Ever hear of the new "fractal antenna" designs ?

Discussion in 'Antennas, Feedlines, Towers & Rotors' started by KD7SIZ, Dec 15, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: QSOToday-1
ad: Left-3
ad: Subscribe
ad: abrind-2
ad: Left-2
ad: L-MFJ
  1. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    It is puzzling why some folks just can't 'fess up to being wrong and won't admit that the answers have already been given, so one is asked to REPEAT AND REPEAT AND REPEAT :)

    For example we have ample evidence--nary only a few posts ago, in post #506 where I said:

    "It is not a single point measurement. Full scattering measurements are being published. The video makes it very clear there is a second part that will be shown after publication of the scattering data."

    In fact, I PUBLICLY SHOWED THE SCATTERING DATA--ALL OF IT-- at Boxboro and TAPR in 2010. So who, is hiding...what??
    Here's the video link again:


    Maybe someone is having a senior moment?

    But you know Cecil, we are bright and honorable guys, why are we asked to do such an unreasonable thing- to repeat repeat repeat? It's really an abuse of the thread system don't you think?

    Attached is that ammeter study picture that proves the drop in current ACROSS A LOADING COIL. Barry W9UCW, who did this, is to be commended for a standard measurement, rendered elegantly.

    Now this coil discussion isn't off-topic, for two reasons:

    1) folks need to have an objective perspective of all the posters here;
    2) loading can be done in a number of ways, including using fractals, and it is helpful to understand that the current drops along a load.

    Chip W1YW
  2. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    Pix is...below!
  3. K4WGE

    K4WGE Ham Member QRZ Page

    Find the Demiguise

    On the other hand...

    from Wikipedia
  4. NN4RH

    NN4RH Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    They can. Depends on where in the publication process it is.

    Sometimes authors will start circulating their papers in manuscript form to key people in the field, right after submitting them and before the review process is completed. Those are "citable" and that can get you in the citation index quicker than waiting for acceptance and actual publication, but the risk is if there are substantial revisions or even rejection encountered as a result of review, it makes you look like an incompetent idiot.

    More often, authors will circulate papers once they have been "Accepted" by peer review, but before they're in print. That's safer but entails waiting for the review process to run its course. Some journals that happens quickly, but some can take up to a year.

    More and more journals are going to "Web Publishing" of papers as soon as they are accepted, well before they're typeset and scheduled for dispatch in print form. If you use a journal that is pretty quick about getting reviews done, this is a fairly good situation. Technically, they're not "published" in the traditional sense and probably won't show up in online literature search databases, for example. But, they are officially accepted and citable papers.

    Getting papers into actual printed hard-copy journals can take anywhere from a few months to more than year. My own feeling is that print scientific journals are going to go away within a few more years and everything will be entirely web based or otherwise electronic.

    There's also a growing number of essentially un-reviewed web-based "journals". Those don't count for much, in my opinion. Probably even less than an unreviewed conference proceeding paper. There can be some value in those, provided the reader is critical - i.e. basically everyone who reads it is their own peer reviewer. On the other hand, not having formal peer review can be an advantage at times, because often reviewers can be arbitrary and capricious, and reject papers simply because they go against ingrained dogma. Using a non-reviewed publication outlet circumvents that.
  5. W8JI

    W8JI Ham Member QRZ Page

    I guess this is a loading coil thread now, and not a fractal thread. It is impossible to have a conversation about fractals on a fractal thread.

    Maybe the invisible 811H amplifier with the invisible rectifier will reappear? Was it cloaked?
  6. AE1PT

    AE1PT Ham Member QRZ Page

    The topic has wandered about--and at 535 posts is an impossibly large thread that is unworkable from a readership standpoint. If anyone wants to break some element into new topics--there is a button for that.

    An editorial close.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page