4 ms·
Correct me if I'm wrong: the near fields don't take out any energy if nothing's coupling to them. They're like a reactive load. The far fields, however, take en
by eternauta3k 10y ago
Correct me if I'm wrong: the near fields don't take out any energy if nothing's coupling to them. They're like a reactive load. The far fields, however, take energy out to infinity regardless of what's out there.
- madengr 10y agoYep, correct. I posted a link in another comment, but this is a good picture of all the components for small dipoles and loops. http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/near-far-field.htm http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/near-far-field.h...
- mlonkibjuyhv 10y agoQuick question: if you put a sink in the far field, does that increase energy drain at the source, or is the definition of the far field such that the field strength around the vicinity of the sink is the only thing practically affected?
- madengr 10y agoNo additional energy drain. In fact, one of the definitions of far field is that any thing in it can't change the impedance of the radiating antenna. There is a good article in this months IEEE APS magazine exploring where the far field begins. Coincidence I was reading it last night.