V.4 No 1

33

Study of dynamic scalar potential

This investigation clearly shows, how much the method affects the measurement results. With an improperly chosen method, locations of extremums and maximums of propagation change, the field strength inversions can arise in the region of measurement. In their turn, these inversions can make (and do make) the illusion of standing waves, while in reality these processes in the dynamic dipole field are absent.

These features distinctively reveal when plotting the direction diagrams of dipole radiation.

As it is known from the conventional theory, "the field of radiation of electric half-wave oscillator with the length l = /2 is determined from the following expression (in the far field - authors):

[14, p. 109]. The appearance of this diagram is shown in Fig. 19.

Fig. 19. Standard directional diagram of a half-wave dipole in the far field

We also can plot the directional diagrams of half-wave dipole, using the calculation data yielded in plotting the vector and amplitude diagrams shown before. We even can make our diagrams more informative, making them dynamical and adding to them the diagrams of the near field of dipole radiation.

In Fig. 20 are shown these diagrams for few distances from the half-wave dipole which cover both near and far fields.

Fig. 20. Directional diagrams of half-wave dipole for the near and far fields

We can see in this diagram that immediately near the dipole (R = /4), the side lobes considerably broaden the main lobe of radiation and make the phase distortions. We would like to mark here, these lobes appear fully because of the experimental method and have just the nature as the above described inversions of the field strength on the periphery of the radiation region. In the real pattern of physical process, these lobes are absent.

With the growing distance from dipole, the side lobes diminish, and their affection on the oscillation phase of the main lobe as well. With R = 2, the main and side lobes join into a common lobe in the very beginning of the period of main lobe growth, and with R = 10  the side lobes are already fully absent, and the directional diagram gets the shape similar to that shown in Fig.19.

The only difference of diagrams in Fig. 19 and Fig. 20 is that the degree of direction in Fig. 20 is much larger and limited to the angle of 90^?, while in Fig. 19 the direction angle is about 150^?. This has several reasons. First, as we showed in [15], in derivation of the principal expressions describing the EM field of the element of current, a considerable inaccuracy which distorts the result is conventionally made. Second, in conventional calculations of the dipole field, the features of measuring scheme were not taken into account. As a rule, all these calculations were targeted to determine the electric field strength at the studied point. But in reality we have to take into account that the difference of potentials is determined between the ends of measuring dipole, which considerably changes the observed pattern of process.

None the less, despite quite regular discrepancies in some particular results, general pattern of process visualised by the method of transforming grid coincides with the experimental results, if noting the features of measurement methods. It is important to mark that given the finite size of measuring dipole, all diagrams basically changed, but with it the very process of dipole radiation remained the same. There changed only the conditions of measurement of those field parameters which we studied in the previous item. In this way we showed the influence of measuring method on the results. However we cannot call dramatic the situation with methods. Even with existing experimental results, we can plot a real field pattern, if we take into account the factors analysed here. With it our understanding of real processes in the EM field will basically change and will well more accurately reflect the features which effect on our results.