[TowerTalk] Lightning Protection Question

[Roger (K8RI)]

On 9/13/2010 12:31 AM, Doug Renwick wrote:
> Just a minute.  Using the words theory and fundamental science
> principles interchangeably is flawed.  There is a big definition
> difference between these two.  Theory can be defined as an assumption or
> guess which is clearly different from fundamental science principles.
The problem here is that most of electronics works with the "laws of 
physics", or very well proven theories that may be treated as if they 
are laws.
Basic theory is part of the foundation of scientific principles.

That a circuit or amp does not work the way mathematics says it should 
is not a flaw in either the science or theories, but rather a failure to 
take into account all of the complex actions and interactions present in 
the real world application. Taming or neutralizing amplifiers is one of 
these applications while antenna modeling is another.

The application of "Vacuum tube principles" are based on the laws of 
physics as are the construction of vacuum tubes.
Semiconductor theory is based on how we think they work on the molecular 
level, not how they operate.  However the application of those 
semiconductors is based on the laws of physics.
Computers operate based on the laws of physics and the principles of 
mathematics.

There is nothing I can think of in Amateur Radio that is not based on 
the laws of physics, or well founded theory that can not be treated as 
law from propagation to circuit design.

73

Roger (K8RI)


> Doug
>
> The train doesn't stop here anymore.
> -----Original Message-----
>
> One of my favorite EE profs liked to use the words "zero length" to
> emphasize the potential significance of stray inductance, stray
> capacitance, and stray resistance in any given circuit. SIMPLE circuits
> assume ideal components, with those ZERO length leads. Real circuits
> have
> those strays (some folks call them parasitics).
>
> Some ignorant people like to talk about the difference between theory
> and
> reality, as if there is something wrong with the science. In fact, there
> is
> NO difference between fundamental science principles and reality --
> those
> ignorant folks are simply ignoring important parts of the problem, like
> stray C, stray L, and stray R. Hence, my own personal way of saying it