"I imagine it couples with internal
    circuitry, and possible wouldn't pass
    normal emissions tests, or at least
    would have higher levels of emissions."

Good point. Very good point.

This 'internal antenna' BS turns my gut every time
I see it.

*I* should be so unscrupulous so as to market
something as vapid as that on TV and bilk millions
from the unsuspecting non-technical 'consumers' (a
term I despise as well) of technology.

How does the "Canons Of Ethics Of Engineers" as
printed in ESCHBACH ("Hdbk of Enginering
Fundamentals") begin again?

"I. Will be honest and impartial, and will serve with
     devotion his employer, his clients, and the public."

I'd still like to see "range plots" of a 'before
and after' using the 'internal antenna' just to
remain 'impartial' ...

Jim


----- Original Message -----
From: "M. Adam Davis" <adampic@UBASICS.COM>
To: <PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 11:27 AM
Subject: Re: [OT] Internal Antenna baloney!


> You would probably have to delve into antenna theory toget the full
> story, but about all I can offer is that many antennas (especially TV
> roof antennas) have passive elements which are also not connected to the
> antenna wires, or grounded.  These elements do serve a purpose, however...
>
> Whether the internal antenna helps or not is probably subjective.  A few
> scenarios could happen, though.  I imagine it couples with internal
> circuitry, and possible wouldn't pass normal emissions tests, or at
> least would have higher levels of emissions.  Since the strongest
> emission is the readio signal then it would gain a small bit from pieces
> of metal neraby, especially those in which it could resonate (the right
> size/shape, etc).  But then you are increasing the emitted signal from
> the phone which could then exceed FCC (or the equivilant in your coutry)
> limitations for hand held cell phones.
>
> Of course, it could be snake oil.  Anyone else see the "X-ION" in
> stores?  Heh...
>
> -Adam
>
> Matthew Fries wrote:
>
> >Alright, I have been seeing so many commercials about this thing and have
> >wondered how it could possibly work.
> >
> >In case you have not heard of it, the "internal antenna" looks to be a
> >thin piece of gold foil with adhesive backing that you place underneath
> >the battery of your cell phone. It claims to boost the signal reception
of
> >your cell phone.
> >
> >My question is... How?
> >
> >The phone that is used in the ad is a Nokia of some sort. Lucky me, I
have
> >a nokia, so I could use it as comparison. I don't even know how this
would
> >work, because it does not appear that the foil is electrically
> >connected with *ANY* contacts on the phone at all.
> >
> >Secondly, the foil does not appear to contain any active components, or
> >any recognizable components at all. It's just foil.
> >
> >Thirdly, the foil does not even seem to be any complete circuit. It
> >appears to be a collection of traces arranged in a U or C shape. Maybe
> >this acts as some sort of RF coil or filter? If so, how could it possibly
> >have an effect since it is neither grounded or connected to the phone?
> >
> >Is this in fact just a bunch of hooey, or does it have any credability as
> >a valid device?
> >
> >What do you think?
> >
> >--
> >http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
> >ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
> ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.
>
>

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.