[HCARC] "Antennas on A Chip"

[Kerry Sandstrom]

Hi Gary,

I wasn't sure I wanted to get into this discussion but since you want to 
I will join you.  I really can't decide what these guys are talking 
about.  The first thing I think is confusing is when he talks about this 
may be where electromagnetics and quantum mechanics cross over.  Well, 
the two great physics theories of the 20th century, quantum mechanics 
and relativity, are consistent with classical physics.  You can solve 
very simple problems with quantum mechanics and relativity.  What 
actually happens is when you are in the world of the ordinary, both 
quantum theory and relativity reduce to classical physics.  Classical 
physics is a special case of relativity and quantum theory.  You can't 
do anything with classical physics that you can't also do with quantum 
physics and relativistic physics.  The converse is not true.  Classical 
physics is incapable of solving problems involving relativistic and/or 
quantum considerations.  The name of the field that includes 
electromagnetism and quantum physics is called quantum electrodynamics - 
and its not for the casual reader!

I don't believe any one has an adequate understanding of how 
electromagnetic waves are created.  We have various models which can be 
used to predict the generation of electromagnetic waves under specific 
circumstances.  I'm sure you remember from school that there are two 
different descriptions of electromagnetic radiation. One is a particle 
description using photons.  This description is essential to describing 
adequately things like the photoelectric effect.  The second description 
is the wave description which is essential to describing interference 
patterns.  Usually the wave and particle natures of electromagnetic 
waves are discussed with visible light but they apply across the entire 
spectrum from DC to gamma rays and beyond.  From this it should be 
obvious that neither one is a real accurate description of the physics 
of electromagnetic radiation, each only applies to specific situations.

Now when it comes down to the physical size of antennas, antenna theory 
already allows for infinitesimal antennas.  The theory works adequately 
for very small antennas, but of course there is no way to build a true 
infinitesimal antenna!  While very small antennas work just fine they 
suffer from poor efficiency and very broad beams. That is why people 
don't use them except for very special situations.  Note that antenna 
theory has no real concept of how the electromagnetic wave is 
generated.  It just allows you to determine how to control it and use it.

Now lets talk about what I think these guys are up to.  One of the major 
problems with computers is how to move data around on chips. When 
computers had  small memories were slow and handled 8 bits at a time, 
interconnecting conductors were not an issue.  Times have changed.  Now 
computer guys want to talk about massively parallel processors and huge 
parallel access memories.  Think about how you might move 1000 bit 
parallel data around on a chip!  Some work is being done using light 
signals to carry information around the chip.  I think the work 
described in the paper you attached is to look at alternatives to lasers 
and photodetectors on chips.

As far as 160/80/40 m antennas, this has no conceivable application.  
Just my opinion.

Have fun,

Kerry

On 4/10/2015 11:18 AM, Gary J - N5BAA wrote:
> How might this breakthrough affect lower frequency antennas such as for 40/80/160 meters??  Might we finally be able to get those antennas down to a size that is more manageable??  Does height over ground still apply with this breakthrough??
>
> antenna-chip.cfm
>
> Gary J
> N5BAA
> ______________________________________________________________
> HCARC mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/hcarc
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:HCARC at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>