Scalar Wave - Energy

[fritz]

Fritz, I like that concept, especially about the "Ground", Zero Impeadance connection.

I really think that fits, to a point, as you are then conducting the RF through the "Earth" or "Ground" and if this is possible with standard RF circuits, then I have a tremendous amount of learning to do.

For example, an antenna "Dummy" load, for tuning transmitters, is a resistor (OK, this is also simplified...) that doesn't radiate, or is shielded.  The confusing part, for me, here is the shield is connected to ground.  For a buried antenna, the ground is still the shield connection, but also the radiating part, so the entire "Earth" becomes the radiating part?  I get so confused.....

Were I to measure the resistance between the radiator and the "Ground", I do realize this is very different from the impeadance, but might that mean that the ground/Dirt between the "Radiator" and the "Ground Rod" becomes the radiating part of the transmission ckt?  I just get so lost with this stuff, and am always trying to learn, as RF still, to this day, drives me nuts.  It's almost as if EM RF and Scalar "RF" were easily interchangeable, if such exists at all.

Ground may play multiple roles in EM.
The radiator thing might be interesting up to few MHz, classical HAM frequencies. In that frequency bands - part of the energy is emitted as ground  bound wave. Thats the reason why ground plays a special role here.

If we talk about vhf and even higher - ground "as real" ground  has an almost different meaning. On high mounted pole antennas  - you have multiple (typ. 3 or more) downwards turned poles which form the "virtual ground" for the upwards turned  "antenna" pole. The higher you get in frequency - "real ground" is just a barrier - the propagation itself  is almost "optical". (with lots of athmospheric specials - but thats ham stuff).

Or if you take a satellite - how to ground a satellite ?
OK - we have a satellite with vhf antenna - so if the satellite case is shielded - we can use that as floating ground in the oposite to our standing pole antenna.  Designs involving a "ground" concept are asymmetrical. So you have one (relatively) low impedance path (ground) and a high impedance path (pole)..
Or take the HAARP thing - they ionize huge spaces in the athmosphere and use that as antenna. In this case we have no ground - its symmetrical and in loop configuration

Back to our radiator antenna. Its quite obvious that the impedance of free space propagation will be different (higher impedance) than the impedance of ground bound wave.
Well there are magnetic antennas (loops) and electric antennas (poles).
If you bury a loop in the ground and match the output power of the transmitter to that low impedance you have a nice setup.
I think you missed out the magnetic vs. electric antenna thing.
While electric antennas need "ground" - loops dont.

[xee2]

@ Loner

I wasn't aware that EM could be sent from underground that way, but hams did it for years.  I still have a copy of "The Radio Amateurs Handbook" from the 50's and another from the 60's.  It's in the 50's copy, but strangely missing from the 60's copy.  I never understood that, so it's a question for me.)

At low frequencies the ground is such a small part of a wavelength that is effectively not there. It is like holding a piece of paper in front of a cell phone antenna.

Just for a history fact, the Colorado tower of Tesla's wasn't in near field by any means, yet transmitted power easily. 

All transmit antennas are in near field by definition.

[xee2]

@ Loner

Xee2, maybe you could help me

I will try.  I have a pretty good background in antenna design.

And maybe you can help me. I know nothing about "scalar waves" and you seem to have done some research on them. You also seem to be objective about your opinions so you seem like someone I could ask questions without having you feel like I was attacking you.

Near field means "near the transmitter antenna". The energy from the transmitter antenna falls off as 1/(R^2) but this only happens some distance from the transmitter (usually assumed to be about 3 wavelengths). Near the transmitter the energy is much higher and it is easy to couple as much as half of the energy to a receiving antenna. Note that distances are in wavelenths and so are frequency dependent. One wavelenght at 1 MHz is 1000 feet. At 1 KHZ a wavelength is one million feet. So at low frequencies the near field can extend for a great distance. At distances less than 1/10th wavelength the antenna coupling is pretty much just the capacitive coupling between the antennas. So I suspect that much of the "scalar wave" results are simply near field results. But, I am trying to find out if there is more to it than that.

[xee2]

@ Loner

I find it interesting that it could be a normal type of EM signal and get through shielding, where a high power swept signal could not.

Do you know about "skin depth" of RF signals? A low frequency signal can go through many feet of steel whereas a microwave signal will bounce off only a fraction of an inch of steel.

[BEP]

@Loner,

The 'birdie' was about the size of a baking soda box with nothing protruding from it and no holes. The only control was an on/off push button. The seams were soldered. I'm quite sure the box was made from aluminum.

The receiver was identical except it had a BNC output jack. It was connected to a spectrum analyzer/scope to display phase modulation of the signal and any other signals that may have modulated the carrier.

I was only an operator at that time so I didn't have the 'need to know' to see a schematic. I know the transmitter had three transistors with no heat sinks and a thick ferrite rod with 2 coils wrapped around it. The coils were covered in heat-shrink tubing. One coil only covered about half an inch of the rod and was at one end. The second coil covered the majority of the rod and looked much like a caduceus coil would look if it was covered with heat-shrink tubing.

The same tests were performed in two U.S. embassies and many tactical AN/TRD-23A system enclosures, that I know of.

The interesting part was to be inside and see the look on a newb's face when the door was shut and his getto-blaster lost the broadcast radio signal. Yet, we could still see the signal from that little box inside from the outside when the same door was shut.

Ah! The good ol' days of the Cold War! 

IMO, the folks thinking it was magnetic coupling are yanking their own chains 

@ex

First time I've seen someone describe a 'standing wave' correctly in years