Continue to Site

Welcome to our site!

Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

  • Welcome to our site! Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

Waveform Definition


That's a big 10-4 good buddy. I acquired a FCC 1st class radiotelephone ticket and an advance amateur ticket in the early 70s also. I was taught and trained just like everybody else was. I know the conventional narratives and worked with them all my life. Until I found that they were all wrong. It was quite a shocker. The real shock was that no one seem to care.

Being able to emit one photon from a radio dipole, to me, seemed like quite a feat. I was quite proud of myself. It doesn't take expensive equipment or much time. Any high school lab or an electronic hobby bench can do it.

But for some reason, no one will try. So, I just put it out there for any to see for themselves.

It wouldn't do any good to try and convince you further, one has to see it for themselves. Change is hard.

It's the same with current. The motion of current is a lot different than we have been taught also. Especially antenna current. And antenna measurements.

Light is our PRIME and fundamental narrative for all science. And I believe my experiment shows that narrative to be incorrect.

However, my true goal and my objective is not to disprove light theory. My true goal is a PHYSICAL narrative on mass and matter. If you think my antenna theory is hard to swallow, wait to you hear about mass and matter theory. But, before that, if one sees the true antenna function, they might be willing to listen to the mass and matter theory.

If one dismisses this antenna theory without trying the experiment, then the mass and matter theory is a waste of time for me to present.

I believe that anyone who understands the attractive and repulsive forces of the electric and the magnetic......can understand mass and matter. Any 16 year old.

This is with classical theory and all the restrictions that go with classical theory. Very tight boundaries of what is possible. But one needs to see the true dynamic of EM radiation first. To wet your appetite. One has to be curious to be willing to listen. I can demonstrate light, but can not demonstrate mass, we do not have the instruments yet. But if you see light, you might be willing to listen about mass.

Our modern science has no narrative for mass. I do.


Well-Known Member
Most Helpful Member
The pulse position is variable within a *fixed* waveform period.
Disagree, sorry - see "Differential" ppm in the article.
That uses the time from the last pulse as the data value. Inherently that cannot have a fixed frame frequency.


Well-Known Member
Most Helpful Member
Our modern science has no narrative for mass. I do.

Energy itself has mass. Matter is "condensed" energy, so also has mass.

That's how mass dilation with velocity works - kinetic energy is added, and that energy has an equivalent mass, making the apparent mass of the particle or object being accelerated increase. Higher mass needs more energy to accelerate, so even more added mass etc. etc.

If you do the calculations all the way through, you get a numeric overflow at a point just below C, depending on the maths limits of the computer in use.

I agree that there is a lot of stuff not yet adequately explained, it's not necessarily wrong, just incomplete.

Displacement current is an interesting oddity, having a magnetic field with no electron flow.
It has now gained an explanation but what seems to be a fudged one.

No one has a working explanation of gravity yet.
The "rubber sheet" mass distorting space stuff was originally created to explain light being bent by gravity as back then light was considered to have no mass.

As energy (including light) does have mass, it can be directly influenced by gravity, no space distortion required; but it's still used as an explanation.

All that does is move the unexplained force to another plane or dimension anyway, it did not give a fundamental cause.

And remember that it took around 100 years for science to formally accept that an aircraft can genuinely fly inverted & a greater curvature on the nominally upper surface of the wing is not the only cause of lift.
There is a lot of conceptual inertia involved in changes like that!

Tony Stewart

Well-Known Member
Most Helpful Member
The off time is just a negative going pulse? - which you're width of.
I understand your negative logic if you were referring to TTL, but it contradicts engineering convention and wisdom to universally define PFM as a subset of PWM and make me reflect poorly on using the site as a record of truth & logic. But No offence to you, as I admire your experience.

Tony Stewart

Well-Known Member
Most Helpful Member
transmission mode, the dipole is anti-resonant and breaks/cuts the field around it. The cut is instant. leaving a neutral dipole for the next inducement feed. The dipole cuts the field, every 180 degrees. Preventing resonance. The dipole is charged, but never discharged, only cut. The discharge goes out in space. Not back into dipole, like it does in RX mode.
The dipole impedance has a transmission line property that is wavelength dependent in coupling free-space to a 50 ohm line. The dipole has a aperture effect just like light converting 3D radiation into a 2D window. As the aperture is rotated, the window reduces to a null when the ends have a null window area. If you have a dipole or monopole shorter than the matched wavelength, its impedance rises inversely such that to receive maximum power on VLF with a whip antenna much shorter than Lambda, , you use a FET Rx front end. In far field measurments, the propagation is a 2D aperture where the spherical surface is divided by 4pi to translate to a 2D aperture Area.

A dipole antenna does not ring strongly with stored energy in high Q, but does have gain based on diversity beamwidth.

Unlike an AM high Q coil with gain In voltage with a reduction transformed in impedance It also is polar directional with a directional null effect on aperture. Yet matched impedances are still necessary to satisfy MPT theorem.

a dipole does have a reactive BPF effect with an LC like phase shift so it can store energy if unmatched, but the function is to transfer energy without absorbing losses or causing propagational reflections to the load from Z mismatch.

If the duration of the alternations is not equal, I personally would not call that a frequency. That's why I asked you guys what is was called.

the asymmetry of voltage is defined by duty cycle and the repetition rate inversely defines f. But unlike some other views, modulating the rep rate if it is a fixed active energy pulse is called Pulse FM. Yet I understand the negative logic used with imagination of proper terms.
Last edited:

Tony Stewart

Well-Known Member
Most Helpful Member
energy (including light) does have mass
It takes only a bit of photon energy to deflect and rotate a mirrored propeller and we don't feel the mass effect of light until the UV band and higher energy wavelengths of X and Gamma rays. So says Planks constant.

Tony Stewart

Well-Known Member
Most Helpful Member
Being able to emit one photon from a radio dipole, to me, seemed like quite a feat. I was quite proud of myself. It
Perhaps you can define your setup

others have defined the single photon emission like this.

The scenario described by the title (Emission of one photon in an electric dipole transition of one among N atoms)
... can be called subradiant emission from a collection of N independent atoms, since only one of N atoms is supposed to be excited. We examine this situation using a quantum electrodynamic Hertz vector approach and use the result to address the directionality of the emission, considering a possible role for atomic entanglement in the multi-atom initial state.

There is a subtle difference with AC & RF vs photons.

Photons move at the speed of light but electric effects are just the waves propagating at the same speed as light depending only on the dielectric constant of the medium to alter propagation speed like a glass or water that deflects light at an angle.

while the electron drift velocity is extremely slow. You know the analogy of hand waves around a football stadium as the speed of electricity while no one is drifting over a short span of time, unless Argentina has been eliminated from the World cup , then they return home.

But we measure galaxy motion from photon velocity and wavelength redshift and gravitation effects define the light deflection around galaxies or absorption in a black hole. So we measure with the frequency corresponding to the absorption of gasses in the microwave band. Yet SETI has yet to receive any "intelligent" life signals but it has seen some interesting galaxy structures modulating the microwave noise into patterns. !
Last edited:


Thanks for all the response. I see right now this is going to be very hard because of our contemporary concept of the terms. I am going to use the same terms, but these terms are applied to a foreign, unfamiliar dynamic. There is bound to be some confusion. And of course a lot of doubt.

We have been taught that for the property of momentum, there needs to be mass. This is largely because no one knows what mass is. Mass is not needed for momentum. Mass only occurs with inertia. Inertia is a resistance to change. Inertia is an anti-rate property, meaning it resists any change in rate of any property. It's sorta like a "do not disturb" property. It is produce by two perpendicular rotational woven EM fields. Momentum only needs field density with velocity, not mass. This is why E fields and M fields have linear or angular momentum. They have density.

Energy is simply, any and all motion. Motion can be linear, angular and area expansion/contraction. It's a property of a physical entity. Mass/inertia is confined motion. Confinement occurs with angular and area E/C motion. It is also a property of a physical entity. These properties(energy/mass) can be ratio-ed with structure. There are two physical entities, one has mass, one has none, but does have momentum. The mass entity has structure, and that structure and the motion of it, produces and ratios all the properties of the entity.

The woven EM fields around this structure can be separated from the structure. This is an EM emission. This structure is the ONLY physical structure/entity in the cosmos. All other structures and objects in the cosmos are combinations of this one structure. This structure has a ring type shape, and has a property like a telescopic circumference. The structure can expand and contract. But it can not E/C in an analog fashion. This is because of rotational resonance. Rotation resonance is what gives us the "quantum effect". Rotational resonance is monopole resonance. It is a balance between electric field divergence and magnetic field convergence. Only set lengths(circumferences) can balance the two. Also, this structure is a non pi structure. pi does not apply to the ratio of Cir/Dia. The C/D ratio is always larger than 3.14, and it is variable. Never ever depend on math for understanding or determination. This goes for planetary orbits also. Planetary orbits are NOT elliptical.

This mass entity is what science calls charge, but other the e, science knows nothing about charge. Or mass.

A charge has a front porch, a back porch and one side. An iso charge always moves in the front porch direction. If you want to reverse the direction of a charge, you need to flip it. Which is easy to do, and it's very quick. So quick, that if you do it the right way, you can separate the field from the charge. On rare occasions, the charge can be accelerated backwards. This will invert the properties and allow an electron to have the mass properties of a proton, and let a proton acquire the mass properties of an electron. Anti-matter. It's not a mystery or a confoundment.

This is going to sound silly, but it's the secret to understand the asymmetry between electrons and protons. I always use electron flow for current, never ever positive flow. If positive flow occurs, it will not obey ohm's law.

Wind a left handed solenoid coil. Hang it vertically. Apply current to go up the coil. There will be a S mag pole at the top. The current, the charge is moving up, but the M dipole is moving down. The direction of a M dipole is S to N. The "dipole" term applies to the axle or converged section of the total M field. E charge up, M charge down, for a left handed coil.

Replace coil with a right handed coil. Now the current is moving up, and the M dipole is moving up. E charge up. M charge up.

Now imagine measuring these momentums. In the left handed coil, the momentums cancel, giving a very low net(if any) momentum. The "net" comes from measurement orientation. It would appear very light. But the right handed coil has the momentums in parallel, and would measure a high total momentum. Appear heavy. But there is more to it than that.

e is the only constant quantity in the cosmos. You should think of it as a constant length, OF a constant number of E field lines along that length. However, we can vary the density of those lines with structure. And this is how. Please imagine two equal strings hanging vertically. If we twist one of those strings, it will shorten, compared to the untwisted string. If we twist it again, it will shorten some more. This will increase the E field density, without adding charge. Now imagine, instead of twisting, that we spiral the constant length of e, around a very skinny rod. Let's give it 100 turns. Now remove rod, and bend this long skinny helix in a circle. A closed helix. This helix of charge rolls, or spirals, and the total close helix will appear to rotate, but it's the roll, not the spin a total structure. But gives an appearance of total ring rotation. It's the roll or spiral motion that gives the torus motion. This roll is always at angular c.

The M dipole, remains completely enclosed inside the helix. In an lefthanded charge, the E flux and M flux motion is anti-parallel. This causes an electron to have a normally expansive property. It want's to remain in a large size, slow rotation, low energy state. When charged, it looks for a way to discharge.

In the right handed roll, the fluxes are in parallel. This contracts the structure, it's a pig, and keeps what energy it can get. It's super stingy. It keeps all the energy and is looking for more. This keeps the proton at small size, high rotation and high energy state.

When a charge absorbs energy, it adds a turn or turns. It shrinks. It increases density. It increases the RPM of torus. When a charge discharges energy, it relaxes a turn or turns. It expands. It slows the torus RPM.

99.9 % of energy in cosmos is in protons. 99.9 % of energy transferred in the done by the electron.

This is my speculation....(the art of speculation has hit it's zenith with probability and spacetime as boundaries)....but mine has set rules. What the heck would cause all this configuration and motion, what powers this device. Lets take a dab of raw charge. Charge is repulsive and will immediately start to diverge away from itself and all the other charge in that dab. This causes a common outward velocity. A common speed and a common direction....out. Common direction is common in two directions....out AND in. This common acceleration builds a common M field. This M field rolls and spirals AND turns this dab in the same common direction, into this helical structure when the V of the M equals the E velocity. This enclosed M field lassos the E field with rotation. Think of a super nova explosion. If we put the same turn on all the flying out components, all the components would form a ring, and the expansion would cease. We could control the diameter of that ring by controlling the V of the turn. Slow it down, it expands, speed it up, it contracts. Only with charge, it uses E and M forces.

Only a certain number of turns will balance the repulsive force at only certain diameters. The quantum effect.

The number of E lines are constant, but we can add M lines, to contract it down to varying degrees of E density.

Magnetic flux can be exchanged, but E flux stays constant, only the density of it changes.

There is more. Adding turns and particle bonding. And light of course. And the antenna setup. I have to take a break for medication, if I don't come back tonite, will try tomorrow.


Well-Known Member
Most Helpful Member
Thanks for all the response. I see right now this is going to be very hard because of our contemporary concept of the terms. I am going to use the same terms, but these terms are applied to a foreign, unfamiliar dynamic.
The vast majority of everything after this point is incorrect.

You do not get to re-define terms, especially terms that have been standardized for *centuries*. That is not how scientific communication works. All communication is based on a common language. If you have a concept that does not fit the available terms, make up a new one; that's how today's terms came about.

The reason Einstein's work was accepted so quickly is that it left the previous 1000 years of observation, experimentation, analysis, and *language* intact. Where the current language did not fit his idea, he made up a new term.

Oliver Heavyside created several terms to describe his view of the various relationships in electricity.



There are two EM fields in the charge. One internal, one external. Both come from rotation. One rotation has a very small radius, the other one has a large radius. This is because one is an open rotation and one is a closed rotation. The helical rotation of the circumference is an open rotation. That means the origin of the rotation is moving. That means that there is nothing straight across the diameter. In the closed rotation, the torus rotation, straight across the diameter is the other side of the rotation, the origin is more or less stationary, in reference to the rotation. This all means that in the open rotation, there is no repulsion across the diameter.....and in the closed rotation there is a repulsive force across the diameter.

Imagine a toroid coil with 10 turns on a hula hoop. There is no repulsive force across the diameter of the turns. But there is a repulsive E force between the neighboring turns of the coil. NOT across them. This is the internal E repulsion force. Between turns. The internal M field is completely enclosed in the "core" of the toroid. The E forces the turns to spread, and the M lasso's the turns together. But the torus rotation is closed. There is a repulsive force across the torus. The rotation of the torus, manufactures a M dipole in the center of the torus. That field is open, and fountains out on one side and envelopes the charge, fountaining back in on the other side. The external E field expands the torus and the external M field contracts and squeezes the torus. Two balances, of two perpendicular EM fields. Rotational resonance.

The diameter of the left handed torus is about 200 to 300 times larger than the right handed torus. Not only is the a huge difference in inertia and RPM, the is a huge difference in target/capture area between the charges. It takes a much larger influence to affect the proton, than the electron.....because of the target/capture area also.

If we stand on the side of an electron, every rotation would gives us one e of charge motion. Current. The electron would measure about 18-20 amps. The proton would measure about 30,000amps. The proton can go hundreds of thousands of amps.

If we lay the the proton and electron on the desk, so that they are rotating in the same direction, let's say counterclockwise direction, A S pole will be on top the electron and a N pole will be on top the proton. If we line up the M poles to add,(S to N, or N to S)....the charges will be rotating in opposite directions. And have one common external M field. One common M axle. This common open M field, will encircle both charges. It will appear as a funnel, from a distance. A funnel connects a small hole to a large hole. The proton would be like a small o-ring on the small lip of funnel, the electron would be like an o-ring on the large lip. These o-rings rotate in opposite directions. The small proton has a very dense external E field, the electron has a rarefied external E field. As long as there is a difference in density, the two fields will attract. As the move closer to one another, the density becomes equal, and the attraction stops. The overshoot of the density, will repel the charges. The density balance between those charges, oscillates at that distance. The electron can combine with different sizes, so the dipole distance can have certain quantum lengths. The electron does all the moving in and out. Less inertia.

If an external influence increases the travel of that oscillation, The dipole will emit and cast off that influence with emission. It can act like a radio repeater. Influenced by one rate, and cast off with the dipole rate. The dipole can only oscillate close to the quantum rates. But they can be varied with external forces.

The emission of the dipole is at the M dipole length. Much lower in F, than an isolated charge.

EM radiation can be had by four methods. Hard x-ray and gamma are mono-pole emissions. No oscillation is involved. This comes from the unknown property of expansion and contraction of the charge with energy level. Charge can only exist at certain circumferences. This is due to rotational resonance. It only has "quantum" sizes. This is due to the balance of a divergent E field(expansive force) and the convergence of a M field(contractive force). When an isolated charge is accelerated, 1/2 goes to kinetic propulsion and 1/2 goes to trying the spin the charge faster, angular acceleration. If the angular acceleration reaches the next quantum step, the charge will snap down to the next smaller size. Giving a much smaller size to react to the acceleration. Also the inertia increases, needing more acceleration for the same kinetic velocity.

Modern science is completely unaware of this property. As they are with energy and mass itself.

If the acceleration is enough to get to the next step down is size, but not enough to get to the next one, the charge will emit the a orphan emission. The same thing happens when going up in size thru discharge of the charge, an orphan emission. Eons of orphans has given the space around in the cosmos a background of static EM. EM pollution.

X-ray down to very far IR emissions come from dipole oscillations. The wavelength is determined by the distance between the poles. That distance is variable... and also affected by external environment. We use oscillation to detect acceleration, orientation and gravity. Unfortunately we also use it to measure time.....very bad JUJU.

Radio emissions come from collective fields. This requires an alignment of net charge. A radio antenna. Or a long plasma alignment.

The fourth method is charge un-wrapping. This occurs when the charges are the same size. When the charges are at different sizes, they can not touch. One will fly thru the center of the other. But when same size, they can touch, when they do, they un-wrap each other, because of the opposite rotation. Anti-matter reaction.

There is no impedance in space. The only limit of velocity, comes from the acceleration it under goes. We have found nothing faster than c, to accelerate with. And now, that we know why charge gains that mass, we can accelerate just short of size change, let the charge emit and come back to starting size, and accelerate again. Intermittent acceleration will take charge to linear c, without mass and inertia gain. But no faster, because we do not have a faster acceleration velocity. Two perpendicular accelerations might take it beyond c. Spacetime relativity says no, but there is NO spacetime with classical theory. Relativity is greatly mis-understood.

The size and inertia act like a spring. As long as we don't push it til the size contraction, it will not gain mass. We can reset that the starting mass.

The first "relativity" was observed, measured and documented by Ampere. It's angle relativity. He also speculated that the "corpuscles"(electrons) acted exactly like small current loops. The second relativity was observed, measured and documented by Weber. The relativity of velocity.

These two relativities, were discovered decades before Einstein and spacetime relativity.

I need another break. Any of you had this covid? I think I have long haul covid.


Well-Known Member
Most Helpful Member
Hard x-ray and gamma are mono-pole emissions. No oscillation is involved. This comes from the unknown property of expansion and contraction of the charge with energy level.
Nothing "unknown" about it.

Hard X-Ray emission is just "fluorescence" except in an element such as tungsten that has appropriately high energy changes between electron orbits.

An electron in an atom has energy added by eg. a high energy electron beam, then the electron returns to its proper shell and emits a photon.

The photon energy is just a lot higher than with visible light fluorescence or soft X-Rays created by a similar electron shell jumping process in different atoms.

I can't be bothered to go through the rest.


Well-Known Member
Most Helpful Member
Hard x-ray and gamma are mono-pole emissions. No oscillation is involved. This comes from the unknown property of expansion and contraction of the charge with energy level.

How can you state that something is caused by an *unknown* property. If the property is unknown, then how can you know that it causes anything?



I tried to explain at the beginning that one can not use QM and spacetime to critique/compare this model/theory. This is classical theory, which is cause and effect. This means that probability, randomness and chaos are not permitted. And that all motions in the cosmos use absolute time and absolute length. Space is square. And empty, without properties. At absolute zero temp. It's only because of orphan emissions(static), that you encounter a little temp(or energy) in space. But this energy is only passing thru. And all that energy came from mass, not space. Space is empty, emptiness is the only thing that can fill infinity. Space is infinite, it was not newly created with mass in the "big bang". Space is not part of creation, just a void to put creation in.

Using QM and spacetime for total waste of time. Only classical postulates can be used. It's a totally different religion, if you prefer. And from your comments, I don't think you can do this. I was explaining that this unknown property, was the physical dynamic for the quantum effect. In which there is no narrative.....or an unknown property. We know of the steps, but not the reason for it. And if hearing of this particle expansion/contraction was new to you, it is unknown to you.

However, this might interest you. Instead of giving you a step by step setup for the dipole antenna experiment, let me propose a new dipole dynamic. Then you may verify it, in the manner you prefer. If you want.

As stated, the dipole emits at the end of every half sine you introduce to the feedpoint. During the first 90 degrees of that half sine, very little happens on the dipole. At 90 degrees input, the voltage peaks are at the feedpoint. At this time, the voltage peaks turn direction. They expand away from each other for the final 90 degrees. These peaks stretch a 1/2 wavelength of EM field in the last 90 degrees, along the dipole. When these peaks hit the tips of the elements, the antenna fires, and that built field is collapsed OUT into space. This is also the time when the feedpoint voltage is zero and ready for the next half sine. That 1/2 wavelength field was 1/4 period. Or the last half of the induced half sine. And the dipole is ready for the next half sine. That field is a 1/2 wavelength CHUNK. Emitted in an instant. The EM disturbance that is emitted has a 1/2 period duration, not a full wavelength duration.

You can check that out, without reading any of my further posts. Which does not seem to interest you. You are not alone.

If anyone else is interested, I can continue and explain how to make a neutron. And why it is necessary to do so.

But right now, apparently I have a new hobby. Covid for the third time. Maybe the fourth time, they told me it was the flu last time. But who knows now?


Well-Known Member
Most Helpful Member
And empty, without properties. At absolute zero temp.
Empty space or vacuum, no matter, means nothing to have temperature, not "absolute zero". The temperature of any matter or object is space is the result of a balance between absorption and emission.

I don't have time to go through all the things blatantly wrong with your claims - which are a hypothesis, not a Theory, by the way.

It is only a Theory after it has been tested exhaustively by multiple people without them being able to show anything wrong with it.

If you want to convince anyone of anything to do with your claims, create a repeatable experiment to show the claimed difference in forces between the left/right clockwise/anticlockwise coils or toroids.

Changing the protons or neutrons in an atom would be changing the element or isotope, involving literally Nuclear energy levels.

Latest threads

New Articles From Microcontroller Tips