fullsquare

if you have an antenna with impedance of, say, 200 ohms, then you need to match it to transmitter impedance of 50 ohms, or else most of power output from transmitter would be bounced back and will damage output stage of amplifier. because on receive currents are tiny, you can wing it by just using it without any match and connecting it directly

transformers are not the only way to do this, and some other circuits can be used instead. if you take a transformer with 1:2 winding ratio, then if on one side current is 1 and voltage is 1, then on the other current will be 0.5 and voltage 2, which means that impedance increases 4x. in EFHW, it's 1:7 winding ratio and impedance ratio is 49x, which works for end-feeding a half-wave dipole, just as expected (from 50 ohm to ~2500 ohm). that transformer is a limitation on power usable in this antenna and main reason to use this type of antenna is mechanical

most importantly, transformers work nicely only if you have real impedances, so your antenna has to be resonant anyway. l- or pi-network tuner will also handle complex impedances so doublet or random wire will work nicely with it, as long as you can accept weight and losses in tuner

how compact and what do you want to do with it? if it's for receive only, the most compact you can get is ferrite rod antenna, but it's very different from usual wire antennas used for transmission. if using wire antennas, random wire would be fine

it depends on whether you want to transmit or not. if not, you can just use random wire antenna

random wire antenna is exactly what it says on the tin - length of random wire strung up as high as you can, as long as you can make it work. the other part is ground, where you might want to lay some lengths of wire and connect them in a single point, to act as radio ground. it won't have right impedance (probably 50 ohm) but for receive, this is ok - it'll be probably usable, and you can amplify signal without penalty because amplifier noise will be much smaller than atmospheric noise already present. the amount of power bouncing around is tiny and can't damage anything

if you want to transmit, you'll need more elaborate antenna. what you can use depends on whether do you have a tuner like neidu3 describes or not. if you do, common choice is doublet which is a specific length of wire connected to tuner with a 400-ohm parallel line. if you don't, common choice is halfwave dipole which is halfwave long, and put as high as you can get, either vertical or horizontal, but for practical reasons mostly horizontal, or monopole, that is quarterwave long, but requires lots of wire on ground to act as radio ground. you can make them shorter using coils, but this makes bandwidth narrower. in any case, it'll be need to be tuned to your band in question, for which you need a tool like nanoVNA. tuner also narrows your bandwidth, but you can retune it so it doesn't matter that much. (it'c called instantaneous bandwidth)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutonium_Management_and_Disposition_Agreement

this shouldn't be surprising if you paid any amount of attention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pravda_network https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20250310-russian-disinformation-infects-ai-chatbots-researchers-warn

i don't mean beta-oxidation, it's just a series of separated normal reactions. i mean something like this: when first learning about ketones, you might learn about aldol condensation, which has enol as a nucleophile and another carbonyl as electrophile. at some other point you might learn about strecker reaction, which has iminium ion as electrophile and cyanide as nucleophile. but really, what you can do is mix and match, and you can pair enolizable ketone and iminium (mannich reaction) or carbonyl and cyanide (cyanohydrin formation) and then generalize, for example you don't need strictly ketone for mannich, you can use any electron rich conjugated system like malonate or nitroalkane anion (henry reaction) or phenol or indole. to figure this out you need to study mechanisms. these last two are usually treated as variants of friedel-crafts reaction, but really categories like this are fake

and to get that right, you need to know how these reactive intermediates look like, how reactive they are, what influences their stability which means that ochem starts with discussion of carbocations, carboanions, radicals, their shapes and orbitals involved, hyperconjugation, solvent effects and the like. and then first reactions taught are sn1/sn2, because these showcase these fundamentals nicely, and from there, it's about introduction of more compound classes

we only had synthons introduced during lecture at around 4th year, and only for ochem path, it's not doing a lot at that point and imo would have much more impact right after ochem intro course

i always thought that the idea of synthons should be taught early on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthon

i'd say it's more important to learn mechanisms because this way you can notice these patterns of reactivity easier. at some point you'd only get new reactions that are really just pieces of other reactions you know put in a new way

there's zero reason to make chart like this, it's both barely comprehensible and touching surface level stuff only (where are palladium couplings for one)

i mean it would be hard to imagine 20 years ago precise ways things could get worse, and then

is there something you don't understand? it doesn't fucking matter what russians claim to have tested, you as nato resident are protected by nato's ability to evaporate moscow and moscow residents survival instinct, meaning that they won't start shit if they want to remain not evaporated. it works in any number of ways between any number of nuclear states, and can't be undone