Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #534477 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Earle Jones27 <earle.jones@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-11-21 17:26 -0800 |
| Last post | 2015-11-23 03:18 -0500 |
| Articles | 17 — 6 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Optimum length of a long-wire antenna Earle Jones27 <earle.jones@comcast.net> - 2015-11-21 17:26 -0800
Re: Optimum length of a long-wire antenna benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 01:11 -0500
Re: Optimum length of a long-wire antenna Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 13:02 -0600
Re: Optimum length of a long-wire antenna jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-22 19:45 +0000
Re: Optimum length of a long-wire antenna "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 12:57 -0800
Re: Optimum length of a long-wire antenna jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-22 21:06 +0000
Re: Optimum length of a long-wire antenna "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 13:20 -0800
Re: Optimum length of a long-wire antenna jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-22 23:18 +0000
Re: Optimum length of a long-wire antenna "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 16:43 -0800
Re: Optimum length of a long-wire antenna jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-23 01:13 +0000
Re: Optimum length of a long-wire antenna benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-23 03:10 -0500
Re: Optimum length of a long-wire antenna "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-23 10:54 -0800
Re: Optimum length of a long-wire antenna jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-23 19:05 +0000
Re: Optimum length of a long-wire antenna "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-23 12:07 -0800
Re: Optimum length of a long-wire antenna benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 00:00 -0500
Re: Optimum length of a long-wire antenna "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 14:49 -0800
Re: Optimum length of a long-wire antenna benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-23 03:18 -0500
| From | Earle Jones27 <earle.jones@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-21 17:26 -0800 |
| Subject | Optimum length of a long-wire antenna |
| Message-ID | <2015112117265771652-earlejones@comcastnet> |
* The optimum length of a long-wire antenna is one that reaches from the transmitter to the receiver. earle *
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-22 01:11 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <60d4y.187315$eK.160305@fx11.iad> |
| In reply to | #534477 |
On 11/21/2015 08:26 PM, Earle Jones27 wrote:
> *
> The optimum length of a long-wire antenna is one that reaches from the
> transmitter to the receiver.
>
> earle
> *
You have not defined your term "optimum". If one is paying for the wire,
that may not be so optimum after all.
“...there is always a well-known solution to every human problem — neat,
plausible, and wrong.”
H. L. Mencken
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-22 13:02 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <RbCdnWiqjfq0jM_LnZ2dnUU7-dmdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #534477 |
On 11/21/15 7:26 PM, Earle Jones27 wrote: > The optimum length of a long-wire antenna is one that reaches from the > transmitter to the receiver. > Fiber optic. -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-22 19:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <aki9ic-kah.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #534582 |
Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/21/15 7:26 PM, Earle Jones27 wrote: >> The optimum length of a long-wire antenna is one that reaches from the >> transmitter to the receiver. >> > > Fiber optic. Obviously you have never paid for such out of your own pocket. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-22 12:57 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <caad3f85-4e00-4122-9fbf-fae73ba91e2e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #534596 |
On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 11:46:07 AM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 11/21/15 7:26 PM, Earle Jones27 wrote: > >> The optimum length of a long-wire antenna is one that reaches from the > >> transmitter to the receiver. > >> > > > > Fiber optic. > > Obviously you have never paid for such out of your own pocket. > > > > -- > Jim Pennino It's twice the wavelength. (For what you get.) What with frequency modulation instead of amplitude modulation, then, seems you'd want a "harp".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-22 21:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2cn9ic-9qh.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #534607 |
Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 11:46:07 AM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On 11/21/15 7:26 PM, Earle Jones27 wrote: >> >> The optimum length of a long-wire antenna is one that reaches from the >> >> transmitter to the receiver. >> >> >> > >> > Fiber optic. >> >> Obviously you have never paid for such out of your own pocket. >> >> >> >> -- >> Jim Pennino > > It's twice the wavelength. > > (For what you get.) > > What with frequency modulation > instead of amplitude modulation, > then, seems you'd want a "harp". Is any of that supposed to mean something or is it just the random, babbling word salad it looks like? -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-22 13:20 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <cfe3a61f-f991-4880-b991-f167f7192461@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #534611 |
On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 1:16:06 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 11:46:07 AM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > On 11/21/15 7:26 PM, Earle Jones27 wrote: > >> >> The optimum length of a long-wire antenna is one that reaches from the > >> >> transmitter to the receiver. > >> >> > >> > > >> > Fiber optic. > >> > >> Obviously you have never paid for such out of your own pocket. > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Jim Pennino > > > > It's twice the wavelength. > > > > (For what you get.) > > > > What with frequency modulation > > instead of amplitude modulation, > > then, seems you'd want a "harp". > > Is any of that supposed to mean something or is it just the random, > babbling word salad it looks like? > > -- > Jim Pennino You can thank Nyquist and Shannon for that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-22 23:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <63v9ic-bgi.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #534612 |
Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 1:16:06 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 11:46:07 AM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > On 11/21/15 7:26 PM, Earle Jones27 wrote: >> >> >> The optimum length of a long-wire antenna is one that reaches from the >> >> >> transmitter to the receiver. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Fiber optic. >> >> >> >> Obviously you have never paid for such out of your own pocket. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Jim Pennino >> > >> > It's twice the wavelength. >> > >> > (For what you get.) >> > >> > What with frequency modulation >> > instead of amplitude modulation, >> > then, seems you'd want a "harp". >> >> Is any of that supposed to mean something or is it just the random, >> babbling word salad it looks like? >> >> -- >> Jim Pennino > > You can thank Nyquist and Shannon for that. I take it that Nyquist and Shannon have you dazzed and confused beyond all hope. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-22 16:43 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <71dc38b8-14fe-4ebf-81a0-8fb6e9a05670@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #534641 |
On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 3:31:09 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 1:16:06 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >> Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 11:46:07 AM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >> >> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > On 11/21/15 7:26 PM, Earle Jones27 wrote: > >> >> >> The optimum length of a long-wire antenna is one that reaches from the > >> >> >> transmitter to the receiver. > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > Fiber optic. > >> >> > >> >> Obviously you have never paid for such out of your own pocket. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> Jim Pennino > >> > > >> > It's twice the wavelength. > >> > > >> > (For what you get.) > >> > > >> > What with frequency modulation > >> > instead of amplitude modulation, > >> > then, seems you'd want a "harp". > >> > >> Is any of that supposed to mean something or is it just the random, > >> babbling word salad it looks like? > >> > >> -- > >> Jim Pennino > > > > You can thank Nyquist and Shannon for that. > > I take it that Nyquist and Shannon have you dazzed and confused beyond > all hope. > > > -- > Jim Pennino Maybe you'd be happier with Jacob Wolfowitz and Stanford Goldman. How about: Huffman? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_Richard_W._Hamming_Medal Here this is for "signal processing" of the "resonant frequencies of antenna material in electrical fields including atmospheric radio frequency fields". We can just go back to Fourier for a bunch of this too.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-23 01:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <9r5aic-a4j.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #534655 |
Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 3:31:09 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 1:16:06 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >> Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 11:46:07 AM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >> >> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> > On 11/21/15 7:26 PM, Earle Jones27 wrote: >> >> >> >> The optimum length of a long-wire antenna is one that reaches from the >> >> >> >> transmitter to the receiver. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Fiber optic. >> >> >> >> >> >> Obviously you have never paid for such out of your own pocket. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> Jim Pennino >> >> > >> >> > It's twice the wavelength. >> >> > >> >> > (For what you get.) >> >> > >> >> > What with frequency modulation >> >> > instead of amplitude modulation, >> >> > then, seems you'd want a "harp". >> >> >> >> Is any of that supposed to mean something or is it just the random, >> >> babbling word salad it looks like? >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Jim Pennino >> > >> > You can thank Nyquist and Shannon for that. >> >> I take it that Nyquist and Shannon have you dazzed and confused beyond >> all hope. >> >> >> -- >> Jim Pennino > > Maybe you'd be happier with > Jacob Wolfowitz and Stanford Goldman. > > How about: Huffman? > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_Richard_W._Hamming_Medal > > Here this is for "signal processing" of the > "resonant frequencies of antenna material > in electrical fields including atmospheric > radio frequency fields". > > We can just go back to Fourier for a bunch > of this too. Do you have a point or is that just the beanie you are wearing? BTW genius, information theory and antenna theory are two different fields. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-23 03:10 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <6Sz4y.128136$GH.60501@fx27.iad> |
| In reply to | #534660 |
On 11/22/2015 08:13 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 3:31:09 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 1:16:06 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>> Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 11:46:07 AM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/21/15 7:26 PM, Earle Jones27 wrote:
>>>>>>>>> The optimum length of a long-wire antenna is one that reaches from the
>>>>>>>>> transmitter to the receiver.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Fiber optic.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Obviously you have never paid for such out of your own pocket.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Jim Pennino
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's twice the wavelength.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (For what you get.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What with frequency modulation
>>>>>> instead of amplitude modulation,
>>>>>> then, seems you'd want a "harp".
>>>>>
>>>>> Is any of that supposed to mean something or is it just the random,
>>>>> babbling word salad it looks like?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jim Pennino
>>>>
>>>> You can thank Nyquist and Shannon for that.
>>>
>>> I take it that Nyquist and Shannon have you dazzed and confused beyond
>>> all hope.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jim Pennino
>>
>> Maybe you'd be happier with
>> Jacob Wolfowitz and Stanford Goldman.
>>
>> How about: Huffman?
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_Richard_W._Hamming_Medal
>>
>> Here this is for "signal processing" of the
>> "resonant frequencies of antenna material
>> in electrical fields including atmospheric
>> radio frequency fields".
>>
>> We can just go back to Fourier for a bunch
>> of this too.
>
> Do you have a point or is that just the beanie you are wearing?
>
> BTW genius, information theory and antenna theory are two different fields.
Jim, this is what happens when people "know" a bunch of stuff but have
no idea what it all means. Happens here all the time.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-23 10:54 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <69c91f9e-95e9-4934-a818-d57decaa9f2f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #534728 |
On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 12:10:48 AM UTC-8, benj wrote: > On 11/22/2015 08:13 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > > Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 3:31:09 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >>> Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 1:16:06 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >>>>> Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 11:46:07 AM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >>>>>>> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>> On 11/21/15 7:26 PM, Earle Jones27 wrote: > >>>>>>>>> The optimum length of a long-wire antenna is one that reaches from the > >>>>>>>>> transmitter to the receiver. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Fiber optic. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Obviously you have never paid for such out of your own pocket. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>> Jim Pennino > >>>>>> > >>>>>> It's twice the wavelength. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> (For what you get.) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> What with frequency modulation > >>>>>> instead of amplitude modulation, > >>>>>> then, seems you'd want a "harp". > >>>>> > >>>>> Is any of that supposed to mean something or is it just the random, > >>>>> babbling word salad it looks like? > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Jim Pennino > >>>> > >>>> You can thank Nyquist and Shannon for that. > >>> > >>> I take it that Nyquist and Shannon have you dazzed and confused beyond > >>> all hope. > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Jim Pennino > >> > >> Maybe you'd be happier with > >> Jacob Wolfowitz and Stanford Goldman. > >> > >> How about: Huffman? > >> > >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_Richard_W._Hamming_Medal > >> > >> Here this is for "signal processing" of the > >> "resonant frequencies of antenna material > >> in electrical fields including atmospheric > >> radio frequency fields". > >> > >> We can just go back to Fourier for a bunch > >> of this too. > > > > Do you have a point or is that just the beanie you are wearing? > > > > BTW genius, information theory and antenna theory are two different fields. > > Jim, this is what happens when people "know" a bunch of stuff but have > no idea what it all means. Happens here all the time. > > Thanks, I was quite flattered for a moment and we can't have that now can we - here the notion that basic fundamentals for the theory for the applications comprise the "Yogi Berra" difference between theory and practice (in theory there's no difference, in practice there is) - still, this is science not engineering, for having the tiniest decoder with the most, not the encyclopedia of code books to throw in the woodstove each day. https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Yogi_Berra#Misattributed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-23 19:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <4k4cic-rmp.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #534855 |
Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: > On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 12:10:48 AM UTC-8, benj wrote: >> On 11/22/2015 08:13 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> > Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 3:31:09 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >>> Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 1:16:06 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >>>>> Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 11:46:07 AM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >>>>>>> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>> On 11/21/15 7:26 PM, Earle Jones27 wrote: >> >>>>>>>>> The optimum length of a long-wire antenna is one that reaches from the >> >>>>>>>>> transmitter to the receiver. >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> Fiber optic. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Obviously you have never paid for such out of your own pocket. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> -- >> >>>>>>> Jim Pennino >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> It's twice the wavelength. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> (For what you get.) >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> What with frequency modulation >> >>>>>> instead of amplitude modulation, >> >>>>>> then, seems you'd want a "harp". >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Is any of that supposed to mean something or is it just the random, >> >>>>> babbling word salad it looks like? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> -- >> >>>>> Jim Pennino >> >>>> >> >>>> You can thank Nyquist and Shannon for that. >> >>> >> >>> I take it that Nyquist and Shannon have you dazzed and confused beyond >> >>> all hope. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> Jim Pennino >> >> >> >> Maybe you'd be happier with >> >> Jacob Wolfowitz and Stanford Goldman. >> >> >> >> How about: Huffman? >> >> >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_Richard_W._Hamming_Medal >> >> >> >> Here this is for "signal processing" of the >> >> "resonant frequencies of antenna material >> >> in electrical fields including atmospheric >> >> radio frequency fields". >> >> >> >> We can just go back to Fourier for a bunch >> >> of this too. >> > >> > Do you have a point or is that just the beanie you are wearing? >> > >> > BTW genius, information theory and antenna theory are two different fields. >> >> Jim, this is what happens when people "know" a bunch of stuff but have >> no idea what it all means. Happens here all the time. >> >> > > Thanks, I was quite flattered for a moment > and we can't have that now can we - here > the notion that basic fundamentals for the > theory for the applications comprise the > "Yogi Berra" difference between theory and > practice (in theory there's no difference, > in practice there is) - still, this is > science not engineering, for having the > tiniest decoder with the most, not the > encyclopedia of code books to throw in > the woodstove each day. > > https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Yogi_Berra#Misattributed I think this poster is a bot. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-23 12:07 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3497cab9-3d0c-40fd-8776-99c18258adb9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #534869 |
On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 11:16:08 AM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 12:10:48 AM UTC-8, benj wrote: > >> On 11/22/2015 08:13 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >> > Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 3:31:09 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >> >>> Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >>>> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 1:16:06 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >> >>>>> Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >>>>>> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 11:46:07 AM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >> >>>>>>> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >>>>>>>> On 11/21/15 7:26 PM, Earle Jones27 wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>> The optimum length of a long-wire antenna is one that reaches from the > >> >>>>>>>>> transmitter to the receiver. > >> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> Fiber optic. > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> Obviously you have never paid for such out of your own pocket. > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> -- > >> >>>>>>> Jim Pennino > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> It's twice the wavelength. > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> (For what you get.) > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> What with frequency modulation > >> >>>>>> instead of amplitude modulation, > >> >>>>>> then, seems you'd want a "harp". > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Is any of that supposed to mean something or is it just the random, > >> >>>>> babbling word salad it looks like? > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> -- > >> >>>>> Jim Pennino > >> >>>> > >> >>>> You can thank Nyquist and Shannon for that. > >> >>> > >> >>> I take it that Nyquist and Shannon have you dazzed and confused beyond > >> >>> all hope. > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> -- > >> >>> Jim Pennino > >> >> > >> >> Maybe you'd be happier with > >> >> Jacob Wolfowitz and Stanford Goldman. > >> >> > >> >> How about: Huffman? > >> >> > >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_Richard_W._Hamming_Medal > >> >> > >> >> Here this is for "signal processing" of the > >> >> "resonant frequencies of antenna material > >> >> in electrical fields including atmospheric > >> >> radio frequency fields". > >> >> > >> >> We can just go back to Fourier for a bunch > >> >> of this too. > >> > > >> > Do you have a point or is that just the beanie you are wearing? > >> > > >> > BTW genius, information theory and antenna theory are two different fields. > >> > >> Jim, this is what happens when people "know" a bunch of stuff but have > >> no idea what it all means. Happens here all the time. > >> > >> > > > > Thanks, I was quite flattered for a moment > > and we can't have that now can we - here > > the notion that basic fundamentals for the > > theory for the applications comprise the > > "Yogi Berra" difference between theory and > > practice (in theory there's no difference, > > in practice there is) - still, this is > > science not engineering, for having the > > tiniest decoder with the most, not the > > encyclopedia of code books to throw in > > the woodstove each day. > > > > https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Yogi_Berra#Misattributed > > I think this poster is a bot. > > > -- > Jim Pennino There are bots on usenet, there are also quite a few many very intelligent and even genius people who've found usenet as an accessible medium, format, and forum for basically free publication and dissemination, what with "usenet is designed to survive" etc. I am yet alive, though. You mean benj and etcetera? Again, we're looking here mostly at trolls of the human variety, vis a vis, post prompters and anagrams. SWORD OF THE DAY
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-24 00:00 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <7aS4y.171600$fC2.149303@fx03.iad> |
| In reply to | #534855 |
On 11/23/2015 01:54 PM, Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
> On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 12:10:48 AM UTC-8, benj wrote:
>> On 11/22/2015 08:13 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 3:31:09 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>> Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 1:16:06 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>> Ross A. Finlayson <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 11:46:07 AM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 11/21/15 7:26 PM, Earle Jones27 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> The optimum length of a long-wire antenna is one that reaches from the
>>>>>>>>>>> transmitter to the receiver.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Fiber optic.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Obviously you have never paid for such out of your own pocket.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Jim Pennino
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's twice the wavelength.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (For what you get.)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What with frequency modulation
>>>>>>>> instead of amplitude modulation,
>>>>>>>> then, seems you'd want a "harp".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is any of that supposed to mean something or is it just the random,
>>>>>>> babbling word salad it looks like?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Jim Pennino
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You can thank Nyquist and Shannon for that.
>>>>>
>>>>> I take it that Nyquist and Shannon have you dazzed and confused beyond
>>>>> all hope.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jim Pennino
>>>>
>>>> Maybe you'd be happier with
>>>> Jacob Wolfowitz and Stanford Goldman.
>>>>
>>>> How about: Huffman?
>>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_Richard_W._Hamming_Medal
>>>>
>>>> Here this is for "signal processing" of the
>>>> "resonant frequencies of antenna material
>>>> in electrical fields including atmospheric
>>>> radio frequency fields".
>>>>
>>>> We can just go back to Fourier for a bunch
>>>> of this too.
>>>
>>> Do you have a point or is that just the beanie you are wearing?
>>>
>>> BTW genius, information theory and antenna theory are two different fields.
>>
>> Jim, this is what happens when people "know" a bunch of stuff but have
>> no idea what it all means. Happens here all the time.
>>
>>
>
> Thanks, I was quite flattered for a moment
> and we can't have that now can we - here
> the notion that basic fundamentals for the
> theory for the applications comprise the
> "Yogi Berra" difference between theory and
> practice (in theory there's no difference,
> in practice there is) - still, this is
> science not engineering, for having the
> tiniest decoder with the most, not the
> encyclopedia of code books to throw in
> the woodstove each day.
>
> https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Yogi_Berra#Misattributed
Of course there is the science of antennas and the engineering of
antennas. The two are not wholly incompatible. In fact E&M is a VERY
interesting theoretical field in that while the theory is fundamentally
all wrong, nevertheless it works exceptionally well to predict the
performance of devices often to a great many decimal places (which in
case you don't know is EXTREMELY rare in science)'
When someone knows nothing about how something works, it's all a
mystery. It might as well be working by magic. And then the person
learns some of the principles and laws that govern the phenomena. They
feel very enlightened to have this understanding.
So when a practical problem comes along they attempt to apply what they
know to the problem. But alas, life is FAR more complicated than what
you've learned and the theory is all fantasy misapplied for all the
wrong reasons. It's just ideas but no quantity. You know, like Lib glow
bull warmers who are just idea men but never do quantity. The result (if
you are lucky) is massive confusion, (f not disaster)
However, the answer is not to reject the theory or return to ignorance,
the answer is to gain MORE understanding in greater and greater detail!
And having done that one can make a proper application of the ideas and
laws you've learned. OK?
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-22 14:49 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <04b80832-3512-4d45-b6ba-489f402ef650@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #534477 |
On Saturday, November 21, 2015 at 5:27:01 PM UTC-8, Earle Jones27 wrote: > * > The optimum length of a long-wire antenna is one that reaches from the > transmitter to the receiver. > > earle > * In reality transformer and receiver relate to a generator and an electric motor.Wires can do it all but wireless is the way to go.AT&T had it all.Now its apple or your out of touch. Things change,but in the good old days you could have a pizza date with a telephone operater If she was pretty she got two topping as long as one was mushroom.TreBert
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-23 03:18 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MZz4y.185841$nL.13508@fx25.iad> |
| In reply to | #534623 |
On 11/22/2015 05:49 PM, reber g=emc^2 wrote:
> On Saturday, November 21, 2015 at 5:27:01 PM UTC-8, Earle Jones27 wrote:
>> *
>> The optimum length of a long-wire antenna is one that reaches from the
>> transmitter to the receiver.
>>
>> earle
>> *
>
> In reality transformer and receiver relate to a generator and an electric motor.Wires can do it all but wireless is the way to go.AT&T had it all.Now its apple or your out of touch. Things change,but in the good old days you could have a pizza date with a telephone operater If she was pretty she got two topping as long as one was mushroom.TreBert
>
Days of topping your mushroom are long gone, Treeb.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web