https://compactenna.com/ I am very dubious. Lots of hype and little explanation. Comments appreciated. Clifford
More snake oil. I can't watch the whole thing without getting nauseous, but from skimming it, Dr. Jack is yet another fellow claiming to be the first to make use of Magnetic waves to "fill in" and reinforce weak signals. Blah, blah, blah. I'm disappointed in Universal Radio for supporting such nonsense.
I watched about half of the video. I heard a lot of double talk. Almost didn't get past the first minutes of "ummm, ahhhh, theeee, uhhhh" but that got a bit better as time went on. Still reminded me of Professor Irwin Corey.
Ya my gut feeling as well. He avoids eye contact unless saying "superb performance" etc. In addition and more importantly his attempt at explanations drone on with little substance. I'm no expert which is why I posted here. 73 (a good palette cleanser offering sound analysis of a different antenna: http://www.hamradio.me/antennas/lnr-precision-ef-102040mkii-examination.html)
On the contrary As he explained, this has been around for decades FM broadcast stations for example use "polarity diversity" to eliminate mobile flutter by using circular polarized antennas I have installed quite a number of circular polarized antennas for mobile data antennas and the effect is similar Due to the fact that all the drop outs due to polarity flip are reduced, a dual polarity, or circular polarity antenna will outperform single polarity antennas with much higher gain The cell phone companies have for years used 2 separate antennas"spatial diversity" in order to reduce flutter If these antennas do indeed operate in both polarities, they should work as described
Interesting makes some sense w reflected signals. Cell phones often use fractal flat plane pcb based antennas as well. Interesting stuff. Thx for the input. I'd still like to see the guts of this antenna and a good QST mag review.
So ya think that's how his "new" antennas work? With age old tech? It took me like three minutes or less to read your post, do ya think he could have gotten rid of all the superfluous dramatics and explained it in like ten minutes or less? It's all that bs in the video that turned me off... And never mind the fact that one antenna works from 10 all the way up to 450! I say, SHOW ME THE RESISTORS!
There is only ONE basic fact - electrical current flowing thru / along the electrical conductor generates both electrical and magnetic fields , thus an electrical conductor exposed to such fields should "generate" both electrical and "magnetic"currents. All under simple law that energy just changes from one form to another, it is never created or lost. Does technology exists to detect both electrical and magnetic "currents" and distinguish between them in the receiving media? Currently known and used communication technology just points to usage - generation and detection - of electrical field only. The author neglects to clearly state how his "magnetic" antenna physically accomplishes the magnetic field detection. Not even his references to "previous" article are convincing. His presentation would be much more enjoyable , albeit still technically a dud , if he would join Toastmasters. For reasons any Toastmaster ( I used to be one) detects in almost every sentence. Perhaps only "tilt" detection devices are users of natural magnetic field of OUR rock spinning in Universe. Just my guess. 73 Shirley
"Show me the horizontal radiating element". Nothing new about cross polarized antennas. Oh, and BTW, why is he going on about Magnet waves, then? It's mumbo jumbo.
I'll build you an array of them that will have a bizillion dB gain and you can fit it into a shoebox. Just send cash. My address on QRZ.com is good. The first 20 dB is $1000, but it builds after that. Thank you.
I was trying to decipher it all too. FWIW, I have theorized it's possible to construct antennas in such a manner they have a horizontal radiation component, although the antenna may appear vertical in it's physical construction. This is because the feed point location will often determine how an antenna is polarized. I suspect there's something like that going on here, but I suspect it's being done in combination with multiple antenna elements arranged inside. Multiple antenna elements would adequately explain how the antenna would cut down on "flutter" and picket fencing. For example, we know that moving your antenna an inch or two can often improve reception in a fringe enviroment, but if you install multiple elements inside that are cross polarized, then yes I suppose the additional antenna elements can actually serve to help "fill in" any dead spots in reception, because you are now using an antenna arrangement intended for diversity reception. There's probably no "resistors" inside, but perhaps the tuning section is arranged on a small circuit board, or multiple circuit boards stacked on top of one another? It looks like a few small round circuit board disks might fit inside. Populate them with coils and capacitors and viola, you have a tuning section. It probably works ok for what it is. Hard to make a really bad VHF/UHF antenna even if it's only 7" tall. For example, I have several HT antenna's around that size that would probably work pretty good if mounted to the roof of my car. I guess anything works and marketing is everything.
Dr Jack seems to be a Tech Class Ham. https://www.qrz.com/db/N8NDL I would have expected a higher class of license by an antenna designer. His interest in the CB band is also -- odd. He also seems to be behind the dead NilJon antennas , and mpantenna.com. When in doubt , create another antenna company. gregW OH2FFY
Dr Jack seems to be (or was) a people doctor , not a antenna doctor. Top of page 2 on both these pages is interesting. http://www.medinadomesticrelations.org/images/prod_mdrc/downloads/mag._oliver_9_02_13.pdf http://www.medinadomesticrelations.com/images/prod_mdrc/downloads/mag._oliver_4_28_14.pdf gregW OH2FFY
