Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.1.100 with SMTP id 4csp37125igl; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 10:31:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.152.19.40 with SMTP id b8mr15338721lae.34.1373477492599; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 10:31:32 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id v7si12342588laa.84.2013.07.10.10.31.31 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 10:31:32 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) client-ip=195.171.43.25; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) smtp.mail=owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1UwyDf-0007EX-Lw for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:30:23 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1UwyDf-0007EO-9b for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:30:23 +0100 Received: from mx4.utsp.utwente.nl ([130.89.2.32] helo=mxpool.utwente.nl) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1UwyDd-0006Va-Ov for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:30:22 +0100 Received: from ewi1614.ewi.utwente.nl (utwks06146.ad.utwente.nl [130.89.13.213]) by mxpool.utwente.nl (8.13.8) with ESMTP id r6AHULhs024999 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 19:30:21 +0200 Received: by ewi1614.ewi.utwente.nl (Postfix, from userid 17643373) id E0E1B3C40AE8; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 19:30:20 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 19:30:20 +0200 From: Pieter-Tjerk de Boer To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Message-ID: <20130710173020.GA22574@cs.utwente.nl> Mail-Followup-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <51D975FA.60008@virginbroadband.com.au> <51DD1434.2030300@virginbroadband.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51DD1434.2030300@virginbroadband.com.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Spam-Score: -0.3 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 05:58:44PM +1000, edgar wrote: > Surely every conductor in the unit will have a difference in potential > due to being in a electromagnetic field. > Even in the legs of the FET. Although the potential will be extremely small. [...] Content analysis details: (-0.3 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.3 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: bb61bee384896e075004ae5ec954ddd2 Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: LF: VK1OD's analysis of the MiniWhip antenna Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 1853 On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 05:58:44PM +1000, edgar wrote: > Surely every conductor in the unit will have a difference in potential > due to being in a electromagnetic field. > Even in the legs of the FET. Although the potential will be extremely small. Yes, of course that's correct. I should have written that with a fiber optic cable instead of the coaxial cable, all circuit elements are coupled to the field at _almost_ the same place, and thus are at _almost_ the same potential, and thus _almost_ no signal will come out: very much less than with the coax still in place. B.t.w., some mini-whips are built using a metal can as the probe, with the entire electronics inside the can; such an arrangement would get quite close to zero output when the coax is replaced by the fiber optics. Anyway, it was originally claimed that the functioning of the mini-whip does not depend on the coaxial cable; I just intended to explain why I think it does. 73, Pieter-Tjerk, PA3FWM