well, duh
 

"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 14:06:51 -0400, Jeff
wrote:

Much depends on your needs and location, so the first
thing to try is
some very cheap solution, such as the wire "T" that comes
with FM
radios.

That's called a dipole antenna if you need to ask for one.


Doesn't everybody have a few of them laying around?

SBV

well, duh
 

"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 14:06:51 -0400, Jeff wrote:

Much depends on your needs and location, so the first thing to try is
some very cheap solution, such as the wire "T" that comes with FM
radios.

That's called a dipole antenna if you need to ask for one.

CWM

It's actually a folded dipole.

http://www.kgnu.org/howtohear/antenna.html

well, duh
 

It's actually a folded dipole.

http://www.kgnu.org/howtohear/antenna.html


Less bandwidth too. Not good for TV.

http://www.qsl.net/w4sat/fdipole.htm

well, duh
 

"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 18:15:26 -0600, "Gilligan"
wrote:


"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 14:06:51 -0400, Jeff wrote:

Much depends on your needs and location, so the first thing to try is
some very cheap solution, such as the wire "T" that comes with FM
radios.

That's called a dipole antenna if you need to ask for one.

CWM

It's actually a folded dipole.

http://www.kgnu.org/howtohear/antenna.html


It's a dipole antenna, goofus.


It really is a folded dipole for FM use. Read he

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipole_antenna

http://beradio.com/eyeoniboc/radio_b...ter_reception/

http://kalx.berkeley.edu/recept/tanttips.htm

The folded dipole is the defacto standard for FM radio. It has the bandwidth
for the FM band, much better than a dipole. It does not have the bandwidth
for all channel tv reception.

Technically, the folded dipole antenna is a class of loop antenna which is
not even in the category of dipoles. It is the mutual coupling between line
sections that make it act as similar to a dipole.

The dc impedance of a folded dipole is a short circuit. The dc impedance of
a dipole is an open circuit. Two completely different mechanisms.

If you devoted less time to hot tub chemistry and more time to
electrodynamics you may find it beneficial.

well, duh
 

"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message

I challenge you once again to reveal what you claim to know about me.

CHICKEN!

Thanks to Gilligan... I also now know who you really are!!

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahaaaa...... Good Grief!!!

CM-

well, duh
 

"Charlie Morgan" wrote in




I'm a dip and a goofus.

CWM

well, duh
 

"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 07:54:10 -0600, "Gilligan"
wrote:


"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 18:15:26 -0600, "Gilligan"
wrote:


"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
m...
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 14:06:51 -0400, Jeff wrote:

Much depends on your needs and location, so the first thing to try is
some very cheap solution, such as the wire "T" that comes with FM
radios.

That's called a dipole antenna if you need to ask for one.

CWM

It's actually a folded dipole.

http://www.kgnu.org/howtohear/antenna.html


It's a dipole antenna, goofus.


It really is a folded dipole for FM use. Read he

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipole_antenna

http://beradio.com/eyeoniboc/radio_b...ter_reception/

http://kalx.berkeley.edu/recept/tanttips.htm

The folded dipole is the defacto standard for FM radio. It has the
bandwidth
for the FM band, much better than a dipole. It does not have the bandwidth
for all channel tv reception.

Technically, the folded dipole antenna is a class of loop antenna which is
not even in the category of dipoles. It is the mutual coupling between
line
sections that make it act as similar to a dipole.

The dc impedance of a folded dipole is a short circuit. The dc impedance
of
a dipole is an open circuit. Two completely different mechanisms.

If you devoted less time to hot tub chemistry and more time to
electrodynamics you may find it beneficial.


Do you actually know anything at all?

How would you like the multipole expansion of an infinitesimal dipole versus
the infinitesimal folded dipole? I could show the fundamental differences in
the E and H fields for the inverse radial terms for each antenna. Or would
you just prefer a brute force numerical moment method solution?

Oh look Krusty!

Here are the fields of an infinitesimal folded dipole (loop):

http://www.ece.msstate.edu/~donohoe/ece4990notes5.pdf

What's really neat is it is done with magnetic vector potentials. Back when
you took physics they probably taught you the myth that magnetic vector
potentials are fictituous quantities only used for ease of calculation. But
guess what? The results of the famous Arahanov-Bohm Experiment clearly show
that the magnetic vector potential is real! Neat, isn't it? Exciting too!

Back to the link! It also compares the E and H components of a dipole and a
loop (folded dipole). Note the fields of the dipole are in phase quadrature
to the folded dipole type antenna! That's that j term in the front. Remember
I talked about the DC impedance? They are also in phase quadrature too!
Small world isn't it? If you have a Smith Chart handy we can go over this in
greater detail. Do you have an inverted overlay chart? Grease pencil ready?


You even claim to know who I am, but when I challenge you as "Crantz' to
go
ahead and post what you think you know, you disappear for a week or two
and then
return as Gilligan.

I know who you are. What does it matter? I wouldn't reveal it here ever. I
respect your privacy and know in real life you are a decent person.


I challenge you once again to reveal what you claim to know about me.

You know your hot tub chemistry cold!


CHICKEN!

I prefer beef!

Why don't you offer to fist fight me or something like that? At least RB
makes some ridiculous claims of superhuman strength. What do you have? A pH
balanced hot tub? Significant intestinal flora from a macrobiotic diet? Try
some hem-iron in your diet.


CWM

well, duh
 

"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message

Except, he's as wrong as he could be! You're both dopes!

Now that I know who you are... I just can't take any of your posts
seriously.

Too Funny!!!! Ha Ha Ha

CM-

well, duh
 

"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 19:44:30 -0600, "Gilligan"
wrote:


FRAUD!

CWM

Take some Geritol.

well, duh
 

Charlie Morgan wrote:
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 19:44:30 -0600, "Gilligan"
wrote:

"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
You even claim to know who I am, but when I challenge you as "Crantz' to
go
ahead and post what you think you know, you disappear for a week or two
and then
return as Gilligan.


I know who you are. What does it matter? I wouldn't reveal it here ever. I
respect your privacy and know in real life you are a decent person.


The truth is, you can't reveal who I am... and for a very good reason.

CWM

Ah...so you're just another Gilly sockpuppet?