Roy Lewallen wrote:
Y'know, if every author seems to have it wrong, considering how many
really, really intelligent and learned people there are out there, and
how many times their work has been carefully reviewed, have you
considered for just a moment the possibility that maybe, just maybe,
they have it right and you have it wrong?

"It" is not always the same thing. What I am saying is that nobody's
perfect, nobody knows everything, and 1000 years from now, most of what
you and I believe today will be obsolete.

For instance, Ramo & Whinnery use the square root of the ratio of reflected
power to forward power to define the reflection coefficient. Shortly
thereafter, they use the reflection coefficient as the cause of that
power ratio. So in essence, they are saying that the reflection
coefficient causes itself.

Another example from this newsgroup. After standing waves have been caused
by the superposition of forward waves and reflected waves, they somehow
become self-sustaining without the forward waves and reflected waves.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----