Cecil Moore wrote:
Tom Donaly wrote:

current, in a wire, is the total current density integrated across
a cross section of the wire. It's a vector, ...


From "Fields and Waves in Communications Electronics", by Ramo, Whinnery,
& Van Duzer, page 239: "It must be recognized that the symbols in the
equations of this article have a *different* meaning from the same symbols
used in Art. 4.06. There they represented the instantaneous values of the
indicated *vector* and scalar quantities. Here they represent the complex
multipliers of e^jwt, giving the in-phase and out-of-phase parts with
respect to the chosen reference. The complex scalar quantities are commonly
referred to as *phasors*, ..."

From the IEEE Dictionary: "The phase angle of a phasor should not be
confused with the space angle of a vector."

You are obviously confusing vectors and phasors.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000
Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

You're just digging the hole deeper, Cecil. I know you think you can use
the simplifications of transmission line theory to explain everything
in electromagnetics. Reg seems to think that's a valid way of doing
things, too. If it were true, it would certainly make life easier for
those poor souls who have to study Maxwell's equations in colleges
throughout the world. Just think, no more vector calculus for engineers!
From what I've read on this group the past few days, many engineers
don't learn it anyway, so why not just dumb things down to
your level? Maybe you should write a letter to Texas A&M telling them
they don't have to teach it any more. (If they still do, that is. Some
colleges have dumbed themselves down considerably in the past 20 years.)
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH