Message-ID: <4101255E.5040804@usa.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 16:49:02 +0200
From: Alberto di Bene <dibene@usa.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <01C470B0.228BAA70.actalbot@southsurf.com> <41010FB4.7010207@usa.net> <000b01c470bd$80166e20$75540150@captbrian>
In-Reply-To: <000b01c470bd$80166e20$75540150@captbrian>
Subject: LF: Re: Loops v Verticals
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org

captbrian wrote:

>I disagree. To the best of my knowledge the E-H antennas never demonstrated
>anything more than one would expect from what they were.;  ie short
>antennas with inductive  centre loading and capacitative end loading ..
>
>They fitted normal theory quite well as did the ephemeral "fractal" antenna.
>
>Bryan G3GVB
>  
>

Bryan,
   we do completely agree. But the point is that the EH-antenna priests 
have a different point of view.
They claim that their toy is a breakthrough in the electromagnetic 
theories. According to them the
classical theory (Maxwell's) cannot explain the PVS (Poynting Vector 
Synthesis), which, still according
to them, is the reason why the EH-antenna works. So they claim for a 
revision of the classical theory.

Now this claim is founded on the experimental evidence that, somehow, 
the EH-antenna seems to radiate.
Hence, from the fact that experiment apparently is not in complete 
accord with theory, they want to change
the theory. What they fail to understand (in good faith or for more 
venal reasons...) is that the error is in
the experiment, as what radiates in their tests is the feeder line, as 
shown by other tests performed by
open-minded persons, not adepts of the EH religion.

73  Alberto  I2PHD