Nope. If you read what I was talking about in the original question at the beginning of this thread and my explaining it further, only a very small portion, maybe two or three pages, were on that topic. This is page 21 now. This thread did put me in a situation where I could push my knowledge of antenna theory further, but that is all.
Odd, it is putting those lines as two separate quotes? Odd. Anyway...
This has NOTHING to do with what I was talking about. I was only interested in currents in so far as figuring out the three dimensional fields that they generate. Understanding currents is good, understanding the fields they generate is better. I have stated multiple times that this is where I think the solution to how this antenna actually works lies, and I stand behind that statement. I regards to the fields that are generated you have made no contribution, and instead tried to twist what I was asking about to fit your theory, this was and still is in vain.
I on the other hand completely reject the idea of full cancellation. I can think of any number of reasons why that would not be the case, simply from a theory point of view. I have yet to see anything other than an opinion tell me otherwise. I have reason to believe that the standard NEC2 models are wrong in this case, and these reasons extend to real world testing that actual broadcast engineers testing a similar antenna design. You can look that data up on the FCC's web site yourself, although you have to do some digging to find it... When real world test results made by engineers disagree with the results from modeling software, I have to error on the side of the real world results. A model is useless if it doesn't, in fact, even come close to simulating the real world.
This goes with the above. I am very familiar with your opinion here as I have read it multiple times before. This opinion is, however, based on assumptions that you (and I for that matter) have been unable to demonstrate.
I have considered this, and as I mentioned above, rejected the idea. I don't believe it to be true, and this belief is not based on Bob and Donald not believing it, but what theory and real world evidence tell me.
Something has to be said here, you asked me to have an open mind yet you have failed to open yours on any number of occasions including the ones mentioned here? You seem to be stuck on your idea, and unless you can find a way to imagine other possibilities you always will be.
I have considered your thoughts, however, the evidence I have come across during my research disagrees with your thoughts on any number of levels. I'm sorry.
The DB
