Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: Microwave polarization

One could excite the wave guide w/ a loop instead of a stub to confuse
the student, or the stub parallel with wide side (horiz.) instead of the
vertical. Confusion is most easily resolved by using a 1 / 2 wave
antenna with a diode in the middle. Then one may verify the theory for
the orientation for max. transmission of the picket fence.

bc, also, whose favoured demo. is crossed picket fences with a third
interposed at 45 deg.

Brian Whatcott wrote:

At 12:48 PM 3/1/2004, Leigh, you wrote:


On 1-Mar-04, at 1:00 AM, From Chuck Britton:



I have a similar problem with those physics instructors who declare
forcefully that the 'picket fence' model is a totally bogus, wrong,
without merit, way of visualizing polarized light.


I'm one of those instructors. There is no reason to invoke skipping
ropes through picket fences when discussing polarized light.
...
The student must accept his instructor's initial premise
that the incident microwave radiation has the polarization he alleges.
It is all a bit of a swindle, you see, so I say that one should swindle
on the side of the angels.....
Leigh




I expect that given a waveguide of the usual rectangular form,
and given that one accepts that the emergent e field is parallel
to its short side for the usual propagation mode, then one
would see that the e field is normal to the pickets of a
cake-tray polarizer?



Brian Whatcott Altus OK Eureka!