Elecraft › [K3]

Why I won't purchase K3

Classic

List

Threaded

76 messages Options

1234

Alexey Kats

Re: Maxwell's Equations.

"What Descartes did was a good step. You have added much several ways, and
especially in taking the colours of thin plates into philosophical
consideration. If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the
shoulders of Giants." (Isaac Newton)

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 3:31 PM, David Cutter <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I don't recall that from his biography, I'll have to read it again.
> Interesting.
>
> David
> G3UNA
>
>
> > Hi Kevin,
> >
> > Was not Maxwell that condensed the hard to understand original theory.
> > Was some his disciples, aka "The Maxwellians," that finished the theory
> > in the present form. FitzGerald, Lodge, and Heavyside plus others.
> >
> > Am just now reading "The Maxwellians" that has this story.
> >
> > 73, tom n4zpt
> >
> >
> >
> > On 3/6/2011 5:37 PM, Kevin Rock wrote:
> >> I have always wondered how he condensed the original twenty equations in
> >> twenty unknowns down to just four of them. The quaternions he used
> >> initially were out a favor with the physics community of the day so he
> >> needed to get them into vector form. Heaviside did a good job but how
> do
> >> you characterize a system with twenty unknowns in four equations? What
> >> has been lost in the translation?
> >> Kevin. KD5ONS
> >
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

--
Alexey Kats (neko)
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Tom Azlin N4ZPT

Re: Maxwell's Equations.

In reply to this post by kevinr@coho.net

Hi Kevin,

What was asserted in "The Maxwellians" was that Maxwell died in the
middle of a rewrite. It did sound like there was a controversy on his
particle (or little eddies?) form of the equations for a field approach.
Perhaps that new version would have dropped the use of quaternions?
Have not studied the equations since college, perhaps will go find the
papers after I finish this history book. Thanks for the tip on locating
the older forms.

73, tom n4zpt

On 3/10/2011 1:46 AM, Kevin Rock wrote:

> There was a group which disliked his use of quaternions so he was forced
> to rewrite the system into other systems. Most of the work was carried
> out by others but for him to publish he needed peer review so he caved
> into the larger group. I am reading his original work from 1873 and
> finding it very enlightening. Even though I have studied the
> Heaviside-Gibb's version of the Maxwell equations many times the
> quaternions he used in the original paper were very hard to find. Luckily
> they are proliferating online these days.
> Kevin. KD5ONS
>
>
> On Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:31:18 -0800, David Cutter<[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> I don't recall that from his biography, I'll have to read it again.
>> Interesting.
>>
>> David
>> G3UNA
>>
>>
>>> Hi Kevin,
>>>
>>> Was not Maxwell that condensed the hard to understand original theory.
>>> Was some his disciples, aka "The Maxwellians," that finished the theory
>>> in the present form. FitzGerald, Lodge, and Heavyside plus others.
>>>
>>> Am just now reading "The Maxwellians" that has this story.
>>>
>>> 73, tom n4zpt
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/6/2011 5:37 PM, Kevin Rock wrote:
>>>> I have always wondered how he condensed the original twenty equations
>>>> in
>>>> twenty unknowns down to just four of them. The quaternions he used
>>>> initially were out a favor with the physics community of the day so he
>>>> needed to get them into vector form. Heaviside did a good job but how
>>>> do
>>>> you characterize a system with twenty unknowns in four equations? What
>>>> has been lost in the translation?
>>>> Kevin. KD5ONS

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Jim Rogers, W4ATK

Re: Maxwell's Equations.

Enough with the Maxwell Equations.... What in the world does this represent to the average K3 user? .
On Mar 10, 2011, at 8:21 AM, Tom Azlin N4ZPT wrote:

> Hi Kevin,
>
> What was asserted in "The Maxwellians" was that Maxwell died in the
> middle of a rewrite. It did sound like there was a controversy on his
> particle (or little eddies?) form of the equations for a field approach.
> Perhaps that new version would have dropped the use of quaternions?
> Have not studied the equations since college, perhaps will go find the
> papers after I finish this history book. Thanks for the tip on locating
> the older forms.
>
> 73, tom n4zpt
>
> On 3/10/2011 1:46 AM, Kevin Rock wrote:
>> There was a group which disliked his use of quaternions so he was forced
>> to rewrite the system into other systems. Most of the work was carried
>> out by others but for him to publish he needed peer review so he caved
>> into the larger group. I am reading his original work from 1873 and
>> finding it very enlightening. Even though I have studied the
>> Heaviside-Gibb's version of the Maxwell equations many times the
>> quaternions he used in the original paper were very hard to find. Luckily
>> they are proliferating online these days.
>> Kevin. KD5ONS
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:31:18 -0800, David Cutter<[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't recall that from his biography, I'll have to read it again.
>>> Interesting.
>>>
>>> David
>>> G3UNA
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi Kevin,
>>>>
>>>> Was not Maxwell that condensed the hard to understand original theory.
>>>> Was some his disciples, aka "The Maxwellians," that finished the theory
>>>> in the present form. FitzGerald, Lodge, and Heavyside plus others.
>>>>
>>>> Am just now reading "The Maxwellians" that has this story.
>>>>
>>>> 73, tom n4zpt
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/6/2011 5:37 PM, Kevin Rock wrote:
>>>>> I have always wondered how he condensed the original twenty equations
>>>>> in
>>>>> twenty unknowns down to just four of them. The quaternions he used
>>>>> initially were out a favor with the physics community of the day so he
>>>>> needed to get them into vector form. Heaviside did a good job but how
>>>>> do
>>>>> you characterize a system with twenty unknowns in four equations? What
>>>>> has been lost in the translation?
>>>>> Kevin. KD5ONS
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

JIM ROGERS, W4ATK
[hidden email]
http://web.me.com/jimrogers_w4atk
K3/100 P3
K2/10

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Tom Azlin N4ZPT

Re: Maxwell's Equations.

Sorry you are not enjoying the thread James.

Seems like many of the email on this reflector has nothing to do with
the K3. I'm an average user of the K3 (and an in progress K2 builder).
Talking about the actual equations and the history of their development
seems to me to be of general interest to many of the readers of this
list given the other responses.

73, tom n4zpt

On 3/10/2011 10:06 AM, JAMES ROGERS wrote:

> Enough with the Maxwell Equations.... What in the world does this represent to the average K3 user? .
> On Mar 10, 2011, at 8:21 AM, Tom Azlin N4ZPT wrote:
>
>> Hi Kevin,
>>
>> What was asserted in "The Maxwellians" was that Maxwell died in the
>> middle of a rewrite. It did sound like there was a controversy on his
>> particle (or little eddies?) form of the equations for a field approach.
>> Perhaps that new version would have dropped the use of quaternions?
>> Have not studied the equations since college, perhaps will go find the
>> papers after I finish this history book. Thanks for the tip on locating
>> the older forms.
>>
>> 73, tom n4zpt
>>
>> On 3/10/2011 1:46 AM, Kevin Rock wrote:
>>> There was a group which disliked his use of quaternions so he was forced
>>> to rewrite the system into other systems. Most of the work was carried
>>> out by others but for him to publish he needed peer review so he caved
>>> into the larger group. I am reading his original work from 1873 and
>>> finding it very enlightening. Even though I have studied the
>>> Heaviside-Gibb's version of the Maxwell equations many times the
>>> quaternions he used in the original paper were very hard to find. Luckily
>>> they are proliferating online these days.
>>> Kevin. KD5ONS
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:31:18 -0800, David Cutter<[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't recall that from his biography, I'll have to read it again.
>>>> Interesting.
>>>>
>>>> David
>>>> G3UNA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Kevin,
>>>>>
>>>>> Was not Maxwell that condensed the hard to understand original theory.
>>>>> Was some his disciples, aka "The Maxwellians," that finished the theory
>>>>> in the present form. FitzGerald, Lodge, and Heavyside plus others.
>>>>>
>>>>> Am just now reading "The Maxwellians" that has this story.
>>>>>
>>>>> 73, tom n4zpt
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/6/2011 5:37 PM, Kevin Rock wrote:
>>>>>> I have always wondered how he condensed the original twenty equations
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> twenty unknowns down to just four of them. The quaternions he used
>>>>>> initially were out a favor with the physics community of the day so he
>>>>>> needed to get them into vector form. Heaviside did a good job but how
>>>>>> do
>>>>>> you characterize a system with twenty unknowns in four equations? What
>>>>>> has been lost in the translation?
>>>>>> Kevin. KD5ONS
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> JIM ROGERS, W4ATK
> [hidden email]
> http://web.me.com/jimrogers_w4atk
> K3/100 P3
> K2/10
>
>
>
>
>

Jim Rogers, W4ATK

Re: Maxwell's Equations.

I am sure what you say has value Tom. It just seems this one has been going on a while. It did prompt me to go out and look up Maxwells equations just to see what you were all talking about and it is interesting but the math is certainly over my head. I hope my comments did not offend anyone. If so, I apologize, sincerely.

73s Jim
On Mar 10, 2011, at 9:42 AM, Tom Azlin N4ZPT wrote:

> Sorry you are not enjoying the thread James.
>
> Seems like many of the email on this reflector has nothing to do with
> the K3. I'm an average user of the K3 (and an in progress K2 builder).
> Talking about the actual equations and the history of their development
> seems to me to be of general interest to many of the readers of this
> list given the other responses.
>
> 73, tom n4zpt
>
> On 3/10/2011 10:06 AM, JAMES ROGERS wrote:
>> Enough with the Maxwell Equations.... What in the world does this represent to the average K3 user? .
>> On Mar 10, 2011, at 8:21 AM, Tom Azlin N4ZPT wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Kevin,
>>>
>>> What was asserted in "The Maxwellians" was that Maxwell died in the
>>> middle of a rewrite. It did sound like there was a controversy on his
>>> particle (or little eddies?) form of the equations for a field approach.
>>> Perhaps that new version would have dropped the use of quaternions?
>>> Have not studied the equations since college, perhaps will go find the
>>> papers after I finish this history book. Thanks for the tip on locating
>>> the older forms.
>>>
>>> 73, tom n4zpt
>>>
>>> On 3/10/2011 1:46 AM, Kevin Rock wrote:
>>>> There was a group which disliked his use of quaternions so he was forced
>>>> to rewrite the system into other systems. Most of the work was carried
>>>> out by others but for him to publish he needed peer review so he caved
>>>> into the larger group. I am reading his original work from 1873 and
>>>> finding it very enlightening. Even though I have studied the
>>>> Heaviside-Gibb's version of the Maxwell equations many times the
>>>> quaternions he used in the original paper were very hard to find. Luckily
>>>> they are proliferating online these days.
>>>> Kevin. KD5ONS
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:31:18 -0800, David Cutter<[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I don't recall that from his biography, I'll have to read it again.
>>>>> Interesting.
>>>>>
>>>>> David
>>>>> G3UNA
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Kevin,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Was not Maxwell that condensed the hard to understand original theory.
>>>>>> Was some his disciples, aka "The Maxwellians," that finished the theory
>>>>>> in the present form. FitzGerald, Lodge, and Heavyside plus others.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am just now reading "The Maxwellians" that has this story.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 73, tom n4zpt
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/6/2011 5:37 PM, Kevin Rock wrote:
>>>>>>> I have always wondered how he condensed the original twenty equations
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>> twenty unknowns down to just four of them. The quaternions he used
>>>>>>> initially were out a favor with the physics community of the day so he
>>>>>>> needed to get them into vector form. Heaviside did a good job but how
>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>> you characterize a system with twenty unknowns in four equations? What
>>>>>>> has been lost in the translation?
>>>>>>> Kevin. KD5ONS
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>> JIM ROGERS, W4ATK
>> [hidden email]
>> http://web.me.com/jimrogers_w4atk
>> K3/100 P3
>> K2/10
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Gary Ferdinand

Re: Maxwell's Equations.

In reply to this post by Tom Azlin N4ZPT

I for one have been enjoying the thread.

Gary W2CS

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:elecraft-
> [hidden email]] On Behalf Of Tom Azlin N4ZPT
> Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 10:42 AM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Maxwell's Equations.
>
> Sorry you are not enjoying the thread James.
>
> Seems like many of the email on this reflector has nothing to do with
> the K3. I'm an average user of the K3 (and an in progress K2 builder).
> Talking about the actual equations and the history of their development
> seems to me to be of general interest to many of the readers of this
> list given the other responses.
>
> 73, tom n4zpt
>
> On 3/10/2011 10:06 AM, JAMES ROGERS wrote:
> > Enough with the Maxwell Equations.... What in the world does this

represent
> to the average K3 user? .
> > On Mar 10, 2011, at 8:21 AM, Tom Azlin N4ZPT wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Kevin,
> >>
> >> What was asserted in "The Maxwellians" was that Maxwell died in the
> >> middle of a rewrite. It did sound like there was a controversy on his
> >> particle (or little eddies?) form of the equations for a field
approach.
> >> Perhaps that new version would have dropped the use of quaternions?
> >> Have not studied the equations since college, perhaps will go find the
> >> papers after I finish this history book. Thanks for the tip on locating
> >> the older forms.
> >>
> >> 73, tom n4zpt
> >>
> >> On 3/10/2011 1:46 AM, Kevin Rock wrote:
> >>> There was a group which disliked his use of quaternions so he was
forced
> >>> to rewrite the system into other systems. Most of the work was
carried
> >>> out by others but for him to publish he needed peer review so he caved
> >>> into the larger group. I am reading his original work from 1873 and
> >>> finding it very enlightening. Even though I have studied the
> >>> Heaviside-Gibb's version of the Maxwell equations many times the
> >>> quaternions he used in the original paper were very hard to find.
Luckily
> >>> they are proliferating online these days.
> >>> Kevin. KD5ONS
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:31:18 -0800, David
Cutter<[hidden email]>

> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I don't recall that from his biography, I'll have to read it again.
> >>>> Interesting.
> >>>>
> >>>> David
> >>>> G3UNA
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hi Kevin,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Was not Maxwell that condensed the hard to understand original

theory.
> >>>>> Was some his disciples, aka "The Maxwellians," that finished the
theory

> >>>>> in the present form. FitzGerald, Lodge, and Heavyside plus others.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Am just now reading "The Maxwellians" that has this story.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 73, tom n4zpt
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 3/6/2011 5:37 PM, Kevin Rock wrote:
> >>>>>> I have always wondered how he condensed the original twenty

equations
> >>>>>> in
> >>>>>> twenty unknowns down to just four of them. The quaternions he used
> >>>>>> initially were out a favor with the physics community of the day so
he
> >>>>>> needed to get them into vector form. Heaviside did a good job but
how
> >>>>>> do
> >>>>>> you characterize a system with twenty unknowns in four equations?
What

> >>>>>> has been lost in the translation?
> >>>>>> Kevin. KD5ONS
> >>
> >> ______________________________________________________________
> >> Elecraft mailing list
> >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> >> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
> >>
> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> >
> > JIM ROGERS, W4ATK
> > [hidden email]
> > http://web.me.com/jimrogers_w4atk
> > K3/100 P3
> > K2/10
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Dave-7

Re: Maxwell's Equations.

> I for one have been enjoying the thread.

Ditto!

It is, unfortunately, somewhat rare that there is an interesting
discussion on here.

73 de dave
ab9ca/4

On 3/10/11 9:58 AM, Gary Ferdinand wrote:
> I for one have been enjoying the thread.
>
> Gary W2CS
>
>
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Tom Azlin N4ZPT

Re: Maxwell's Equations.

In reply to this post by Jim Rogers, W4ATK

Does not offend me Jim!

Was just puzzled.

The math is hard having forgotten most of that myself especially as I
only barely understood it back in college 40 years ago. The book I am
reading, "The Maxwellians," is more a science history book than a book
on the equations themselves. Interesting reading about the scientists
and how they worked this out. How some ideas survived and some did not.

73, tom n4zpt

On 3/10/2011 10:56 AM, JAMES ROGERS wrote:

> I am sure what you say has value Tom. It just seems this one has been
> going on a while. It did prompt me to go out and look up Maxwells
> equations just to see what you were all talking about and it is
> interesting but the math is certainly over my head. I hope my
> comments did not offend anyone. If so, I apologize, sincerely.
>
> 73s Jim On Mar 10, 2011, at 9:42 AM, Tom Azlin N4ZPT wrote:
>
>> Sorry you are not enjoying the thread James.
>>
>> Seems like many of the email on this reflector has nothing to do
>> with the K3. I'm an average user of the K3 (and an in progress K2
>> builder). Talking about the actual equations and the history of
>> their development seems to me to be of general interest to many of
>> the readers of this list given the other responses.
>>
>> 73, tom n4zpt
>>
>> On 3/10/2011 10:06 AM, JAMES ROGERS wrote:
>>> Enough with the Maxwell Equations.... What in the world does this
>>> represent to the average K3 user? . On Mar 10, 2011, at 8:21 AM,
>>> Tom Azlin N4ZPT wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Kevin,
>>>>
>>>> What was asserted in "The Maxwellians" was that Maxwell died in
>>>> the middle of a rewrite. It did sound like there was a
>>>> controversy on his particle (or little eddies?) form of the
>>>> equations for a field approach. Perhaps that new version would
>>>> have dropped the use of quaternions? Have not studied the
>>>> equations since college, perhaps will go find the papers after
>>>> I finish this history book. Thanks for the tip on locating the
>>>> older forms.
>>>>
>>>> 73, tom n4zpt
>>>>
>>>> On 3/10/2011 1:46 AM, Kevin Rock wrote:
>>>>> There was a group which disliked his use of quaternions so he
>>>>> was forced to rewrite the system into other systems. Most of
>>>>> the work was carried out by others but for him to publish he
>>>>> needed peer review so he caved into the larger group. I am
>>>>> reading his original work from 1873 and finding it very
>>>>> enlightening. Even though I have studied the
>>>>> Heaviside-Gibb's version of the Maxwell equations many times
>>>>> the quaternions he used in the original paper were very hard
>>>>> to find. Luckily they are proliferating online these days.
>>>>> Kevin. KD5ONS
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:31:18 -0800, David
>>>>> Cutter<[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't recall that from his biography, I'll have to read
>>>>>> it again. Interesting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> David G3UNA
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Kevin,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Was not Maxwell that condensed the hard to understand
>>>>>>> original theory. Was some his disciples, aka "The
>>>>>>> Maxwellians," that finished the theory in the present
>>>>>>> form. FitzGerald, Lodge, and Heavyside plus others.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am just now reading "The Maxwellians" that has this
>>>>>>> story.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 73, tom n4zpt
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/6/2011 5:37 PM, Kevin Rock wrote:
>>>>>>>> I have always wondered how he condensed the original
>>>>>>>> twenty equations in twenty unknowns down to just four
>>>>>>>> of them. The quaternions he used initially were out a
>>>>>>>> favor with the physics community of the day so he
>>>>>>>> needed to get them into vector form. Heaviside did a
>>>>>>>> good job but how do you characterize a system with
>>>>>>>> twenty unknowns in four equations? What has been lost
>>>>>>>> in the translation? Kevin. KD5ONS
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>> Elecraft mailing list Home:
>>>> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help:
>>>> http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post:
>>>> mailto:[hidden email]
>>>>
>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support
>>>> this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>
>>> JIM ROGERS, W4ATK [hidden email]
>>> http://web.me.com/jimrogers_w4atk K3/100 P3 K2/10
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list Home:
>> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help:
>> http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post:
>> mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this
>> email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> JIM ROGERS, W4ATK [hidden email]
> http://web.me.com/jimrogers_w4atk K3/100 P3 K2/10
>
>
>
>
>

Phil Hystad-3

Re: Maxwell's Equations.

For those who might have an interest, there is a brief paper that summarizes Maxwell's equations and shows the connection between the different notations used: differential form, original form, quaternion form, and so on.

http://www.zpenergy.com/downloads/Orig_maxwell_equations.pdf

On Mar 10, 2011, at 8:34 AM, Tom Azlin N4ZPT wrote:

> Does not offend me Jim!
>
> Was just puzzled.
>
> The math is hard having forgotten most of that myself especially as I
> only barely understood it back in college 40 years ago. The book I am
> reading, "The Maxwellians," is more a science history book than a book
> on the equations themselves. Interesting reading about the scientists
> and how they worked this out. How some ideas survived and some did not.
>
> 73, tom n4zpt
>
>
>
>
> On 3/10/2011 10:56 AM, JAMES ROGERS wrote:
>> I am sure what you say has value Tom. It just seems this one has been
>> going on a while. It did prompt me to go out and look up Maxwells
>> equations just to see what you were all talking about and it is
>> interesting but the math is certainly over my head. I hope my
>> comments did not offend anyone. If so, I apologize, sincerely.
>>
>> 73s Jim On Mar 10, 2011, at 9:42 AM, Tom Azlin N4ZPT wrote:
>>
>>> Sorry you are not enjoying the thread James.
>>>
>>> Seems like many of the email on this reflector has nothing to do
>>> with the K3. I'm an average user of the K3 (and an in progress K2
>>> builder). Talking about the actual equations and the history of
>>> their development seems to me to be of general interest to many of
>>> the readers of this list given the other responses.
>>>
>>> 73, tom n4zpt
>>>
>>> On 3/10/2011 10:06 AM, JAMES ROGERS wrote:
>>>> Enough with the Maxwell Equations.... What in the world does this
>>>> represent to the average K3 user? . On Mar 10, 2011, at 8:21 AM,
>>>> Tom Azlin N4ZPT wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Kevin,
>>>>>
>>>>> What was asserted in "The Maxwellians" was that Maxwell died in
>>>>> the middle of a rewrite. It did sound like there was a
>>>>> controversy on his particle (or little eddies?) form of the
>>>>> equations for a field approach. Perhaps that new version would
>>>>> have dropped the use of quaternions? Have not studied the
>>>>> equations since college, perhaps will go find the papers after
>>>>> I finish this history book. Thanks for the tip on locating the
>>>>> older forms.
>>>>>
>>>>> 73, tom n4zpt
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/10/2011 1:46 AM, Kevin Rock wrote:
>>>>>> There was a group which disliked his use of quaternions so he
>>>>>> was forced to rewrite the system into other systems. Most of
>>>>>> the work was carried out by others but for him to publish he
>>>>>> needed peer review so he caved into the larger group. I am
>>>>>> reading his original work from 1873 and finding it very
>>>>>> enlightening. Even though I have studied the
>>>>>> Heaviside-Gibb's version of the Maxwell equations many times
>>>>>> the quaternions he used in the original paper were very hard
>>>>>> to find. Luckily they are proliferating online these days.
>>>>>> Kevin. KD5ONS
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:31:18 -0800, David
>>>>>> Cutter<[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't recall that from his biography, I'll have to read
>>>>>>> it again. Interesting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> David G3UNA
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Kevin,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Was not Maxwell that condensed the hard to understand
>>>>>>>> original theory. Was some his disciples, aka "The
>>>>>>>> Maxwellians," that finished the theory in the present
>>>>>>>> form. FitzGerald, Lodge, and Heavyside plus others.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am just now reading "The Maxwellians" that has this
>>>>>>>> story.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 73, tom n4zpt
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/6/2011 5:37 PM, Kevin Rock wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I have always wondered how he condensed the original
>>>>>>>>> twenty equations in twenty unknowns down to just four
>>>>>>>>> of them. The quaternions he used initially were out a
>>>>>>>>> favor with the physics community of the day so he
>>>>>>>>> needed to get them into vector form. Heaviside did a
>>>>>>>>> good job but how do you characterize a system with
>>>>>>>>> twenty unknowns in four equations? What has been lost
>>>>>>>>> in the translation? Kevin. KD5ONS
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>>> Elecraft mailing list Home:
>>>>> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help:
>>>>> http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post:
>>>>> mailto:[hidden email]
>>>>>
>>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support
>>>>> this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>>
>>>> JIM ROGERS, W4ATK [hidden email]
>>>> http://web.me.com/jimrogers_w4atk K3/100 P3 K2/10
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Elecraft mailing list Home:
>>> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help:
>>> http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post:
>>> mailto:[hidden email]
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this
>>> email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>> JIM ROGERS, W4ATK [hidden email]
>> http://web.me.com/jimrogers_w4atk K3/100 P3 K2/10
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

kevinr@coho.net

Re: Maxwell's Equations.

In reply to this post by Tom Azlin N4ZPT

I remember JFK saying (and I paraphrase) "... we do it not because it
is easy, but because it is hard ..." Do any of you think the K3 was
designed in a week? From what little I was told it was a matter of four
or five years and it still being developed as we sit. We did not get to
the moon because it was a simple problem. We got there through the
efforts of many thousands of hard working engineers who had a dream.
Whenever I feel bored or depressed I sit with a book on fluid dynamics or
learn some new methods in mathematics. It has taken years but I still
need to keep learning more. Each small step opens up a new vista for my
exploration to continue. As was stated earlier: "I see so far because I
stand on the shoulders of giants."
73,
Kevin. KD5ONS

On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 08:34:22 -0800, Tom Azlin N4ZPT <[hidden email]> wrote:

Rick Dettinger-3

Re: Maxwell's Equations.

In reply to this post by Dave-7

I also have been enjoying this discussion. And the thread is nicely
described in the subject line, making it easy to filter for those not
interested. It would be nice if this was always the case, on this
reflector and others.

73,
Rick Dettinger K7MW

On Mar 10, 2011, at 8:25 AM, dave wrote:

>> I for one have been enjoying the thread.
>
> Ditto!
>
> It is, unfortunately, somewhat rare that there is an interesting
> discussion on here.
>
>
> 73 de dave
> ab9ca/4
>
>
>
>
>
> On 3/10/11 9:58 AM, Gary Ferdinand wrote:
>> I for one have been enjoying the thread.
>>
>> Gary W2CS
>>
>>

Ross Primrose N4RP

Re: Maxwell's Equations.

On 3/10/2011 1:14 PM, Rick Dettinger wrote:
> I also have been enjoying this discussion. And the thread is nicely
> described in the subject line, making it easy to filter for those not
> interested. It would be nice if this was always the case, on this
> reflector and others.
>

It would be even nicer if we didn't NEED to filter off-topic discussions
perpetuated by a small minority of list members who don't seem to care
what the list focus is....

73, Ross N4RP

> 73,
> Rick Dettinger K7MW
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 10, 2011, at 8:25 AM, dave wrote:
>
>>> I for one have been enjoying the thread.
>> Ditto!
>>
>> It is, unfortunately, somewhat rare that there is an interesting
>> discussion on here.
>>
>>
>> 73 de dave
>> ab9ca/4
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3/10/11 9:58 AM, Gary Ferdinand wrote:
>>> I for one have been enjoying the thread.
>>>
>>> Gary W2CS
>>>
>>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

--
FCC Section 97.313(a) “At all times, an amateur station must use the minimum transmitter power necessary to carry out the desired communications.”

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

AC7AC

Re: Maxwell's Equations.

In reply to this post by Tom Azlin N4ZPT

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

Guy, K2AV

Re: Maxwell's Equations.

Also a lot has to do with the "tone" of the discussion. Pleasant
discussions that open a subject well to new understanding seem to be
tolerated for a longer string of posts than others that get personal or
confrontational. This thread has been interesting and entertaining. 73,
Guy.

On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Ron D'Eau Claire <[hidden email]> wrote:

> James, we will soon seen an end to this thread when Eric "pulls the plug"
> to
> keep the message rate under control. As list moderator Eric makes that
> decision to keep the total traffic under some semblance of control ;-)
>
> Note that this is *not* just a "K3" list. It covers all Elecraft gear, the
> uses of that gear *and* assorted discussions of interest to Hams in all
> aspects of the hobby and the evolution of the technology, past and present,
> according to what I've followed over the past decade here.
>
> 73,
>
> Ron AC7AC
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> Sorry you are not enjoying the thread James.
>
> Seems like many of the email on this reflector has nothing to do with
> the K3. I'm an average user of the K3 (and an in progress K2 builder).
> Talking about the actual equations and the history of their development
> seems to me to be of general interest to many of the readers of this
> list given the other responses.
>
> 73, tom n4zpt
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

WD6DBM

Re: Maxwell's Equations

In reply to this post by Geoffrey Downs-3

When I'm using my K3, it's M-theory. When I'm using my K2, it's Modified
Newtonian Dynamics (MOND). But when I'm using my HW-16, it's definitely a
steady-state universe ala Fred Hoyle, et al. :-)

72.1415926535,

Eric WD6DBM

(snip) Interesting discussion. Gives me an idea.

We'll soon be announcing a very cool new test instrument (it's the same size as
our T1 antenna tuner but not related to it in any way). We'll give one of these
to whoever can suggest, by next Thursday, the most plausible alternative to
11-dimensional supersymmetry as the working basis for a unified field theory.
You may assume a negative cosmological constant and cannot impose R-parity. If
the Higgs boson is discovered before the new product announcement, we'll throw
in a spare 9-V battery.

73.14159...,

Wayne
N6KR
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ

Re: Maxwell's Equations.

Administrator

In reply to this post by kevinr@coho.net

> Guy states my moderation position perfectly :-)
>
> 73,
> Eric WA6HHQ
> List Moderator and modulator..
>
> www.elecraft.com
> _..._
>
>
>
> On Mar 10, 2011, at 7:56 PM, Guy Olinger K2AV <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Also a lot has to do with the "tone" of the discussion. Pleasant
>> discussions that open a subject well to new understanding seem to be
>> tolerated for a longer string of posts than others that get personal or
>> confrontational. This thread has been interesting and entertaining. 73,
>> Guy.
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Ron D'Eau Claire <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> James, we will soon seen an end to this thread when Eric "pulls the plug"
>>> to
>>> keep the message rate under control. As list moderator Eric makes that
>>> decision to keep the total traffic under some semblance of control ;-)
>>>

1234