >>> 2. A doctrine holding that all values are baseless and that nothing >>>can be known or communicated. >does not proceed towards: >>How could you possibly read the denial of existence itself? >but in fact stems from >>>>>>So in what context do we contain poorly understood rules and >>>>>>perceptions? How do we speak of them? >which is nihilistic. The confusion is yours, explicitly admitted to, >and it is evidenced in many of your statements. As such, the >consistency speaks for itself and mocks these attempts at denial. > Well, with your editing, I suppose you could strain credulity and make such a claim. "... Most conclude, wisely in my opinion, that our experience should be our guide. That if we don't eat we starve, that if we jump off to high a platform we die, that if we stay under water too long we drown. That there are rules that we disobey at our own peril. The above are the simple rules, those that are readily perceived and accepted by most. They were not, however, always so well known or so well understood, like hygiene for instance. So in what context do we contain poorly understood rules and perceptions? How do we speak of them? We could always resort to obtuse phrases such as 'that which cannot be contained', or 'that which is smaller than smallest small' or 'that which is larger than largest large'." I was clearly addressing the introduction of new ideas (as opposed to well known ideas) and pointing out that it's difficult to discuss things we are just starting to perceive. Your insistance upon putting words in my mouth is amazing. If you don't understand, say so. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217850 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Uncle Ted Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 00:22:56 -0400 Message-ID: References: <5ujsi196c3dl0l0a7su4uqltnt4u0ql4ko@4ax.com> <3f84j1t6o536tgnekhutv1ruepdo5d5ggs@4ax.com> On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 23:56:14 GMT, kashe@sonic.net wrote: > Mommy and Daddy have been dead since 95 and 61, respectively. > > If you think you're important enough that I should leap to the >keyboard daily, you're sadly mistaken. I may only look in once a week. >Live with it. > > So, you're not only full of shit on both counts, you're also >wrong. > > And just how hollow is your life that you have to track my >posting delays? Get a hobby. My, my! I seem to have hit a nerve. Article: 217851 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Owen Duffy Subject: Re: Bad News for Hams? Message-ID: <1ehpj15a2kq2h4gmdq2jn5rluma65njqti@4ax.com> References: <88U_e.693$sL3.385@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 04:58:34 GMT On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 15:55:48 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: >http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050929/D8CTUA3O7.html Note that not only are the Japanese smart enought to "develop" the technology, they are smart enough to ban its use in their own country. Owen -- Article: 217852 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Asimov" Subject: Re: Lightning Question Message-ID: References: <3IWdnVBwV9BTkqHeRVn-sw@crocker.com> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 06:11:08 GMT "Dave" bravely wrote to "All" (29 Sep 05 16:01:09) --- on the heady topic of "Re: Lightning Question" Da> From: "Dave" Da> Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217598 Da> the 'leader' is usually referring to the charge that is coming down Da> from the cloud and attracting the charge on the ground to it. this Da> process is actually relatively slow, as it the growth of the streamers Da> up from the ground. just note how long you have from when your hair Da> starts standing up to dive into a ditch, that is hardly a high Da> frequency event. OK, but that tickly feeling consists of many spikey pulses, and from Fourier, pulses consist of a whole series of higher order frequencies. However, this could be relevant, some scientist in Florida studying lightning has theorized that the strike is instigated by cosmic radiation, more specifically gamma ray bursts from blackholes. It kind of makes sense because if the CR creates an ionization trail in the atmosphere, this is a good initial conductive channel for the cloud's potential to drive a current into a suitable ground point. Awesome. A*s*i*m*o*v ... Explain counter-clockwise to someone with a digital watch Article: 217853 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Asimov" Subject: Re: 73 Ohms, How do you get it? Message-ID: References: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 06:11:10 GMT "Cecil Moore" bravely wrote to "All" (29 Sep 05 15:25:42) --- on the heady topic of "Re: 73 Ohms, How do you get it?" CM> From: Cecil Moore CM> Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217594 CM> Asimov wrote: > Cecil, an infinitely long antenna is simply an impedance transformation > between different mediums. i.e. wire to free space. CM> We know one of the impedances to be 377 ohms. CM> Question is, what is the other impedance? I think it is whatever you want it to be because it is a transformer. Varying Rs would only affect the pattern. A*s*i*m*o*v ... Thank Thor Friday Nears! Article: 217854 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Howard K0ACF" References: <11j8isc2vp1so0f@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: Metal Roof and Vertical Antenna Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 05:07:14 -0700 I live in a 24x56 ft. mobile home with metal roof & sides. a HF6V is mounted about 6 inch's off the side & about 28 ft. from the end & the matching coil is stretched out so far that it is like a piece of wire & it works great. "Rod Maupin" wrote in message news:11j8isc2vp1so0f@corp.supernews.com... >I posted this on the wrong newsgroup a few days ago and no one has >answered, so I'll try here. > > I have a Butternut Vertical (as a secondary antenna) and a regular radial > system set up with it. I also have a metal roof on my house (here in the > country in Western Washington). I have been wondering if I can use the > metal roof as the radial system/ground plane for this antenna. Haven't > tried it yet. Would this work or would it detune the antenna? > > What do you guys think? > > Rod KI7CQ > > Article: 217855 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Lee" Subject: Magnetic Loop !!! Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 12:29:36 GMT Hi !!. I`ve just built a magnetic loop for 20m, it is 1 metre circumference and uses a coaxial capacitor (RG58... QRP operation!!!) , it receives very well but doesn`t transmit very well at all !!!!.....it loads but T/X isn`t up to R/X..... Any advice will be greatly appreciated..... Thanks.... Lee....G6ZSG.... Article: 217856 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Win Subject: MD-75 Motor Drive Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 07:41:25 -0500 Message-ID: Would anyone know what type of oil/grease goes in the gear box of the MD-75 Motor Drive? Also, what type of drive belt is needed? If anyone would have the a service manual on this drive, I would be intersted in getting a copy. I would gladly pay all expenses. Win, w0lz Article: 217857 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Magnetic Loop !!! Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 12:59:15 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: > I`ve just built a magnetic loop for 20m, it is 1 metre circumference and > uses a coaxial capacitor (RG58... QRP operation!!!) , it receives very > well but doesn`t transmit very well at all !!!!.....it loads but T/X isn`t > up > to R/X..... > > Any advice will be greatly appreciated..... > ============================== There's almost certainly nothing the matter with it. You can't expect a small QRP magloop to work as well as a 1/2-wave vertical with 100 watts. What makes you think it is not working as well as it ought to? What have you compared it with? ---- Reg, G4FGQ Article: 217858 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Lee" References: Subject: Re: Magnetic Loop !!! Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:46:55 GMT "Reg Edwards" wrote in message news:dhjcr3$75s$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... > ============================== > There's almost certainly nothing the matter with it. > > You can't expect a small QRP magloop to work as well as a 1/2-wave > vertical with 100 watts. > > What makes you think it is not working as well as it ought to? What > have you compared it with? > ---- > Reg, G4FGQ > Hello Reg.. Took your advice and built a magloop...... I`m comparing the magloop to 5watts on a half-size sloping G5RV and i find the magloop equivalent to the G5RV on R/X.whilst the magloop is inside the house!!!.. I have a friend about a mile away that i chat to who hears me on the G5RV at s30+ ......but, not at all on the magloop!!!!...... Why am i not being heard on the magloop???? :-/. H-E-L-P........ Lee.....G6ZSG..... Article: 217859 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <433D46F0.D0533E2B@shaw.ca> From: Irv Finkleman Subject: Re: Magnetic Loop !!! References: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 14:08:27 GMT Lee wrote: > > "Reg Edwards" wrote in message > news:dhjcr3$75s$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... > > ============================== > > There's almost certainly nothing the matter with it. > > > > You can't expect a small QRP magloop to work as well as a 1/2-wave > > vertical with 100 watts. > > > > What makes you think it is not working as well as it ought to? What > > have you compared it with? > > ---- > > Reg, G4FGQ > > > Hello Reg.. > Took your advice and built a magloop...... > I`m comparing the magloop to 5watts on a half-size sloping G5RV and i find > the magloop equivalent to the G5RV on R/X.whilst the magloop is inside the > house!!!.. > I have a friend about a mile away that i chat to who hears me on the G5RV at > s30+ ......but, not at all on the magloop!!!!...... > Why am i not being heard on the magloop???? :-/. H-E-L-P........ > > Lee.....G6ZSG..... You may have the null pointed at him. Are you able to work other stations on the magloop? Irv VE6BP -- -------------------------------------- Diagnosed Type II Diabetes March 5 2001 Beating it with diet and exercise! 297/215/210 (to be revised lower) 58"/43"(!)/44" (already lower too!) -------------------------------------- Visit my HomePage at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv/index.html Visit my Baby Sofia website at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv4/index.htm Visit my OLDTIMERS website at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv5/index.htm -------------------- Irv Finkleman, Grampa/Ex-Navy/Old Fart/Ham Radio VE6BP Calgary, Alberta, Canada Article: 217860 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Lee" References: <433D46F0.D0533E2B@shaw.ca> Subject: Re: Magnetic Loop !!! Message-ID: <2Ob%e.18013$iW5.5036@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 14:17:34 GMT "Irv Finkleman" wrote in message news:433D46F0.D0533E2B@shaw.ca... > Lee wrote: > > > > "Reg Edwards" wrote in message > > news:dhjcr3$75s$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... > > > ============================== > > > There's almost certainly nothing the matter with it. > > > > > > You can't expect a small QRP magloop to work as well as a 1/2-wave > > > vertical with 100 watts. > > > > > > What makes you think it is not working as well as it ought to? What > > > have you compared it with? > > > ---- > > > Reg, G4FGQ > > > > > Hello Reg.. > > Took your advice and built a magloop...... > > I`m comparing the magloop to 5watts on a half-size sloping G5RV and i find > > the magloop equivalent to the G5RV on R/X.whilst the magloop is inside the > > house!!!.. > > I have a friend about a mile away that i chat to who hears me on the G5RV at > > s30+ ......but, not at all on the magloop!!!!...... > > Why am i not being heard on the magloop???? :-/. H-E-L-P........ > > > > Lee.....G6ZSG..... > > You may have the null pointed at him. Are you able to work other > stations on the magloop? > > Irv VE6BP I`ll try that tomorrow when i get it on the tower...thanks Irv. Lee....G6ZSG..... References: <433D46F0.D0533E2B@shaw.ca> Subject: Re: Magnetic Loop !!! Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 14:21:27 GMT "Irv Finkleman" wrote in message news:433D46F0.D0533E2B@shaw.ca... > Lee wrote: > > > > "Reg Edwards" wrote in message > > news:dhjcr3$75s$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... > > > ============================== > > > There's almost certainly nothing the matter with it. > > > > > > You can't expect a small QRP magloop to work as well as a 1/2-wave > > > vertical with 100 watts. > > > > > > What makes you think it is not working as well as it ought to? What > > > have you compared it with? > > > ---- > > > Reg, G4FGQ > > > > > Hello Reg.. > > Took your advice and built a magloop...... > > I`m comparing the magloop to 5watts on a half-size sloping G5RV and i find > > the magloop equivalent to the G5RV on R/X.whilst the magloop is inside the > > house!!!.. > > I have a friend about a mile away that i chat to who hears me on the G5RV at > > s30+ ......but, not at all on the magloop!!!!...... > > Why am i not being heard on the magloop???? :-/. H-E-L-P........ > > > > Lee.....G6ZSG..... > > You may have the null pointed at him. Tried that just and got 5x8 with magloop in the house!!!! and only 5watts.... Lee....G6ZSG.. References: <8dY_e.1601$Fi3.1037@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> Cecil, W5DXP wrote: "Is the graph impedance looking into 1/2 of the dipole?" I only quoted from the plot for tthe whole dipole in free-space. The graph on page 345 has two traces: Zo, or antenna average surge impedance, ZA, for a balanced, center-fed dipole in free-space, which is found to be a function of the antenna thickness= ZA = 276 log 1/P The other formula is also plotted. It is for a vertical rod against ground. It has exactly 1/2 the resistance of the dipole. For peripheries larger than 0.25 wavelength, Bailey notes that surge impedance departs from the formula. For smaller peripheries, the plots are almost straight lines on the scale used. Peripheries are plotted with log spacings. Impedances are plotted with linear spacings. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Article: 217863 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Gene Fuller Subject: Re: Lightning Question References: <3IWdnVBwV9BTkqHeRVn-sw@crocker.com> <1128062984.923437.180830@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <02c%e.344310$5N3.103184@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 14:34:36 GMT This idea does not appear to be the product of some wacko professor in some obscure junior college. There is a fairly large amount of work ongoing around the world. The first scientific paper with a detailed analysis of a possible role for cosmic rays in lightning generation appears to be from Russia, in 1992. The unsolved mystery with lightning generation is how it can happen at all. The breakdown strength of air is something like 2 megavolts per meter. No one can come close to finding this sort of field strength in clouds, even the violent clouds associated with thunderstorms. At the same time, it is now well documented that there are gamma-ray bursts that appear to be well correlated to lightning strikes. Gamma-ray generation requires extremely energetic relativistic electrons. Again, there is no clear mechanism for generation of these gamma-rays in ordinary atmospheric processes. The proposal is that the violent atmospheric processes establish electric fields well beyond normal calm atmospheric levels, but still insufficient for spontaneous breakdown and lightning discharge. The cosmic rays act as a trigger to cause the breakdown and discharge. I don't have a dog in this fight; I am merely reporting an overview of what I have read. 73, Gene W4SZ nm5k@wt.net wrote: >> However, this could be relevant, some scientist in Florida studying >> lightning has theorized that the strike is instigated by cosmic >> radiation, more specifically gamma ray bursts from blackholes. It kind >> of makes sense because if the CR creates an ionization trail in the >> atmosphere, this is a good initial conductive channel for the cloud's >> potential to drive a current into a suitable ground point. Awesome. >> > Ugh....If that were the case, wouldn't you have lightning in good > weather? Dunno...I think he's had too much gatoraid... MK Article: 217864 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Gene Fuller Subject: Re: OT: Reconcile Qs using SPICE References: Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 14:53:08 GMT John, The generic definition of Q is the ratio of energy stored over a cycle to energy dissipated over a cycle. Thus it makes sense to look at energy or power as the entity under analysis. Width of a resonance peak is commonly defined at the half-point, i.e., 3 dB down from the peak. If you wish to look at current, then the magic number for bandwidth definition is 70.7% of peak current. This number will be found in any number of books, including Terman. It sounds like you are slightly confused about the definition and application of dB. It is traditional that the basic definition of dB is: dB = 10 * log10 (P2/P1) At the same time, a very common adjunct is: dB = 20 * log10 (I2/I1) or dB = 20 * log10 (V2/V1) As long as the resistance does not vary, it will not matter whether you consider dB to represent a power ratio or a voltage ratio or a current ratio. The numerical result will be the same. 73, Gene W4SZ John - KD5YI wrote: > Gene Fuller wrote: > >> John, >> >> It is customary to use 3 dB points for defining the bandwidth when >> considering resonance phenomena and Q. If you do so, I believe you >> will find your numbers match more closely. >> >> 73, >> Gene >> W4SZ > > \ > > Thanks, Gene. > > Then my misunderstanding is with Decibels (or SPICE) instead of Q. You > are correct that, if I check the bandwidth between the 3dB *current* > points, the numbers come out about right. However, I thought 3dB was a > power thing and 6dB was a current (or voltage) thing. In any case, if I > use the 3dB down points of either voltage or current, it works out as > calculated. So I checked the current at the 3dB points and that put the > Q very close to the X/R point. > > Thanks for your help. > > John > > >> >> John - KD5YI wrote: >> >>> Forgive the OT posting, but I know a lot of RF experts hang out here. >>> >>> I am trying to learn about Q. I know there is a difference in >>> component Q and circuit Q. To study this thing, I am using SPICE so >>> that I will have no instrument loading to affect my setup. I can make >>> things as perfect as I wish, almost. >>> >>> My problem is that I cannot reconcile the two ways of obtaining Q: >>> >>> 1. Q = X/R (reactance divided by resistance) >>> 2. Q = Fo/BW (resonant frequency divided by bandwidth) >>> >>> In spice, I have a 1V source, one end connected to ground and the >>> other end applied to a series string composed of L = 24.833 mH, 458 >>> ohms, and 102 pF and then to ground. Essentially, I have a series >>> circuit consisting of a source, inductor, resistor, and capacitor. >>> The resonant frequency should be 100 kHz. >>> >>> Using SPICE, I examine the current in the loop. I find that the >>> current 6dB down points are about +/- 2.5 kHz away from 100 kHz. This >>> is a Q of about 20. >>> >>> But, the reactance is about 15.6 kohms and the resistance is 458 >>> ohms, so the calculated Q is about 34. >>> >>> Can someone explain where I'm going wrong here? >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> John - KD5YI Article: 217865 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison) Subject: Re: 73 Ohms, How do you get it? Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 10:28:39 -0500 Message-ID: <11736-433D59A7-93@storefull-3253.bay.webtv.net> References: Reg, G4FGQ wrote: "When the circumference of the antenna rod is one wavelength, Zo = 0." Bailey adrees with Reg. I was remiss in not quoting Bailey`s caveat. The formula does not hold for circumferences greater than one-quarter wavelength. Bailey notes that uniform cross section conductors don`t have ubiform impedances throughout their lengths. Zo is inversely proportional to capacitance per unit length. Zo is lower at the antenna feedpoint than at its conductors` middles. At the tips or open ends of antennas, Zo is low. This is explained by the concentration of electric force lines at the open end. Variation of Zo along an antenna need not deter one from finding a workable average of surge impedance. Bailey has determined this to be: 276 log 1/P, where P=circumference of the conductor in wavelength, for circumferences of less than 1/4-wavelength. For practical lengths of center-fed dipoles, the feedpoint impedance is determined by combination of incident and reflected waves. Bailey has worked out these for resonant lengths between 1/2 and 5 wavelengths. I posted these long ago. But, for infinite length, Zo must prevail, as no reflection will ever return. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Article: 217866 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John - KD5YI Subject: Re: OT: Reconcile Qs using SPICE References: Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 15:41:08 GMT Gene Fuller wrote: > John, > > The generic definition of Q is the ratio of energy stored over a cycle > to energy dissipated over a cycle. Thus it makes sense to look at energy > or power as the entity under analysis. Width of a resonance peak is > commonly defined at the half-point, i.e., 3 dB down from the peak. > > If you wish to look at current, then the magic number for bandwidth > definition is 70.7% of peak current. This number will be found in any > number of books, including Terman. > > It sounds like you are slightly confused about the definition and > application of dB. It is traditional that the basic definition of dB is: > > dB = 10 * log10 (P2/P1) > > At the same time, a very common adjunct is: > > dB = 20 * log10 (I2/I1) > > or > > dB = 20 * log10 (V2/V1) > > > As long as the resistance does not vary, it will not matter whether you > consider dB to represent a power ratio or a voltage ratio or a current > ratio. The numerical result will be the same. > > > 73, > Gene > W4SZ Yes. Actually, I understand the equations. I think my confusion is the application of them. I was assuming I needed to measure the frequency at the -6dB points because I was plotting current rather than power. That's where I went wrong. Thanks again. Cheers, John Article: 217867 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Michael Coslo Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:41:37 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> <73063$433c14ac$97d56a13$3806@ALLTEL.NET> Dave wrote: > "Michael Coslo" wrote in message >> >>Is it possible then that my latest antenna, an OCF dipole, is a fractal? >> >>_______ x ___________________ >>| | >>| | >>| | >> >> >>It has those hangy-down ends, so it sure looks a good bit like yours. >> >>I don't really consider an antenna as fractal until the wires start >>folding back toward the center feed in their meandering. >> >>Hey! is a folded dipole a fractal antenna? >> >>- Mike KB3EIA - >> > > sure, even a non-folded dipole is a fractal. I suppose everything is self similar! - Mike KB3EIA - Article: 217868 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <3v0pj1h66mvi1c2unrrhc43t9eadjcuthj@4ax.com> Subject: Re: Miracle Whip Antenna Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:12:32 -0400 Message-ID: <2a91$433d5ccd$97d558d8$27561@ALLTEL.NET> 1. Never eat at a place called Moms. 2. Never buy an antenna that has the word "Miracle" in the name or description. Other things to avoid pertaining to antennas: "This new principal cannot be modeled in existing programs because of their limitations" Claims that a particular geometry has magical properties. E/H CFA or some other alphabet soup descriptions coupled with any of the above. Things to be sceptical about: Any antenna that touts take off angle and F/B ratio as primary features. Low SWR from DC to Daylight Any 1/4 wave virtical that needs no radials because of some wizzbang loading system. Special gadgets in the feedline that makes it become a radiating element. This by no means the extent of things to watch out for. A real education is to read the adds for CB antennas, then when the same claims are seen for a ham antenna put the credit card back in your wallet. P.T. Barnum should have sold antennas. His statement would then have been "There is a sucker born every 30 seconds" Article: 217869 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <1128006269.858078.317850@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: UWB Antennas, why these shapes? Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:23:13 -0400 Message-ID: Reg, I have used cages in the past. Looking at my notes, using 12" (I leave the conversion to you in retaliation for having to convert to metric using your programs) diameter PVC pipe slices. 6 wires spaced at 60 degree separation, resulted in a bandwidth of 316 KHz on 75 meters when mounted 40 feet above ground. The wire diameters and wire types had almost no effect on the bandwidth, which was defined at the 2:1 SWR points. Using electric fence wire, for example, resulted in 314 KHz. Anecdotally, it was the quietest antenna I have ever used. "Reg Edwards" wrote in message news:dhibcp$9bp$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... > Richard, > > Everybody says that thickening the antenna conductor increases the > bandwidth. And indeed it does. > > But nobody ever says by how much the bandwidth is increased. > > I think this is because bandwidth is increased by such a small > proportion that it's not worth the trouble and expense of erecting > another antenna. Otherwise everybody would have giant, unsightly, > neighbor-offending, cages in their back yards. But they don't. > > I have a program, DIPCAGE2, which calculates the increase in bandwith > due to increase in dipole diameter which demonstrates this > disappointing point. > > I would like confirmation that my calculations are correct. Do you > have, or know of, any reliable measurements of bandwidth versus dipole > conductor diameter. One serious, accurate example might be good > enough. These days I don't have the facilities to make measurements > myself. > > It doesn't matter how bandwidth is defined but I am not happy with the > usual 'SWR/bandwidth' definition because of unreliability of SWR > meters plus the misplaced confidence in them. > > In practice, accurate knowledge of antenna bandwidth is not of great > use since the system operating bandwidth is affected by the > transmission line and matching network, if there is one. I don't know > why I'm bothered about it! But I WOULD like to see an appropriate > degree of importance attached to the subject on these walls. > ---- > Reggie, G4FGQ. > > Article: 217870 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Michael Coslo Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:42:49 -0400 Message-ID: References: <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> <73063$433c14ac$97d56a13$3806@ALLTEL.NET> Richard Clark wrote: > On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 15:01:43 -0400, Michael Coslo > wrote: > >>Is it possible then that my latest antenna, an OCF dipole, is a fractal? > > > Hi Mike, > > As it so happens (and if properly choked) your OCF dipole is probably > superior to many fractals on their own terms of being multi resonant. > And regrettably yes, that would then make it fractal by appropriation > and claim by the fractal community (something of the Borg mentality > there). Darn! Does that mean I have to pay royalties to Dr. Cohen's company? - Mike KB3EIA - Article: 217871 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Michael Coslo Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:47:12 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> <73063$433c14ac$97d56a13$3806@ALLTEL.NET> Reg Edwards wrote: >>Reg, take a look at my 2-el fractal 6m beam and tell me >>what's wrong with 12.6 dBi gain, TOA=7 deg, F/B=18.5 dB. >>-- > > ================================ > Cec, You know as well as I do, take-off angles are meaningless > regarding who might, by some remote coincidence, be at a distance and > in a direction to receive. Whatheheck is a takeoff angle anyway? From my limited experience with modeling programs, and anecdotal personal experience, that signal I'm putting out takes off at all angles. Well, at least 180 degrees worth. It's stronger at some angles than others tho'. But it doesn't have one angle. > Front-to-back ratios are equally meaningless. Nobody takes any notice > of them when a slight change in frequency, a minute change in antenna > dimensions, or the wind direction acting on an antenna is taken into > account. > Hardly parameters which can sensibly be used to compare one antenna > with another. > > I mention this here only for the benefit of novices who may be misled > by your comments. ;o) - Mike KB3EIA - Article: 217872 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Michael Coslo Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:51:45 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <11j8iv9ofrglt2a@corp.supernews.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> <73063$433c14ac$97d56a13$3806@ALLTEL.NET> Cecil Moore wrote: > Michael Coslo wrote: > >> Isn't that straining the definition of fractal a bit? > > > Nope, that's a well known fractal pattern. It even has > a name within the fractal community but it slips my > mind at the moment. It might be a Koch or Hilbert > pattern, I forget. I haven't looked at this stuff in > a coon's age. > > > ----+ +----x > | | > +----+ > > That's a first level iteration pattern. The second level > iteration would replace each of those one foot lines with > the same overall pattern as above - something like: > > > ----+ +----+ +----+ +----x > | | | | | | > +----+ +----+ +----+ +----+ > | | > +----+ +----+ > | | > +----+ +----+ > | | > +----+ > > There were five wires in the first level iteration. Each of > those five wires is replaced with the original basic pattern. > Do you see five repeats of the original pattern in the above? Thanks for the explanation, Cecil. I do have to say that the 2nd order fractal is what I consider a real fractal. The first order serves well enough as a basis for fractals, and goes some way to explaning them, but tends to be such a common thing that just about any non-linear antenna could get the moniker. - Mike KB3EIA - Article: 217873 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Asimov" Subject: Re: Lightning Question Message-ID: References: <1128062984.923437.180830@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:09:20 GMT "nm5k@wt.net" bravely wrote to "All" (29 Sep 05 23:49:44) --- on the heady topic of "Re: Lightning Question" nm> From: nm5k@wt.net nm> Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217745 nm> However, this could be relevant, some scientist in Florida studying nm> lightning has theorized that the strike is instigated by cosmic nm> radiation, more specifically gamma ray bursts from blackholes. It kind nm> of makes sense because if the CR creates an ionization trail in the nm> atmosphere, this is a good initial conductive channel for the cloud's nm> potential to drive a current into a suitable ground point. Awesome. nm> Ugh....If that were the case, wouldn't you have lightning in good nm> weather? Dunno...I think he's had too much gatoraid... MK I think it opens up a new alternative to the lightning rod. Might some form of radiation shielding be just as effective instead? If there are no air ionization paths of cosmic origin under the shield then the lightning has no place to start? Six inches of lead over the antenna tower doesn't seem right though... perhaps some type of plastic umbrella? Does anyone know if mountain top radar domes are hit less often than other aerials? A*s*i*m*o*v ... Forcast for tonight: Dark. Article: 217874 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Asimov" Subject: Re: UWB Antennas, why these shapes? Message-ID: References: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:11:07 GMT "Reg Edwards" bravely wrote to "All" (30 Sep 05 03:28:25) --- on the heady topic of "Re: UWB Antennas, why these shapes?" Bailey talks about bandwidth vs thickness. A first speculation is that the increase in bandwidth as the conductor is made thicker is a consequence of the longer diagonal dimension. One way to determine BW would measure the antenna constants to get the Q. Then the Q is used to calculate bandwidth just as in a parallel tank. However, a real antenna has many unpredictable factors which affect it (for example feed capacitance) such that other resonnances can appear close to natural resonnance. These would affect bandwidth and mess up the parallel tank analogy. Sorry can't help there... A*s*i*m*o*v RE> From: "Reg Edwards" RE> Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217726 RE> Everybody says that thickening the antenna conductor increases the RE> bandwidth. And indeed it does. RE> But nobody ever says by how much the bandwidth is increased. ... "Let them eat pretzels." -- Laura Bush Article: 217875 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> <73063$433c14ac$97d56a13$3806@ALLTEL.NET> Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:17:41 GMT Michael Coslo wrote: > Whatheheck is a takeoff angle anyway? As used in EZNEC, it is the angle at which the gain is maximum. -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217876 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "David G. Nagel" Subject: Re: Bad News for Hams? Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:56:53 -0500 Message-ID: <11jqriro5dr6731@corp.supernews.com> References: <88U_e.693$sL3.385@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> Bob Miller wrote: > On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 15:55:48 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: > > >>http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050929/D8CTUA3O7.html > > > Little confusing -- the story doesn't explain how the signal gets to > the house -- via power lines, cable, phone, wireless? > > Regardless, guess the house would be a buzz bomb of hash. > > bob > k5qwg > My impression of this story is that they are talking about a LAN system here not a ISP system. Therefore there should not be the broadband interferance of a BPL system. Of course I could be wrong. Dave WD9BDZ Article: 217877 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "David G. Nagel" Subject: Re: Miracle Whip Antenna Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 12:09:51 -0500 Message-ID: <11jqsb5skmkjrd2@corp.supernews.com> References: <3v0pj1h66mvi1c2unrrhc43t9eadjcuthj@4ax.com> <2a91$433d5ccd$97d558d8$27561@ALLTEL.NET> Fred W4JLE wrote: > 1. Never eat at a place called Moms. > 2. Never buy an antenna that has the word "Miracle" in the name or > description. > > Other things to avoid pertaining to antennas: > > "This new principal cannot be modeled in existing programs because of their > limitations" > > Claims that a particular geometry has magical properties. > > E/H CFA or some other alphabet soup descriptions coupled with any of the > above. > > Things to be sceptical about: > > Any antenna that touts take off angle and F/B ratio as primary features. > > Low SWR from DC to Daylight > > Any 1/4 wave virtical that needs no radials because of some wizzbang loading > system. > > Special gadgets in the feedline that makes it become a radiating element. > > This by no means the extent of things to watch out for. A real education is > to read the adds for CB antennas, then when the same claims are seen for a > ham antenna put the credit card back in your wallet. > > P.T. Barnum should have sold antennas. His statement would then have been > "There is a sucker born every 30 seconds" > > > > I think that the greatest thing I ever saw was a antenna enhancement attachment that a friend of mine was conned into selling. It looked just like the gamma match from a Cushcraft Ringo antenna. This gadget was fastened to your antenna with a hose clamp, had a ring shapped element and a wiper arm just like the Ringo. To the credit of the developer he atleast said that he didn't know just what his gadget would do, why the Ringo (not mentioned by name) had one but what could hurt by enriching his bank account. Still laughing about it. Dave WD9BDZ BTW: This was a CB radio thing, not Amateur Radio. Article: 217878 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <433D7754.F019C9B2@shaw.ca> From: Irv Finkleman Subject: Re: Magnetic Loop !!! References: <433D46F0.D0533E2B@shaw.ca> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 17:34:55 GMT Lee wrote: > > "Irv Finkleman" wrote in message > news:433D46F0.D0533E2B@shaw.ca... > > Lee wrote: > > > > > > "Reg Edwards" wrote in message > > > news:dhjcr3$75s$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... > > > > ============================== > > > > There's almost certainly nothing the matter with it. > > > > > > > > You can't expect a small QRP magloop to work as well as a 1/2-wave > > > > vertical with 100 watts. > > > > > > > > What makes you think it is not working as well as it ought to? What > > > > have you compared it with? > > > > ---- > > > > Reg, G4FGQ > > > > > > > Hello Reg.. > > > Took your advice and built a magloop...... > > > I`m comparing the magloop to 5watts on a half-size sloping G5RV and i > find > > > the magloop equivalent to the G5RV on R/X.whilst the magloop is inside > the > > > house!!!.. > > > I have a friend about a mile away that i chat to who hears me on the > G5RV at > > > s30+ ......but, not at all on the magloop!!!!...... > > > Why am i not being heard on the magloop???? :-/. > H-E-L-P........ > > > > > > Lee.....G6ZSG..... > > > > You may have the null pointed at him. > Tried that just and got 5x8 with magloop in the house!!!! and only > 5watts.... > > Lee....G6ZSG.. > Figured as much. You might want to try the loop in a horizontal configuration for omnidirectional work. You'll probably find that you can operate it horizontally just a few inches above the ground although I recommend a couple feet. Irv VE6BP -- -------------------------------------- Diagnosed Type II Diabetes March 5 2001 Beating it with diet and exercise! 297/215/210 (to be revised lower) 58"/43"(!)/44" (already lower too!) -------------------------------------- Visit my HomePage at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv/index.html Visit my Baby Sofia website at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv4/index.htm Visit my OLDTIMERS website at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv5/index.htm -------------------- Irv Finkleman, Grampa/Ex-Navy/Old Fart/Ham Radio VE6BP Calgary, Alberta, Canada From Sat Oct 1 13:29:41 EDT 2005 Article: 217879 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:23:43 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 10 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!cyclone1.gnilink.net!gnilink.net!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!217.73.144.44.MISMATCH!ecngs!feeder.ecngs.de!news.germany.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-05!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22913 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217879 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29613 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208785 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251285 On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 22:08:49 -0700, Richard Clark wrote: >is adequate to the task Clearly, your need to embellish is not only unnecessary, it is also irrelevant. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217880 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Tom Donaly" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <31f74$43299abf$471c63c6$12083@ALLTEL.NET> <1127271443.195835.320110@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43313df9$0$253$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <4338A687.8D5B94DF@earthlink.net> <4338D057.B9B48493@earthlink.net> <8rvoj19bp6umuvfefeo6v87enpmg18pd8m@4ax.com> Message-ID: <84g%e.3872$KQ5.520@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 19:09:56 GMT kashe@sonic.net wrote: > On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 02:54:34 GMT, "Tom Donaly" > wrote: > > >>kashe@sonic.net wrote: >> >>>>Tom Donaly wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>Faith and works are, like voltage and current, inextricably intertwined. >>> >>> >>> They are not. >>> >>> >>> >>>>>The proof of faith is the good work. Those who do no good have no faith. >>> >>> >>> Your logic book get lost in the hurricane? Come back when you >>>can name the logical fallacy you just committed. >> >>Some of the lower forms of American Christianity try to separate faith >>and works. That allows them salvation without substance, the lazy man's >>path to life without end. > > > in your narrow view. > > >> My last two sentences are statements of truth > > > "I fear the man who has all the answers." -- Father James > Marien, S.J. -- 1961 -- in my presence. > > >>, not a logical >>progression. > > > As written, they beg to be read as an incomplete syllogism. In other words, you made the connection up in your head. Typical. > > > >>Each has to be taken alone, by itself. (A religious >>fundamentalist insisting on logical consistency constitutes a >>pretty good joke.) Let me repeat: Those who do no good have no >>faith. > > > Repitition does not include leaving off the first half of the > line you wrote. In a humorous logic treatise, your statement would be > named "The Proof from Blatant Assertion". > > >>Next time you and your friends are sitting around speaking >>in tongues, you should discuss this. Maybe, if you all think real >>hard, together, you can puzzle out what it means. > > > >>73, >>Tom Donaly, KA6RUH > > Unable to address the truth of what I wrote, you fantasize an argument out of your sophomoric command of medieval logic. That, too, is typical, if somewhat pathetic, since your religion is based on unquestioning belief, superstition, and a fundamental opposition to science and inquiring thought. Give it up. No brain can justify the brainless. 73, Tom Donaly, KA6RUH Article: 217881 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Michael Coslo Subject: Re: Miracle Whip Antenna Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 15:50:33 -0400 Message-ID: References: <3v0pj1h66mvi1c2unrrhc43t9eadjcuthj@4ax.com> <2a91$433d5ccd$97d558d8$27561@ALLTEL.NET> Fred W4JLE wrote: > 1. Never eat at a place called Moms. > 2. Never buy an antenna that has the word "Miracle" in the name or > description. > > Other things to avoid pertaining to antennas: > > "This new principal cannot be modeled in existing programs because of their > limitations" > > Claims that a particular geometry has magical properties. > > E/H CFA or some other alphabet soup descriptions coupled with any of the > above. > > Things to be sceptical about: > > Any antenna that touts take off angle and F/B ratio as primary features. > > Low SWR from DC to Daylight > > Any 1/4 wave virtical that needs no radials because of some wizzbang loading > system. > > Special gadgets in the feedline that makes it become a radiating element. > > This by no means the extent of things to watch out for. A real education is > to read the adds for CB antennas, then when the same claims are seen for a > ham antenna put the credit card back in your wallet. > > P.T. Barnum should have sold antennas. His statement would then have been > "There is a sucker born every 30 seconds" Regarding the miracle Whip antenna. 1. It isn't a miracle. 2. It does not work "great" 3. However, it gets a signal out within its abilities. A good operator can work a lot of stations with one. 4. The folks who build and sell it are pretty honest about it's performance. The only part I have an exception with is their performance being rated in regards to SWR. But they put it right out there, so no one can say the information wasn't available. 5. Do we really think that a person believes that the antenna is going to be some kind of top performer? It's a niche antenna. 6. Is it better to have a modest setup, or no setup at all? Seems like a nice way to have a quick setup and operating station in a hotel room or while traveling. Maybe even for mountain topping. - Mike KB3EIA - Article: 217882 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Michael Coslo Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 15:59:57 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> <73063$433c14ac$97d56a13$3806@ALLTEL.NET> Cecil Moore wrote: > Michael Coslo wrote: > >> Whatheheck is a takeoff angle anyway? > > > As used in EZNEC, it is the angle at which the gain > is maximum. It isn't a very good term then. It makes it sound as if it is the angle at which the RF "takes off" at, when in fact it is not. And it seems that a lot of people get really hung up on that, thinking that there is some kind of blob of RF that leaves the antenna at X angle. Even when people "know" that isn't the case, we still see them thinking that way. Maybe we should start using the term "Takeoff Azimuth" too? ;^) - Mike KB3EIA - Article: 217883 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Ulf B" References: <3v0pj1h66mvi1c2unrrhc43t9eadjcuthj@4ax.com> Subject: Re: Miracle Whip Antenna Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 20:06:44 GMT "Buther Boy" skrev i meddelandet news:3v0pj1h66mvi1c2unrrhc43t9eadjcuthj@4ax.com... > Hi, just ordered this awesome antenna. Anyone have any experiences > they'd like to share regarding its use? > I have used one for 1 year now so this is my opinion: It is a fun thing to play with but off course there are limitations. It's exactly as good as its size, which of course is the case with all antennas. It's quite good made if you look inside the box. It works quite well for recieving on 80 and 160 as well. It requires no counterpoise and actually if you try to improve it with a good RF-ground it will not tune.... Is there someone out there who can explain this to me......... ;-) 73 from SM0FKI /Ulf Article: 217884 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: OT: Reconcile Qs using SPICE Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:27:51 -0500 Message-ID: References: John, OOPS... Like they said in Planes, Trains and Automobiles; "You're going the wrong way!" With all due respect, I suggest you do not understand the equations and how to apply them. Don't feel bad, though, this is a very common problem. You fell into a common trap. I have for years posed a question to new Engineers: Why is a "Voltage dB" twice as big as a "Power dB" ?. .. Sorry Alex. Just to see if they really understand and have some fun as well... a little good natured hazing, if you will. What Gene says is 100%, but I clarify. This is the best way I know how to explain this, so if there is a better way, so be it... Just a little background: The decibel is one tenth of a Bel. Just like kilowatt is 1000 watts and meg ohm is 10^6 ohms. It is a prefixed unit. The Bel (named after good ole' Alex Grham) represents a Power ratio of 10:1 (or 1:10) PERIOD! NO IF's AND's or BUT's. (note that here is nothing in there about voltage or current) [ That's also why the "B is capitalized and the "d" isn't] You can't "legally" talk about dB in voltage. Sorry, it is ABSOLUTELY WRONG! [[ NO flames here, let me explain ]] HOWEVER, strange beings that we are (and at some times smarter than at others), we have accepted, as a common practice, the use of dB when referring to voltage and current ratios because we, knowing about math and electronics, understand that there is a relationship between power and these quantities (the all too familiar and confusing formulas). Now, approaching your issue... IF we have some circuit and make two measurements and the difference happens to be 3 dB, we had to make that measurement in some way. _IF_ we make that measurement with a voltmeter, THEN we use the "dB Volts" formula and we will get an answer of 3 dB. _IF_ we use an ammeter...you know the rest. Uh, here you expect me to say _IF_ you use a watt meter..., but I wont, because you can't measure power. This is from the "You can't get there from here...you have to go somewhere else first." department... Power is always calculated [[ I'm sure this'll bring on the flame war, but understand what I say first, then decide if you want to get into that war]] H O W E V E R... If you figure out what the two powers are that were 3 dB apart (by whatever means you desire) you WILL see that they are in a ratio to 2 to 1. Now a clincher... __IF__ you go back and look at the voltages (or currents) you measure at the 3dB point, you will see that they are __NOT__ in a ratio of 2 to 1! the ratio'll be 1.414 (sqr root 2). This is because POWER is a second order quantity (in math terms) In Ham terms, POWER IS VOLTS TIMES AMPS. The product of two measurable quantities. IF the POWER is twice, then the voltage MUST be 1.414 times and the current MUST be 1.414 times... Then 1.414 X 1.414 = 2 DONE! Said another way, HALF POWER is 0.707 the Voltage (AND current) _not_ half. [[ P.S. Put 1.414 (or 0.707 into the volts/current equations]] THEREFORE, IT _AIN'T_ "6 dB volts". If you like {and to hear old Alex spin], call it 3 dB Volts, 3 dB amps, __AND__ 3 dB POWER, though the addition of "volts" and "amps" is sort of wrong (at least possibly mis-leading) and the addition of "power" is un-necessary (remember the definition of dB?). 3dB is 3dB power ONLY! (but it is different ratios when looking at the power vs. the current or voltage) Now to the point, your point. The 3 dB point on your circuit _IS_ the 3dB point in current, it _IS_ the 3dB point in voltage, AND it _is_ the 3 db point in Power. Did I already say that...? I could give a specific example, but rather than me working that hard, go back and measure (well, let Spice show you) your current AND voltage at your 3 dB points and you'll see that the formulas DO apply. They will be only 0.707 down, not 0.5. Hope this helps. If it doesn't then perhaps one of the flame responses will help you understand better. Good luck. 73, Steve, K9DCI Half _voltage_ is 6 dB! "John - KD5YI" wrote in message news:o0d%e.9$Z96.1@trnddc05... > Gene Fuller wrote: > > John, > > > > The generic definition of Q is the ratio of energy stored over a cycle > > to energy dissipated over a cycle. ...[snip...] 3 dB down from the peak. > > > > If you wish to look at current, then the magic number for bandwidth > > definition is 70.7% of peak current. ... ************* There's this number in Gene's post. Article: 217885 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: Lightning Question Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:49:58 -0500 Message-ID: References: <3IWdnVBwV9BTkqHeRVn-sw@crocker.com> <1128062984.923437.180830@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "Dave" wrote in message news:n62dnSYO0P7-vqDeRVn-og@crocker.com... > > wrote in message > news:1128062984.923437.180830@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > However, this could be relevant, some scientist in Florida studying > > lightning has theorized that the strike is instigated by cosmic > > radiation, more specifically gamma ray bursts from blackholes. It kind > > of makes sense because if the CR creates an ionization trail in the > > atmosphere, this is a good initial conductive channel for the cloud's > > potential to drive a current into a suitable ground point. Awesome. > > > > Ugh....If that were the case, wouldn't you have lightning in good > > weather? Dunno...I think he's had too much gatoraid... MK > > > > there actually is a clear air current that flows all the time, you can > actually draw power from it with a relatively small 'antenna'. in fact, > many years ago one of the 'popular' magazines published plans for a motor > that ran off the clear air electric field, you just had to be sure to > disconnect it before a thunderstorm came through. That's what I said. put a VOM on your antenna on a clear day. Steve, K9DCK > > Article: 217886 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: Explain Balun Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:42:37 -0500 Message-ID: References: Bill, Short answer. I've often speculated about the answer to this same question and what I figured, is correct. Here's the mental model I use. Quick look at Cecil's references shows that the voltage balun has an output center tap that is referenced (connected) to the coax input ground (shield). Thus making the two outputs balanced, voltage-wise in reference to the coax shield. a.k.a. a center tapped secondary, so-to-speak, which is referenced to "ground" thus making the two sides equal in voltage (peak). Looking at http://www.eznec.com/Amateur/Articles/Baluns.pdf Figure A3-3, note that there is NO connection between primary and secondary, so the voltage can do anything it wants, but the current at both ends of the secondary will be equal. Note that there are other ways to get this result where the primary and secondary (or the two windings) _ARE_ connected in some way. However, this is an easy way to see the intended difference. "Jennie" wrote in message news:CtWdnT9nitEh0aHeRVn-sQ@adelphia.com... > Would someone be kind enough to explain a balun both voltage and current? > > TY > > -- > > Bill > KI4HPZ > > > Article: 217887 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: Lightning Question Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:53:58 -0500 Message-ID: References: <3IWdnVBwV9BTkqHeRVn-sw@crocker.com> ======================================= OK, but that tickly feeling consists of many spikey pulses, and from Fourier, pulses consist of a whole series of higher order frequencies. However, this could be relevant, some scientist in Florida studying lightning has theorized that the strike is instigated by cosmic radiation, more specifically gamma ray bursts from blackholes. It kind of makes sense because if the CR creates an ionization trail in the atmosphere, this is a good initial conductive channel for the cloud's potential to drive a current into a suitable ground point. Awesome. A*s*i*m*o*v You need to do lots more reading in the right places. While possible for Gamma ionization (If it actually does ionize air) to help in some cases, the local field is many orders of magnitude higher than that required to break down the air in the first place without any help from the cosmos. Steve, K9DCI Article: 217888 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison) Subject: Re: Lightning Question Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 17:20:50 -0500 Message-ID: <16594-433DBA42-441@storefull-3251.bay.webtv.net> References: <02c%e.344310$5N3.103184@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> Gene Fuller wrote: 'the unsolved mystery with lightning generation is how it can happen at all." True. Distribution of the charges involved depends on temperatures, air currents, etc. For a given quantity of charge (Q), it equals the capacitance between the regions which hold it times the voltage between the regions. Q=CE. If you increase the distance between the regions it brings the capacitance down, so the voltage must rise. Natural forces may be adding to the total charge too. You don`t need enough voltage to leap across a giant chasm to initiate lightning. You just have to start ionization when conditions are right and it will sustain itself. Air consists of gas molecules which mostly have no net charge in their normal states. One of these molecules may be struck by an electron, dislodging one of its atom`s orbital electrons, and leaving it with a net positive charge. This process may continue, giving an ionized area which is conductive. This is likely at higher altitudes due to reduced atmospheric pressure. At sea level, normal pressure is 760 mm of mercury, but at 19 miles high, the pressure is only 1% of that at sea level. At rarified pressure, gas easily becomes ionized. Neon is under only about 12 mm of mercury pressure in the glass tubes of a neon sign and conducts readily. The ionosphere is composed of ionized layers high in the earth`s atmosphere. Gas and ionization are mobile. A large voltage gradient produces ionization. Working in a high-power shortwave broadcasting plant, I`ve seen ionized plumes on transmission lines. They don`t usually strike across the wires. They just follow the hot air they make, flaming upward. Lightning is discharging some large capacitance which seems to produce its destination. A combination of forces directs its path. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Article: 217889 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas References: <1127500565.002715.196800@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <6muij11sgp4h5hj9u39ndqfir0cocpvkf0@4ax.com> <8fblj1ho8ej0ihucalee6comabmo87h1b3@4ax.com> <11jmc9on86rvfcc@corp.supernews.com> <73063$433c14ac$97d56a13$3806@ALLTEL.NET> Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 22:38:32 GMT Michael Coslo wrote: > Cecil Moore wrote: >> As used in EZNEC, it (TOA) is the angle at which the gain >> is maximum. > > It isn't a very good term then. It makes it sound as if it is the > angle at which the RF "takes off" at, when in fact it is not. Well, it is the angle at which the peak of the RF takes off. If one understands what it means, it is a useful concept. > And it seems that a lot of people get really hung up on that, > thinking that there is some kind of blob of RF that leaves the antenna > at X angle. Even when people "know" that isn't the case, we still see > them thinking that way. Like any other concept, the user needs to understand the definition. If the TOA of a ground plane antenna is 7 degrees, that bodes well for DX, not well for local stuff. For instance, the take-off-angle for a low dipole is 90 degrees, i.e. straight up. Good for NVIS, terrible for DX. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217890 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Cecil Moore Subject: Re: OT: Reconcile Qs using SPICE References: Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 22:46:30 GMT Steve Nosko wrote: > What Gene says is 100%, but I clarify. This is the best way I know how to > explain this, so if there is a better way, so be it... How about this? Given: P1 = V1^2/Z0, P2 = V2^2/Z0 P1/P2 = (V1/V2)^2 log(P1/P2) = 2*log(V1/V2) 10 log(P1/P2) = 20 log(V1/V2) Sometimes an equation is worth a thousand words. :-) -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Article: 217891 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: Lightning Question [OOPS] Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 17:14:58 -0500 Message-ID: References: <3IWdnVBwV9BTkqHeRVn-sw@crocker.com> I got distracted and hit send B4 completing an edit. I don't see any relavance of the pulses and frequency part of your post. When hairs stand up on your arm the small movement tickles. Touch them with something. I see no pulses to talk about. The Gama part sounds plausable. 73, Steve From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: Lightning Question Date: Friday, September 30, 2005 4:53 PM ======================================= OK, but that tickly feeling consists of many spikey pulses, and from Fourier, pulses consist of a whole series of higher order frequencies. However, this could be relevant, some scientist in Florida studying lightning has theorized that the strike is instigated by cosmic radiation, more specifically gamma ray bursts from blackholes. It kind of makes sense because if the CR creates an ionization trail in the atmosphere, this is a good initial conductive channel for the cloud's potential to drive a current into a suitable ground point. Awesome. A*s*i*m*o*v You need to do lots more reading in the right places. While possible for Gamma ionization (If it actually does ionize air) to help in some cases, the local field is many orders of magnitude higher than that required to break down the air in the first place without any help from the cosmos. Steve, K9DCI Article: 217892 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: Lightning Question Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:59:44 -0500 Message-ID: References: <1128062984.923437.180830@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "Asimov" wrote in message news:MSGID_1=3a167=2f133.0_433d4b31@fidonet.org... "nm5k@wt.net" bravely wrote to "All" (29 Sep 05 23:49:44) --- on the heady topic of "Re: Lightning Question" I think it opens up a new alternative to the lightning rod. Might some form of radiation shielding be just as effective instead? If there are no air ionization paths of cosmic origin under the shield then the lightning has no place to start? Six inches of lead over the antenna tower doesn't seem right though... perhaps some type of plastic umbrella? Does anyone know if mountain top radar domes are hit less often than other aerials? A*s*i*m*o*v ... Forcast for tonight: Dark. "...alternative to the lightning rod. ..." Their purpose it to bleed off the charge so it can't develop to the point where the leaders can start and prevent the strike. You need to get the charge out of there, not let it continue to build until it finds another path it can breach. Charge concentrates at a point and low level ionization bleeds off the charge "safely". You put large round balls on static generators so that you DO allow the charge to build up and not bleed off. 73, Steve K9DCI Article: 217893 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Steve Nosko" Subject: Re: Lightning Question Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 17:06:57 -0500 Message-ID: References: <3IWdnVBwV9BTkqHeRVn-sw@crocker.com> <1128062984.923437.180830@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <02c%e.344310$5N3.103184@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> "Gene Fuller" wrote in message news:02c%e.344310$5N3.103184@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net... > ... > > The unsolved mystery with lightning generation is how it can happen at > all. The breakdown strength of air is something like 2 megavolts per > meter. The number we used in tubes was 10,000 V per inch. Unless my math is off, this is only around 400kV/meter. Besides, what about the local field strength, like at the tip of the lightning rod? Can there be a cloud effect that somehow concentrates charge and gets the corona started for the leaders? > ...well documented that there are gamma-ray bursts > that appear to be well correlated to lightning strikes. ... Interesting. 73, Steve, K9DCI Article: 217894 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: David Subject: Winding details for antenna choke ? Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 23:23:09 GMT Hi, Is there a method for obtaining the number of turns for a given diameter for the antenna choke ? (I am not sure if this will be simple air-core coil formula or "suck it and see" type arrangement). ie. I have a sleeve antenna at 915MHz constructed from RG316 coaxial cable. It is fed up the centre of 1/4" nylon tubing. I want to create a choke at the feedpoint from the RG316 wound around the outside of the 1/4" tubing but not sure of how many turns would be required. Thanks in advance Regards David Article: 217895 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Larry Gauthier \(K8UT\)" References: <3v0pj1h66mvi1c2unrrhc43t9eadjcuthj@4ax.com> Subject: Re: Miracle Whip Antenna Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 19:39:44 -0400 Isn't their marketing slogan: "If it works good, it's a Miracle"? ;-) -- -larry K8UT "Buther Boy" wrote in message news:3v0pj1h66mvi1c2unrrhc43t9eadjcuthj@4ax.com... > Hi, just ordered this awesome antenna. Anyone have any experiences > they'd like to share regarding its use? > > Buther Boy > > -- > Remove the word Spam from my e-mail to contact me... > http://www.PrivacySig.com/SIGbutherboySpam-gmail-black.png > ~ From Sat Oct 1 13:29:44 EDT 2005 Article: 217896 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 18:54:25 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 20 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-10!sn-xit-01!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22916 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217896 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29618 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208789 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251288 On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:48:06 -0700, Richard Clark wrote: >On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:23:43 -0500, Matt Osborn <> wrote: >>>is adequate to the task >>Clearly, your need to embellish is not only unnecessary, it is also >>irrelevant. > >Hi Matt, > >Yet another prejudice I see. In the face of your wandering the >metaphysical landscape of Why? and finding nothing suitable to alight >on, the need for embellishment seems to be your patent. That you find >the discussion irrelevant is yet more evidence of the Nihilistic >propensity to skepticism and denial. > Simply avoiding the question? Your blindness hinders me not. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217897 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 19:24:45 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: Bad News for Hams? References: <88U_e.693$sL3.385@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> <%yV_e.6858$q1.5550@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <433dd74e$0$32205$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Bob Miller wrote: > > It's not quite shortwave, but National Public Radio plays BBC > programming from about midnight to 5 a.m. (at least my local station > does) > > Bob > k5qwg > Great. Fine programming when no one can listen to it surrounded by tripe. "I'll just go out back and shoot myself". Name the famous BBC Radio Play that's from. tom K0TAR Article: 217898 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Pat Stevens" References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 00:27:57 GMT wrote in message news:0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com... > On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 22:08:49 -0700, Richard Clark > wrote: > >>is adequate to the task > > Clearly, your need to embellish is not only unnecessary, it is also > irrelevant. > > > -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217899 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "H. Adam Stevens, NQ5H" Subject: Re: Winding details for antenna choke ? Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 19:27:32 -0500 Message-ID: <11jrlvk8a6mv337@corp.supernews.com> References: "David" wrote in message news:xNj%e.3757$U51.3488@news-server.bigpond.net.au... > Hi, > Is there a method for obtaining the number of turns for a given > diameter for the antenna choke ? (I am not sure if this will be simple > air-core coil formula or "suck it and see" type arrangement). > ie. I have a sleeve antenna at 915MHz constructed from RG316 coaxial > cable. It is fed up the centre of 1/4" nylon tubing. I want to create a > choke at the feedpoint from the RG316 wound around the outside of the 1/4" > tubing but not sure of how many turns would be required. > > Thanks in advance > > Regards > > David How about a ferrite choke? 73 H. Article: 217900 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Pat Stevens" References: <31f74$43299abf$471c63c6$12083@ALLTEL.NET> <1127271443.195835.320110@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <43313df9$0$253$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <4338A687.8D5B94DF@earthlink.net> <4338D057.B9B48493@earthlink.net> <8rvoj19bp6umuvfefeo6v87enpmg18pd8m@4ax.com> <84g%e.3872$KQ5.520@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 00:28:26 GMT "Tom Donaly" wrote in message news:84g%e.3872$KQ5.520@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com... > kashe@sonic.net wrote: >> On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 02:54:34 GMT, "Tom Donaly" >> wrote: >> >> >>>kashe@sonic.net wrote: >>> >>>>>Tom Donaly wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Faith and works are, like voltage and current, inextricably >>>>>>intertwined. >>>> >>>> >>>> They are not. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>>The proof of faith is the good work. Those who do no good have no >>>>>>faith. >>>> >>>> >>>> Your logic book get lost in the hurricane? Come back when you >>>>can name the logical fallacy you just committed. >>> >>>Some of the lower forms of American Christianity try to separate faith >>>and works. That allows them salvation without substance, the lazy man's >>>path to life without end. >> >> >> in your narrow view. >> >> >>> My last two sentences are statements of truth >> >> >> "I fear the man who has all the answers." -- Father James >> Marien, S.J. -- 1961 -- in my presence. >> >> >>>, not a logical progression. >> >> >> As written, they beg to be read as an incomplete syllogism. > > In other words, you made the connection up in your head. Typical. > > >> >> >> >>>Each has to be taken alone, by itself. (A religious >>>fundamentalist insisting on logical consistency constitutes a >>>pretty good joke.) Let me repeat: Those who do no good have no >>>faith. >> >> >> Repitition does not include leaving off the first half of the >> line you wrote. In a humorous logic treatise, your statement would be >> named "The Proof from Blatant Assertion". >> >> >>>Next time you and your friends are sitting around speaking >>>in tongues, you should discuss this. Maybe, if you all think real >>>hard, together, you can puzzle out what it means. >> >> >> >>>73, >>>Tom Donaly, KA6RUH >> > > Unable to address the truth of what I wrote, you fantasize an argument > out of your sophomoric command of medieval logic. That, too, is typical, > if somewhat pathetic, since your religion is based on unquestioning > belief, superstition, and a fundamental opposition to science and > inquiring thought. Give it up. No brain can justify the brainless. > 73, > Tom Donaly, KA6RUH > Article: 217901 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Charlie" Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 19:29:42 -0500 Message-ID: <11jrm3tb4g04cc6@news.supernews.com> References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> Matt..thx for turning me on to Spinoza.... -- Charlie wrote in message news:d0krj158a9aifpk3s92eovrr0nupp0mo1u@4ax.com... > On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:48:06 -0700, Richard Clark > wrote: > >>On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:23:43 -0500, Matt Osborn <> wrote: >>>>is adequate to the task >>>Clearly, your need to embellish is not only unnecessary, it is also >>>irrelevant. >> >>Hi Matt, >> >>Yet another prejudice I see. In the face of your wandering the >>metaphysical landscape of Why? and finding nothing suitable to alight >>on, the need for embellishment seems to be your patent. That you find >>the discussion irrelevant is yet more evidence of the Nihilistic >>propensity to skepticism and denial. >> > Simply avoiding the question? Your blindness hinders me not. > > > -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217902 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Pat Stevens" References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 00:30:04 GMT Your own stupidity is hindering you. Take it to e-mail, moron. wrote in message news:d0krj158a9aifpk3s92eovrr0nupp0mo1u@4ax.com... > > Simply avoiding the question? Your blindness hinders me not. > > > -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217903 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Pat Stevens" References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> <11jrm3tb4g04cc6@news.supernews.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 00:30:19 GMT "Charlie" wrote in message news:11jrm3tb4g04cc6@news.supernews.com... > Matt..thx for turning me on to Spinoza.... > > -- > > Charlie > > > > > > > wrote in message > news:d0krj158a9aifpk3s92eovrr0nupp0mo1u@4ax.com... >> On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:48:06 -0700, Richard Clark >> wrote: >> >>>On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:23:43 -0500, Matt Osborn <> wrote: >>>>>is adequate to the task >>>>Clearly, your need to embellish is not only unnecessary, it is also >>>>irrelevant. >>> >>>Hi Matt, >>> >>>Yet another prejudice I see. In the face of your wandering the >>>metaphysical landscape of Why? and finding nothing suitable to alight >>>on, the need for embellishment seems to be your patent. That you find >>>the discussion irrelevant is yet more evidence of the Nihilistic >>>propensity to skepticism and denial. >>> >> Simply avoiding the question? Your blindness hinders me not. >> >> >> -- msosborn at msosborn dot com > > Article: 217904 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Pat Stevens" References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 00:31:42 GMT "Richard Clark" wrote in message news:nl1rj1daflg9m5dnnjb4ogiruu4ukrim2m@4ax.com... > On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:23:43 -0500, Matt Osborn <> wrote: >>>is adequate to the task >>Clearly, your need to embellish is not only unnecessary, it is also >>irrelevant. > > Hi Matt, > > Yet another prejudice I see. In the face of your wandering the > metaphysical landscape of Why? and finding nothing suitable to alight > on, the need for embellishment seems to be your patent. That you find > the discussion irrelevant is yet more evidence of the Nihilistic > propensity to skepticism and denial. > > 73's > Richard Clark, KB7QHC Article: 217905 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 20:38:17 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> Message-ID: <433de88a$0$32196$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Richard Clark wrote: > The question? > > "What is 6 times 7?" > The question, quoted from the book, is "What do you get when you multiply six by nine?". And the answer is still 42. Which is obvious. tom K0TAR From Sat Oct 1 13:29:47 EDT 2005 Article: 217906 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 20:42:31 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 17 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.news.ucla.edu!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-12!sn-xit-09!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22924 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217906 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29626 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208800 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251296 On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 00:30:04 GMT, "Pat Stevens" wrote: > Your own stupidity is hindering you. Take it to e-mail, moron. > > wrote in message >news:d0krj158a9aifpk3s92eovrr0nupp0mo1u@4ax.com... >> >> Simply avoiding the question? Your blindness hinders me not. >> >> >> -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Nice vocabulary. Need help using your newsreader? -- msosborn at msosborn dot com From Sat Oct 1 13:29:47 EDT 2005 Article: 217907 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 20:49:08 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <0lqrj159qhmnctjgq3srd8br32uftls2u1@4ax.com> References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 24 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!cyclone1.gnilink.net!gnilink.net!news.glorb.com!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-12!sn-xit-09!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22925 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217907 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29627 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208801 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251297 On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 17:58:47 -0700, Richard Clark wrote: >On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 18:54:25 -0500, Matt Osborn <> wrote: > >>Simply avoiding the question? Your blindness hinders me not. > >Hi Matt, > >The question? > > "What is 6 times 7?" > >Any question is certainly not on your horizon for discussion. Its >nebulous generality is not an invitation to discuss, it is a prelude >to a projected negative assertion made in terms of frustration. > >If you are not hindered, you could have been more explicit. This >should be quite apparent. See ya! -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217908 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 20:53:58 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> Message-ID: <433dec37$0$32199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Matt Osborn wrote: > On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 00:30:04 GMT, "Pat Stevens" > wrote: > > >> Your own stupidity is hindering you. Take it to e-mail, moron. > > Nice vocabulary. Need help using your newsreader? > > > -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Well, he could have it wrong, it may not be stupidity, but it certainly is superstition. tom K0TAR Article: 217909 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 21:00:45 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> <0lqrj159qhmnctjgq3srd8br32uftls2u1@4ax.com> Message-ID: <433dedcd$0$32199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Matt Osborn wrote: >>Any question is certainly not on your horizon for discussion. Its >>nebulous generality is not an invitation to discuss, it is a prelude >>to a projected negative assertion made in terms of frustration. >> >>If you are not hindered, you could have been more explicit. This >>should be quite apparent. > > > See ya! > > > -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Well, his BS finally ran out. tom K0TAR Article: 217910 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Winding details for antenna choke ? Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 02:07:25 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: For design of solenoid chokes wound with coax cable, download program SELFRES3 from website below. -- ........................................................... Regards from Reg, G4FGQ For Free Radio Design Software go to http://www.btinternet.com/~g4fgq.regp ........................................................... Article: 217911 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <88U_e.693$sL3.385@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> <%yV_e.6858$q1.5550@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> <433dd74e$0$32205$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Subject: Re: Bad News for Hams? Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 22:25:42 -0400 Message-ID: <2a0c3$433df3d6$97d558d8$24437@ALLTEL.NET> That was from the amusing play, "The night Kavorkian failed to show up" "Tom Ring" wrote in message news:433dd74e$0$32205$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net... . > > "I'll just go out back and shoot myself". Name the famous BBC Radio > Play that's from. > > tom > K0TAR Article: 217912 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Pat Stevens" References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: <2ym%e.16419$Xl2.3609@twister.nyroc.rr.com> Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 02:31:26 GMT Not as much as you need to figure out what a ham radio is what vhf-uhf is about. wrote in message news:oaqrj15639dvdmo7mlvkesl9eiqotmvtk1@4ax.com... > > Nice vocabulary. Need help using your newsreader? > > > -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217913 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: David Subject: Re: Winding details for antenna choke ? References: Message-ID: Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 02:43:24 GMT Thank you. Reg Edwards wrote: > For design of solenoid chokes wound with coax cable, download program > SELFRES3 from website below. > -- > ........................................................... > Regards from Reg, G4FGQ > For Free Radio Design Software go to > http://www.btinternet.com/~g4fgq.regp > ........................................................... > > Article: 217914 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 22:08:11 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> <433de88a$0$32196$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Message-ID: <433dfd9b$0$32193$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Richard Clark wrote: > On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 20:38:17 -0500, Tom Ring > wrote: > >>The question, quoted from the book, is "What do you get when you >>multiply six by nine?". And the answer is still 42. Which is obvious. > > > Hi Tom, > > Well, ya got me there. Trying too hard to lighten up Matt's bleak > outlook on life when I missed the curve there. ;-) > > 73's > Richard Clark, KB7QHC Well, I'll Ill give you a hint, it's a math thing. tom K0TAR Article: 217915 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 22:10:55 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> <433de88a$0$32196$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <433dfd9b$0$32193$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Message-ID: <433dfe3f$0$32193$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Tom Ring wrote: > Well, I'll Ill give you a hint, it's a math thing. > > tom > K0TAR Sorry, I stuttutterered there. tom K0TAR Article: 217916 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Charlie" Subject: Re: Miracle Whip Antenna Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 22:15:45 -0500 Message-ID: <11jrvr7loc9ped3@news.supernews.com> References: <3v0pj1h66mvi1c2unrrhc43t9eadjcuthj@4ax.com> More likely.. "It Tastes Better Than Mayonnaise" -- Charlie "Jim - NN7K" wrote in message news:C_l%e.1487$lc1.477@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com... > More likely,its, "IF it works, its a Miracle" :>) NN7K > > Larry Gauthier (K8UT) wrote: >> Isn't their marketing slogan: "If it works good, it's a Miracle"? ;-) >> From Sat Oct 1 13:29:49 EDT 2005 Article: 217917 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 22:36:11 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> <433dec37$0$32199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 23 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.news.ucla.edu!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22932 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217917 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29633 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208807 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251303 On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 20:53:58 -0500, Tom Ring wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: > >> On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 00:30:04 GMT, "Pat Stevens" >> wrote: >> >> >>> Your own stupidity is hindering you. Take it to e-mail, moron. >> >> Nice vocabulary. Need help using your newsreader? >> >> >> -- msosborn at msosborn dot com > >Well, he could have it wrong, it may not be stupidity, but it certainly >is superstition. I'm afraid I have no idea of what your point is. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com From Sat Oct 1 13:29:49 EDT 2005 Article: 217918 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 22:41:15 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <021sj1hb84shphia0dq78pl55r0q65sntl@4ax.com> References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> <2ym%e.16419$Xl2.3609@twister.nyroc.rr.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 25 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!216.168.1.162.MISMATCH!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22933 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217918 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29634 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208808 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251304 On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 02:31:26 GMT, "Pat Stevens" wrote: > Not as much as you need to figure out what a ham radio is what vhf-uhf >is about. > > wrote in message >news:oaqrj15639dvdmo7mlvkesl9eiqotmvtk1@4ax.com... >> >> Nice vocabulary. Need help using your newsreader? >> >> >> -- msosborn at msosborn dot com > I suppose I know at least as much as you do Pat, about hf, vhf & uhf. I can also identify a thread and I know how to avoid one. Look, I know this is off topic and that it is an imposition on others. So far, though, it has kept to a single thread and hasn't swamped the group. I didn't start the thread, but I did enjoy it (with a few exceptions). -- msosborn at msosborn dot com From Sat Oct 1 13:29:50 EDT 2005 Article: 217919 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 22:43:41 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <7d1sj1ljfil7mk2a45g84havhdhtn0t32b@4ax.com> References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> <0lqrj159qhmnctjgq3srd8br32uftls2u1@4ax.com> <433dedcd$0$32199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 24 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!tethys.csu.net!nntp.csufresno.edu!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22934 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217919 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29635 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208809 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251305 On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 21:00:45 -0500, Tom Ring wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: > >>>Any question is certainly not on your horizon for discussion. Its >>>nebulous generality is not an invitation to discuss, it is a prelude >>>to a projected negative assertion made in terms of frustration. >>> >>>If you are not hindered, you could have been more explicit. This >>>should be quite apparent. >> >> >> See ya! >> >> >> -- msosborn at msosborn dot com > >Well, his BS finally ran out. Patience is too valuable to waste. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217920 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 22:51:39 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> <433dec37$0$32199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Message-ID: <433e07cb$0$32196$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Matt Osborn wrote: >>>-- msosborn at msosborn dot com >> >>Well, he could have it wrong, it may not be stupidity, but it certainly >>is superstition. > > > I'm afraid I have no idea of what your point is. > > > -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Of course not, you aren't capable of it. That's the part that superstition affects. tom K0TAR Article: 217921 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 22:52:59 -0500 From: Tom Ring Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> <0lqrj159qhmnctjgq3srd8br32uftls2u1@4ax.com> <433dedcd$0$32199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <7d1sj1ljfil7mk2a45g84havhdhtn0t32b@4ax.com> Message-ID: <433e081b$0$32196$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> Matt Osborn wrote: > Patience is too valuable to waste. > > > -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Yet another null statement. tom K0TAR Article: 217922 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Lee" References: <433D46F0.D0533E2B@shaw.ca> <433D7754.F019C9B2@shaw.ca> <11jrte940qbbf67@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: Magnetic Loop !!! Message-ID: Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 05:49:44 GMT "J. Mc Laughlin" wrote in message news:11jrte940qbbf67@corp.supernews.com... > I second what Irv (VE6BP) has suggested. The modeling that I have done of > small loops (just plain loops, no magnetic materials involved) placed > horizontally (above earth) suggest the same pattern in all directions with a > significant dip towards the zenith - just what one's receiver likes in order > to receive signals from far away. > > 73 Mac N8TT > > -- > J. Mc Laughlin; Michigan U.S.A. > Home: JCM@Power-Net.Net > "Irv Finkleman" wrote in message > news:433D7754.F019C9B2@shaw.ca... > > Lee wrote: < I`ll try that Mac and see if it is worth the effort of a much larger project.... like 10ft square multiband!!. Thanks Mac & Irv.. Lee....G6ZSG...... Article: 217923 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: dplatt@radagast.org (Dave Platt) Subject: Re: Bad News for Hams? Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 05:55:55 -0000 Message-ID: <11js97bgtcb8u68@corp.supernews.com> References: <88U_e.693$sL3.385@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> <433dd74e$0$32205$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <2a0c3$433df3d6$97d558d8$24437@ALLTEL.NET> <433df9b7$0$32199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> In article <433df9b7$0$32199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net>, Tom Ring wrote: >"I'll just go out back and shoot myself". Name the famous BBC Radio >Play that's from. "Hitch-hiker's Guide to the Galaxy", I believe. The genetically- engineered, tasty, and most obliging foodbeast. -- Dave Platt AE6EO Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads! Article: 217924 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Magnetic Loop !!! Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 07:14:40 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <433D46F0.D0533E2B@shaw.ca> <433D7754.F019C9B2@shaw.ca> <11jrte940qbbf67@corp.supernews.com> Lee, Using the loop indoors, at ground-floor level, at 20MHz, on a groundwave path, is not inconsistent with what you get. Get it high-up, outdoors, and it will make a big difference. The capacitor is made from a length of coax. I wonder how long it is and how it is located relative to the loop? Wherever it is, being unbalanced coax it will unbalance the loop. But what worries me, the very thin coaxial inner conductor is in series with the main loop conductor. It may have a loss resistance several times greater than the large diameter main loop. You could be losing a lot of decibels. ---- Reg, G4FGQ. Article: 217925 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Magnetic Loop !!! Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 08:00:44 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <433D46F0.D0533E2B@shaw.ca> <433D7754.F019C9B2@shaw.ca> <11jrte940qbbf67@corp.supernews.com> > But what worries me, the very thin coaxial inner conductor is in > series with the main loop conductor. It may have a loss resistance > several times greater than the large diameter main loop. You could > be losing a lot of decibels. ===================================== Lee, If you cut the length of coax into, say, 7 equal lengths and connected them in parallel you will have a capacitor of the same value but with a loss resistance only 1/7th of the single length. More compact too. 6 fit very nicely round 1. Bundle them up in a plastic bag to keep off the rain. ---- Reg, G4FGQ. Article: 217926 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Lee" References: <433D46F0.D0533E2B@shaw.ca> <433D7754.F019C9B2@shaw.ca> <11jrte940qbbf67@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: Magnetic Loop !!! Message-ID: Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 08:31:23 GMT "Reg Edwards" wrote in message news:dhld10$g2k$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... > Lee, > > Using the loop indoors, at ground-floor level, at 20MHz, on a > groundwave path, is not inconsistent with what you get. Get it > high-up, outdoors, and it will make a big difference. Next, after testing 2` above ground....... > The capacitor is made from a length of coax. I wonder how long it is > and how it is located relative to the loop? Wherever it is, being > unbalanced coax it will unbalance the loop. Isn`t a variable butterfly vane capacitor unbalanced also as is the co-axial trimpot and the compression piston cap?..they are all used on magloops Reg. > But what worries me, the very thin coaxial inner conductor is in > series with the main loop conductor. It may have a loss resistance > several times greater than the large diameter main loop. You could be > losing a lot of decibels. I`m listening Lee....G6ZSG..... Article: 217927 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Lee" References: <433D46F0.D0533E2B@shaw.ca> <433D7754.F019C9B2@shaw.ca> <11jrte940qbbf67@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: Magnetic Loop !!! Message-ID: Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 08:39:03 GMT "Reg Edwards" wrote in message news:dhlfnc$ngh$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... < > Lee, > > If you cut the length of coax into, say, 7 equal lengths and connected > them in parallel you will have a capacitor of the same value but with > a loss resistance only 1/7th of the single length. RG8 / UR213 would be more convenient i should think Reg if i were running a bit more QRO...... > More compact too. 6 fit very nicely round 1. Bundle them up in a > plastic bag to keep off the rain. I`ll try that Reg..... i have an old QRP atu with air spaced variables around 350pf with slow motion drive i could use on a more ambitious project a little later....good for 100watts or so SSB...Yes? Lee...G6ZSG....... Article: 217928 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: N7ZZT - Eric Oyen Subject: Re: UWB Antennas, why these shapes? References: <1128006269.858078.317850@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 01:56:11 -0700 Reg Edwards wrote: > Richard, > > Everybody says that thickening the antenna conductor increases the > bandwidth. And indeed it does. > > But nobody ever says by how much the bandwidth is increased. > > I think this is because bandwidth is increased by such a small > proportion that it's not worth the trouble and expense of erecting > another antenna. Otherwise everybody would have giant, unsightly, > neighbor-offending, cages in their back yards. But they don't. There is a listed formula for determining BW given wavelength/wire diameter ratio. There is also a description of the antenna's efficiency given that sam ration (btw, when said ratio starts to approach 1:1, the antenna ceases to be efficient at all and and other equally wierd effects begin to happen). > > I have a program, DIPCAGE2, which calculates the increase in bandwith > due to increase in dipole diameter which demonstrates this > disappointing point. a program cannot begin to handle all the variables involved in how an antenna functions IRL. it can approximate those functions only under extremely controlled conditions (which do not happen in real life either). all a program is good for is getting you close and then you adjust the antenna physically to tune it. -- DE N7ZZT Eric Oyen Phoenix, Arizona e-mail: n7zzt(at)hotmail(dot)com the difference between intelligence and stupidity is that intelligence has its limits. Article: 217929 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Asimov" Subject: Re: Lightning Question [OOPS] Message-ID: References: Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 09:11:05 GMT "Steve Nosko" bravely wrote to "All" (30 Sep 05 17:14:58) --- on the heady topic of "Re: Lightning Question [OOPS]" SN> From: "Steve Nosko" SN> Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217790 SN> I got distracted and hit send B4 completing an edit. I don't see any SN> relavance of the pulses and frequency part of your post. When hairs SN> stand up on your arm the small movement tickles. Touch them with SN> something. I see no pulses to talk about. Have you ever seen an image captured with Kirlian Photography? This is a process where corona discharge is photographed onto a film. There was a lot of mumbo jumbo around this effect but it is quite interesting as it gives a great insight into how charges arrange themselves around an object and their behaviour, more so if observed using a live action camera instead of a still. The corona discharge is a dynamic event not simply DC. Just observe any high voltage discharge, it never takes exactly the same path. Even a rectifier diode never has exactly the same forward voltage when a constant AC sinewave current is applied. No one is quite sure why either. Anyway, the gamma ray burst theory is not mine but that of some head of department professor big wig guy. So why should I disbelieve a phd who actually writes this hypothesis up in a published paper? By comparison, those denigrating the theory without much basis don't impress a lot. They should "stop making their political allegiances take a priority over expertise". And that is my new catch phrase for the month. Another guy (in Norway?) also claims that cosmic rays are responsible for creating clouds and that the amount of cloud cover is linked to the solar cycle. Apparently when the Sun cycle is in a minimum period the solar wind lessens and allows more intergalactic cosmic rays to reach the Earth. These cosmic rays promote nucleation of water vapour in the atmosphere, thus creating more cloud cover and the Earth cools as more sunlight is reflected. In a time of maximum the solar wind increases and less cosmic rays reach the Earth, resulting in less cloud cover and the Earth heats up more from the increased sunlight reaching the ground. A*s*i*m*o*v ... Couldn't fix your brakes, so I made the horn louder! Article: 217930 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Asimov" Subject: Re: Lightning Question Message-ID: References: Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 09:11:07 GMT "Steve Nosko" bravely wrote to "All" (30 Sep 05 16:59:44) --- on the heady topic of "Re: Lightning Question" SN> From: "Steve Nosko" SN> Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217792 SN> "...alternative to the lightning rod. ..." SN> Their purpose it to bleed off the charge so it can't develop to the SN> point where the leaders can start and prevent the strike. You need to SN> get the charge out of there, not let it continue to build until it SN> finds another path it can breach. Charge concentrates at a point and SN> low level ionization bleeds off the charge "safely". SN> You put large round balls on static generators so that you DO allow SN> the charge to build up and not bleed off. So then why does the lightning prefer to hit the rod? I've seen St-Elmo's fire on a metal chimney, quite interesting. A*s*i*m*o*v ... Birthdays are good for you - the more you have the longer you live. Article: 217931 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Pat Stevens" References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> <2ym%e.16419$Xl2.3609@twister.nyroc.rr.com> <021sj1hb84shphia0dq78pl55r0q65sntl@4ax.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 11:14:52 GMT I doubt that you know at least as much as I do, because you would realize that your posts are completely off-topic for all of the groups that you insist on posting your religion/atheist arguments. It may have kept to a single thread, but I would disagree with you about it swamping the newsgroups, since it your posts are almost two to three times the on-topic posts for these newsgroups. I don't understand the point that you didn't start the thread, but that you are still posting to it. If someone else starts a fight and you just keep hitting back, does that mean you aren't fighting? Now, I understand your ignorance and why your arguments are all skewed. Take your discussion to e-mail. This thread started on-topic, but people like you, who can't follow rules, have denigrated it to an off-topic discussion. wrote in message news:021sj1hb84shphia0dq78pl55r0q65sntl@4ax.com... > > I suppose I know at least as much as you do Pat, about hf, vhf & uhf. > I can also identify a thread and I know how to avoid one. > > Look, I know this is off topic and that it is an imposition on others. > So far, though, it has kept to a single thread and hasn't swamped the > group. I didn't start the thread, but I did enjoy it (with a few > exceptions). > > > -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217932 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Pat Stevens" References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> <0lqrj159qhmnctjgq3srd8br32uftls2u1@4ax.com> <433dedcd$0$32199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <7d1sj1ljfil7mk2a45g84havhdhtn0t32b@4ax.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 11:17:59 GMT Along with a lot of other things. Too bad, your common sense is lacking. wrote in message news:7d1sj1ljfil7mk2a45g84havhdhtn0t32b@4ax.com... > > Patience is too valuable to waste. > > > -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217933 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "J. Mc Laughlin" Subject: Re: Magnetic Loop !!! Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 08:02:36 -0400 Message-ID: <11jsujdpigc5dff@corp.supernews.com> References: <433D46F0.D0533E2B@shaw.ca> <433D7754.F019C9B2@shaw.ca> <11jrte940qbbf67@corp.supernews.com> Dear Lee (G6ZSG): Please do note that I was commenting on a receiving antenna, which is in need of an antenna mounted amplifier. The amplifier does not have hard-to-accomplish requirements for gain (20 db is good) or for input impedance. However, the amplifier does need to have very high IM performance and at least a high-pass filter to reject signals from the AM broadcast band. Using a small, horizontal loop antenna as a transmitting antenna can be done. As you are finding out, coupling power into the loop is a challenge. Good luck. 73 Mac N8TT -- J. Mc Laughlin; Michigan U.S.A. Home: JCM@Power-Net.Net "Lee" wrote in message news:Yrp%e.24651$VI6.3177@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk... > > "J. Mc Laughlin" wrote in message > news:11jrte940qbbf67@corp.supernews.com... > > I second what Irv (VE6BP) has suggested. The modeling that I have done of > > small loops (just plain loops, no magnetic materials involved) placed > > horizontally (above earth) suggest the same pattern in all directions with > a > > significant dip towards the zenith - just what one's receiver likes in > order > > to receive signals from far away. > > > > 73 Mac N8TT > > > > -- > > J. Mc Laughlin; Michigan U.S.A. > > Home: JCM@Power-Net.Net > > "Irv Finkleman" wrote in message > > news:433D7754.F019C9B2@shaw.ca... > > > Lee wrote: > < > > I`ll try that Mac and see if it is worth the effort of a much larger > project.... like 10ft square multiband!!. > > Thanks Mac & Irv.. > > Lee....G6ZSG...... > > Article: 217934 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison) Subject: Re: Lightning Question Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 06:50:38 -0500 Message-ID: <13320-433E780E-161@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net> References: Asimov wrote: "So then why does the lightning prefer to hit the rod?" The rod is salient. It`s the voltage gradient, which is not a uniform function of position or altirude, but is greater at sharp edges and points. These initiate ionozarion which precipitates lightning. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Article: 217935 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Magnetic Loop !!! Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 13:15:28 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <433D46F0.D0533E2B@shaw.ca> <433D7754.F019C9B2@shaw.ca> <11jrte940qbbf67@corp.supernews.com> <11jsujdpigc5dff@corp.supernews.com> The intermod performance of a receiving pre-amplifier is of no consequence with a magloop. The Q and selectivity (of the order of 1000) of the loop at the wanted frequency easily reject local high-power MF broadcast frequencies. On 160m, It's difficult to hear any stations only 3 kHz away from the wanted frequency. ---- Reg. From Sat Oct 1 13:29:54 EDT 2005 Article: 217936 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 08:36:18 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <264tj1lhmr2sbrkduaropc717hjmhpse21@4ax.com> References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> <433dec37$0$32199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <433e07cb$0$32196$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 23 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!tethys.csu.net!nntp.csufresno.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-08!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22940 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217936 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29640 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208819 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251310 On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 22:51:39 -0500, Tom Ring wrote: >Matt Osborn wrote: > >>>>-- msosborn at msosborn dot com >>> >>>Well, he could have it wrong, it may not be stupidity, but it certainly >>>is superstition. >> >> >> I'm afraid I have no idea of what your point is. >> >> >> -- msosborn at msosborn dot com > >Of course not, you aren't capable of it. That's the part that >superstition affects. What superstition? -- msosborn at msosborn dot com From Sat Oct 1 13:29:54 EDT 2005 Article: 217937 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 08:37:49 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> <2ym%e.16419$Xl2.3609@twister.nyroc.rr.com> <021sj1hb84shphia0dq78pl55r0q65sntl@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 37 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.news.ucla.edu!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22941 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217937 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29641 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208820 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251311 We'll just have to disagree, Pat. On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 11:14:52 GMT, "Pat Stevens" wrote: >I doubt that you know at least as much as I do, because you would realize >that your posts are completely off-topic for all of the groups that you >insist on posting your religion/atheist arguments. >It may have kept to a single thread, but I would disagree with you about it >swamping the newsgroups, since it your posts are almost two to three times >the on-topic posts for these newsgroups. >I don't understand the point that you didn't start the thread, but that you >are still posting to it. If someone else starts a fight and you just keep >hitting back, does that mean you aren't fighting? Now, I understand your >ignorance and why your arguments are all skewed. >Take your discussion to e-mail. This thread started on-topic, but people >like you, who can't follow rules, have denigrated it to an off-topic >discussion. > > wrote in message >news:021sj1hb84shphia0dq78pl55r0q65sntl@4ax.com... >> >> I suppose I know at least as much as you do Pat, about hf, vhf & uhf. >> I can also identify a thread and I know how to avoid one. >> >> Look, I know this is off topic and that it is an imposition on others. >> So far, though, it has kept to a single thread and hasn't swamped the >> group. I didn't start the thread, but I did enjoy it (with a few >> exceptions). >> >> >> -- msosborn at msosborn dot com > -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217938 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Lee" References: <433D46F0.D0533E2B@shaw.ca> <433D7754.F019C9B2@shaw.ca> <11jrte940qbbf67@corp.supernews.com> <11jsujdpigc5dff@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: Magnetic Loop !!! Message-ID: Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 13:42:40 GMT "Reg Edwards" wrote in message news:dhm25g$fst$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... > The intermod performance of a receiving pre-amplifier is of no > consequence with a magloop. > > The Q and selectivity (of the order of 1000) of the loop at the wanted > frequency easily reject local high-power MF broadcast frequencies. > > On 160m, It's difficult to hear any stations only 3 kHz away from the > wanted frequency. > ---- > Reg. > Hi Reg.... I took my little 1 meter dia ( 10 ft circ ) loop outside lunchtime and mounted it verticaly 2ft off the lawn and tested it, not expecting anything special and found that comparing it to the G5RV that there was no noticable difference between the two!!...my friend and i switched out our preamps and attenuator in. I even turned the loop face on and edge on with a change of 2-3 S points.. So, needless to say, i am rather impressed with the performance and bandwidth of 2:1 SWR about 180k.....so much so that i am thinking seriously of going for a 20 ft circumference or larger for 80 and 40 metres.... Regards. Lee....G6ZSG.....Well impressed!!! :-) Article: 217939 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> <2ym%e.16419$Xl2.3609@twister.nyroc.rr.com> <021sj1hb84shphia0dq78pl55r0q65sntl@4ax.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 09:42:19 -0400 Message-ID: <7d3a5$433e926c$97d558d8$32550@ALLTEL.NET> I bet you were a hall monitor in school... It must be really boring to have a life that is only enriched by being a net Nazi. "Pat Stevens" wrote in message news:Mcu%e.16434$Xl2.1264@twister.nyroc.rr.com... > I doubt that you know at least as much as I do, because you would realize > that your posts are completely off-topic for all of the groups that you > insist on posting your religion/atheist arguments. > It may have kept to a single thread, but I would disagree with you about it > swamping the newsgroups, since it your posts are almost two to three times > the on-topic posts for these newsgroups. > I don't understand the point that you didn't start the thread, but that you > are still posting to it. If someone else starts a fight and you just keep > hitting back, does that mean you aren't fighting? Now, I understand your > ignorance and why your arguments are all skewed. > Take your discussion to e-mail. This thread started on-topic, but people > like you, who can't follow rules, have denigrated it to an off-topic > discussion. From Sat Oct 1 13:29:55 EDT 2005 Article: 217940 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 09:21:31 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> <0lqrj159qhmnctjgq3srd8br32uftls2u1@4ax.com> <433dedcd$0$32199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <7d1sj1ljfil7mk2a45g84havhdhtn0t32b@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 27 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!cyclone1.gnilink.net!gnilink.net!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!140.99.99.194.MISMATCH!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-11!sn-xit-05!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22943 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217940 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29643 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208822 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251313 On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 23:00:18 -0700, Richard Clark wrote: >>> Therefore Passion had >>>not so much reason to laugh at Patience, because he had his good things first, >>>as Patience will have to laugh at Passion, because he had his best things last; >>>for first must give place to last, because last must have his time to come; >>>but last gives place to nothing; for there is not another to succeed. The tale is of two sheep, Patience and Passion, awaiting their reward >from the hands of another. Two additional siblings were mentioned, but not named, Jealousy and Greed. >The parable is thus of the passion of the administration laughing at >the world as they glory over it. The plight of New Orleans reveals >their moral poverty in that all towns are New Orleans in their eyes. Again we are told of sheep, those who await their shepherd's staff. The life of a sheep is not that of a man, and that of the farmer is not that of the shepherd. Shall we allow the sheep to deprive us of our grain? Who will shepherd them then? The farmer's fields, so lush and green, let the sheep eat their fill and the farmer will soon abandon his till. -- msosborn at msosborn dot com From Sat Oct 1 13:29:55 EDT 2005 Article: 217941 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Matt Osborn <> Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 09:27:54 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <4s6tj1lpqgae2070qihattvmnv8udk80vb@4ax.com> References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> <0lqrj159qhmnctjgq3srd8br32uftls2u1@4ax.com> <433dedcd$0$32199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <7d1sj1ljfil7mk2a45g84havhdhtn0t32b@4ax.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 24 Path: news1.isis.unc.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.news.ucla.edu!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news1.isis.unc.edu alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf:22944 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:217941 rec.radio.amateur.dx:29644 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:208823 rec.radio.amateur.policy:251314 Thanks for joining the thread, Pat. It's infectious, isn't it? It would be helpful, at least to me, if you would describe what made you believe that I lack common sense? Perhaps, if you don't mind, you could expound a little on why you find common sense so valuable. On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 11:17:59 GMT, "Pat Stevens" wrote: > Along with a lot of other things. Too bad, your common sense is >lacking. > > wrote in message >news:7d1sj1ljfil7mk2a45g84havhdhtn0t32b@4ax.com... >> >> Patience is too valuable to waste. >> >> >> -- msosborn at msosborn dot com > -- msosborn at msosborn dot com Article: 217942 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Pat Stevens" References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> <2ym%e.16419$Xl2.3609@twister.nyroc.rr.com> <021sj1hb84shphia0dq78pl55r0q65sntl@4ax.com> <7d3a5$433e926c$97d558d8$32550@ALLTEL.NET> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 15:46:56 GMT You probably call the police a nazi, too, when they pull you over for speeding. How come everyone believes that they don't need to follow the rules and that when they have it pointed out to them that they are outside the rules, they are being "picked on." Is that what you were in school? "Fred W4JLE" wrote in message news:7d3a5$433e926c$97d558d8$32550@ALLTEL.NET... >I bet you were a hall monitor in school... > > It must be really boring to have a life that is only enriched by being a > net > Nazi. Article: 217943 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Pat Stevens" References: <1jepj1p4qngh1ivp6bo4c1rc3vulugi6d5@4ax.com> <8bgpj11ofckhvd5dcg0umujbqav3508g9m@4ax.com> <0h0rj1ho78qtofjckgk0nrrqu4mgn8di5k@4ax.com> <0lqrj159qhmnctjgq3srd8br32uftls2u1@4ax.com> <433dedcd$0$32199$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net> <7d1sj1ljfil7mk2a45g84havhdhtn0t32b@4ax.com> <4s6tj1lpqgae2070qihattvmnv8udk80vb@4ax.com> Subject: Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article Message-ID: Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 15:47:58 GMT Not enough sense to stay on-topic, maybe? What is with the argument that "I didn't start it, but I sure the hell am going to finish it" attitude. wrote in message news:4s6tj1lpqgae2070qihattvmnv8udk80vb@4ax.com... > Thanks for joining the thread, Pat. It's infectious, isn't it? > > It would be helpful, at least to me, if you would describe what made > you believe that I lack common sense? Perhaps, if you don't mind, > you could expound a little on why you find common sense so valuable. Article: 217944 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "J. Mc Laughlin" Subject: Small, non-resonant, horiz. loop. was Re: Magnetic Loop !!! Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 12:16:14 -0400 Message-ID: <11jtdf05htl4j4a@corp.supernews.com> References: <433D46F0.D0533E2B@shaw.ca> <433D7754.F019C9B2@shaw.ca> <11jrte940qbbf67@corp.supernews.com> <11jsujdpigc5dff@corp.supernews.com> Dear Reg (G4FGQ): I note with interest that your note was written in the early afternoon. The subject of my communication is: small (much smaller than a wavelength) - non-resonant (input impedance almost entirely inductive if one looks into a single opening in the loop) - horizontal - loop antenna (no substances with significant magnetic properties are in the vicinity of the loop antenna) - used to receive incident EM waves (which have both E and H components). SNRHL receiving antennas I do not know the definition of a "magloop." Apparently, such a beastie comprises a resonant loop antenna. No knowledgeable person would disagree that a single tuned network with a Q of 1000 is "narrow." My interest in SNRHL receiving antennas comes from an interest in practical HF receiving antennas that are resistive to types of noise that appear only to be present at isolated, open, rural, otherwise-low-noise sites. The noise involved does not occur in urban areas or even rural sites with many trees. Consider some of the excellent wine from Michigan this evening. This state, with a coastline almost the same length as that of the island of Great Britain, produces some excellent products for your enjoyment. 73 Mac N8TT -- J. Mc Laughlin; Michigan U.S.A. Home: JCM@Power-Net.Net "Reg Edwards" wrote in message news:dhm25g$fst$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... > The intermod performance of a receiving pre-amplifier is of no > consequence with a magloop. > > The Q and selectivity (of the order of 1000) of the loop at the wanted > frequency easily reject local high-power MF broadcast frequencies. > > On 160m, It's difficult to hear any stations only 3 kHz away from the > wanted frequency. > ---- > Reg. > > Article: 217945 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Roger Conroy" Subject: Re: Antenna improvements? Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 18:12:47 +0200 Message-ID: References: > > "Asimov" wrote in message > news:MSGID_1=3a167=2f133.0_430dd78a@fidonet.org... > "Dave" bravely wrote to "All" (25 Aug 05 12:48:54) > --- on the heady topic of "Re: Antenna improvements?" > > > Physicists bounce radar off meteor trails in the upper atmosphere. > This ionized air path reflects radio waves and can be detected. You don't need to be a physicist to do it. Many Hams (without degrees in physics) do it routinely, and what's more, they don't merely "detect" the reflected radio waves, they actually achieve useful communication with them. 73 Roger ZR3RC Article: 217946 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Message-ID: <433EBB7B.2E3FCB63@shaw.ca> From: Irv Finkleman Subject: Re: Miracle Whip Antenna References: <3v0pj1h66mvi1c2unrrhc43t9eadjcuthj@4ax.com> <7pednVJhb64o56DeRVn-oA@crocker.com> Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 16:37:56 GMT Dave wrote: > > "Buther Boy" wrote in message > news:3v0pj1h66mvi1c2unrrhc43t9eadjcuthj@4ax.com... > > Hi, just ordered this awesome antenna. Anyone have any experiences > > they'd like to share regarding its use? > > do you have to keep it refrigerated after opening?? No, but you'll find you won't want to keep it too long! Irv VE6BP -- -------------------------------------- Diagnosed Type II Diabetes March 5 2001 Beating it with diet and exercise! 297/215/210 (to be revised lower) 58"/43"(!)/44" (already lower too!) -------------------------------------- Visit my HomePage at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv/index.html Visit my Baby Sofia website at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv4/index.htm Visit my OLDTIMERS website at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv5/index.htm -------------------- Irv Finkleman, Grampa/Ex-Navy/Old Fart/Ham Radio VE6BP Calgary, Alberta, Canada