[TowerTalk] RF Ground is not a Myth

[David Gallatin via TowerTalk]

Dr. Duffy could be totally right. The problem with his post is when I matched that against all the study and research I've doneon the subject myself the fact is NOTHING he said in that post matched or even came close to matching ANYTHING I've ever readon the subject.   I literally did a double take, gave a mental "WTF?" and read it twice more. It made no sense at all to me. Obviously itmade no sense at all to a number of people. He might be totally correct but expressed the argument in terms only another PhD in Solid State Physics would grasp but if soand his ability to express such things in more layman terms is that poor then he just wasted his time.  73,
David, AA9G

ex W5DCG and KC9EEV

 

     On Friday, January 23, 2015 6:21 PM, Steve Maki <lists at oakcom.org> wrote:
   

 I was flabbergasted at the response to Duffy's post, which seemed 
relatively non controversial to this relatively low level scientific 
brain of mine. Can't one specify a perfect ground (even though 
impossible in the real world) when modeling antennas? Is that not a 
useful exercise as an educational tool? Does that not prove his point?

-Steve K8LX

On 1/23/2015 4:32 PM, Wes Attaway (N5WA) wrote:

> "Believing in something does not make it so" .... Really?
>
> What about an isotropic radiator, defined as a theoretical point source, as
> used in every antenna modeling program?
>
> What about the "imaginary numbers" which consistently pop up in mathematical
> analyses?
>
> The author (Bryan Fields) was careful to point why the use of something that
> is not physically realizable is still useful (even required) in certain
> kinds of analyses.
>
> I think he made a perfectly valid argument about why the concept of an RF
> Ground is important, as he says "in understanding current flow in RF
> circuits".
>
>
>    -------------------
> Wes Attaway (N5WA)
> (318) 393-3289 - Shreveport, LA
> Computer/Cellphone Forensics
> EnCase Certified Examiner
>    -------------------
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TowerTalk [mailto:towertalk-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bryan
> Fields
> Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 11:52 PM
> To: towertalk at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] RF Ground is not a Myth
>
> On 1/19/15, 9:29 PM, James Duffey wrote:
>> The RF ground is a useful theoretical construct. This theoretical
> construct
>> is a result of solid thinking.
>
> Believing in something does not make it so.
>
>> Given that it is hard to realize in
>> practice, but it does have its use in understanding current flow in RF
>> circuits, the practical problems in implementing a useful ground, and why
>> we have problems in circuits that we don't think should have problems.
>> Simply put, an RF ground is an infinite source or sink of carriers,
>> delivered or received with minimal delay. That of course is not
> realizable,
>> but understanding why the carriers cannot be delivered or absorbed with
>> minimal delay helps a great deal in understanding the practical
>> implementation of circuits we design.
>
> Literally nothing is correct in that paragraph.
>

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk