Re: More on the Wellbrook loops


Steve wrote:
Ron Hardin wrote:

It's true of random wires as well. Noise that's propagating is picked up
in proportion to Signal that's propagating, so the ratio is the same regardless
how much of it you gather.

What varies is the energy of that relative to the internal noise of the
receiver.

Once you're above the receiver's internal noise, more gathering doesn't help.

Thus better receivers fail to benefit where worse receivers do, from larger
antennas.

--
Ron Hardin
rhhardin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

What you're saying makes sense, and in another thread people have been
talking about the PA0RDT Mini-Whip, which, assuming it does what
everyone says, seems to demonstrate that small antennas can be just as
effective as much larger ones. Still, I have the sense that something
important is being left out. If I'm listening to AFN on 7811 with a
modest 20 ft wire and then switch over to a 100 ft wire, it does not
seem as though the 100 ft wire allows me to hear exactly what I was
hearing on the 20 ft wire, only at higher volume.

I always figured that, because most of the noise that plagues us is
local, a longer wire would have a greater "reach"---i.e., it would be
able to gather a greater proportion of signal in addition to all of the
local noise that you'd hear on a wire of *any* length. Another way to
put it: I'd have thought that what you can hear via antennas of
different sizes is analogous to what you can see through telescopes of
different sizes. Because of atmospheric distortion, there's a limit to
what you can resolve using an earthbound telescope, no matter what it's
size (that's why we put telescopes into orbit). There's a ratio of
light to atmospheric distortion that just can't be overcome...building
bigger telescopes won't help. However, this is consistent with the fact
that the big reflector on Mt. Palomar can make out much more detail on
the moon's surface than the telescope in my backyard. And the only
explanation for this is the fact that the big reflector is taking in
more light from the moon.

But enough of my armchair speculation. I'll leave it to you experts out
there to decide (assuming you're still awake)!

Steve

This whole debate is nuts. I have a 150 foot longwire behind my house.
It allows me to hear stations that are nowhere to be found using a 16
foot reel antenna. Period! Any theory that denies this is bunkum.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: More on the Wellbrook loops
    ... in proportion to Signal that's propagating, so the ratio is the same regardless ... Once you're above the receiver's internal noise, ... modest 20 ft wire and then switch over to a 100 ft wire, ... size (that's why we put telescopes into orbit). ...
    (rec.radio.shortwave)
  • Re: Why Do Two Telescopes Have the Resolution of a Large One?
    ... Compare the radiation pattern for two dipoles versus a large ... |>>Antennas, Chapter 3, where he actually computes the pattern for several ... He has another book out Radio Telescopes, ... Do not confuse resolution with quantity. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: RoomCap Antenna - last results
    ... The wire I used was a random length and the results should be ... Isolated spot frequencies can be attained by the use of a jumper. ... antennas can also be made in small sheet form and other configurations ... Ham radio is not what it used to be. ...
    (rec.radio.amateur.antenna)
  • A 160m antenna in a 40 garden - an early evaluation
    ... Apologies for the on-topic post. ... Following recent threads about the type of 160m antennas that might be ... An aerial wire was run from the upstairs window of a two-storey house, ... stations were plentiful, at 100 mile range being S9 to S9+20. ...
    (uk.radio.amateur)
  • Re: Larger size HF antennas
    ... >But when I research HAM HF antenna's, ... >antenna's (eg. wire antenna's, inverted V, T2DF) that don't take full ... the reason for the gap from small to very large antennas is ... you migh be able to accomodate an Extended ...
    (rec.radio.amateur.antenna)
Loading