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
|
