Richard Clark wrote in message
There is no discussion as to the genesis of
this "approximation." There is no data garnered by experiment to
support it.

That's simply a false statement. So please tell us what objection do
you have to the graphs in the ARRL Antenna Book (a previous reference
of mine) from which everything I have said logically follows.

I believe Tom's point was that more information was known or available
preceding the "approximation" than following it, which portrays the
"approximation" as a degradation of knowledge.

That's a laugh since most hams are incapable of measuring anything
like 3000+j2000 ohms. I have no idea what your (or Tom's) agenda is
but it is apparently to convince everyone that shortcuts are useless
and only gurus like yourself can bestow the sacred cow knowledge of
antennas on us, the unwashed masses.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP