Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by VK6FLAB, Jan 5, 2019.
Yes, and take your new magicians union card ;-)
It's not like we are publishing peer-reviewed papers in Nature magazine here, Chip. Edison once asked an engineer to calculate the volume of a light bulb. After much work with paper and pencil, the engineer produced his answer. Edison said, "You're off by at least 5%". Edison then filled the bulb with water and poured it into a measuring cup.
Must have been a day off from his gig of publicly electrocuting innocent animals for ole Tom...
...scientifically, empirically, or otherwise.
Not picking on you OM; my following comments are generally addressed--
This is not a case of snobbery.
Empiricism is not separate from the scientific method.
There is a core of understanding that ALL ham operators know--because they are ham operators. And they need it to get their US ham licensees--I can't speak for other countries.
We (some) seem to think it is not only proper, but COOL to abandon that core body of knowledge.
We (some)seem to think, in 2019, that ANY ALLUSION to technical assumption somehow DISSES and DEGRADES those who say its all BS --and that those who call us out on it are ELITISTS and (&(&)&)_'s.
Really: ham radio wasn't started to be a plea to ignorance. It wasn't that way for 80 years. Why should we be making a transition away from our core culture?
Why are many offended by being reminded WHO WE ARE, and WHY WE EXIST (at least in the US under Part 97 service)?
Please tell me why there is this TRANSITION, WHY it is happening, and WHY its a 'good thing'?
You don't NEED to be an engineer; a Ph.D. in physics; you can sell bread to celiac patients, for all I care. But I do want to know WHO we see ourselves as being in 2019.
What's driving it? How is it in tune with the mission--in the US--of Part 97?
How do we justify the US amateur radio service if it lacks the skills of technical knowledge?
Example: freq x wavelength = c, and a dipole(1/2 wave) is 1/2 of that inferred wavelength (with stated assumptions.) HENCE--
length (dipole in feet ) =468 / freq in MHz
'empirical and separate from the scientific method'
If , for example, you cut your 40M dipole and hang it 20 feet off the ground, this formula won't be exact for you. Ask why.
That's the beauty of this hobby. It becomes whatever you make of it.
It can be engineering, like the meticulously-planned installation of the free-standing tower that has supported the TH7DX tribander for over 30 years at my ex's QTH (separate story) . Or it can be "let's see what happens" when I threw some wire up in the mature maple trees at my new QTH.
Both installations have generated ATNO's on the path that gave me an Honor Roll plaque for the shack wall.
The young man who built his first SSB exciter from old television parts grew up to install a television transmitter that serves a city.
All made possible by this intersection of science and creativity.
492 is much closer to one of those 'Free Space' half waves but I have never found one of those for sale nor the material to build one with. With too many variables to properly consider....and those changing with conditions(ground conductivity etc.) Close is usually good enough. I remember when I was happy to get the plate current to dip sharply(couldn't afford one of those fancy wattmeter/swr things) and made lots of contacts all over the place. Who knew? Close enough is definitely good enough, particularly when there are too many variables to count.
492 is the number for the exact 1/2 wave in free space. Actual dipoles are not JUST waves, they are propagating circuits of waves. Hence the 468.
Here's how to get the '492' number
c=3 x 10^8 m/s
3.281 feet per meter
c=3 x 10^8 m/s = Wave (m) x (freq) Hz
for 1/2 wave dipole w/o the other effects ----
= 1/2 x 10^-6 x 3.281 (feet/m) x 3 x 10^8 (m/s) = Wave (feet) x freq (MHz)
1/2 wave in feet = 492 / freq (MHz)
This is not 'empirical'.
The thread poster doesn't understand the difference between an empirical approximation accounting for secondary terms, and the scientific method.
It's all scientific method. It all comes from, and leads to, understanding through the scientific process.
You said it. It's science, you bet.
Interesting discussion here.... And some interesting behaviours in the process.
[ * Disclaimer before I start - I do not know Onno well but I know of Onno and he knows of me .... Yes Onno is "better than" a Foundation Class Licensee but chooses to stay at this level as I have been told many times ]
I see a number of participants effectively bagging Onno and his communication - and his right to communicate effectively here. Onno is a FOUNDATION-CLASS LICENSEE here in Australia. For those in the US, an Australian Foundation Class License is lower-in-standard than a Technician-Class license (though some here in Oz have used Technicians-Class licenses to get advanced licenses... That's another sad story)...
Never bag those on the lowest class of licence grade.
Educate and nurture holders not just of these license classes but ALL AMTEURS that hold a license constructively. Remember that AR is there for "self experimentation" and learning under laws in most nations.
Some communication presented here demonstrates what I am actively targeting - poor communication and bullying.
Everyone is entitled to their view; everyone is entitled to their observations - everyone is entitled to LEARN. Amateurs should be helpers and educators of not just ourselves but the entire community ... we are supposed to be the great communicators. The fact is that we all collectively are the world's worst class of communicators as we all are at war and fight with each other - whether it be those amongst us with high awards and even Nobel Prizes to those amongst us that are heavily disabled...
For AR to survive the arrogance - this infighting - this egotism - must cease. And pronto.
AR must always be a SAFE PLACE where PEOPLE WANT TO COME/BE in order to grow and survive in this internet age.
Its far from this at the moment.
Perhaps some here in their wells of self-gratifying arrogance need to re-evaluate their position - and recognise that their pointless contributions are what is really driving AR backwards.
There are few activities in AR that can be completed solo in AR. Someone needs to transmit.... another needs to listen. Others also have the capability to join in. There is nothing private about AR.
This therefore makes AR a SOCIAL activity.
Amateur Radio is about PEOPLE in a Technical, Regulated Environment. Its about learning. So lets be social and helpful of all. Let's be the great educators; lets always remain constructive in our communication with others.
Its perhaps time to isolate the trolls and encourage them to take up other activities where they cannot hurt others !