wrote:
Are you saying that there can be power when the voltage or current
is always 0? And that this is the error in the sequence of steps
which makes Assertion A false?

There can and does exist component energy when the NET power is zero.
You will understand this when you understand complete destructive
interference in light waves represented by the equation

I1 + I2 -2*Sqrt(I1*I2) equation 9.16, page 388, in the 4th edition
of _Optics_, by Hecht.

Two waves are flowing with unchanging energies and producing an absolutely
black ring, i.e. zero irradiance equals zero power.

Consider again, Assertion A, in more detail this time:

It won't do a bit of good to rehash this until you understand complete
destructive interference. The two interfering waves flow unabated.
You are being fooled by superposition of two waves whose component
energies are completely independent of each other.

All the steps in Assertion A seem correct to me.
Can you help me find the false step which makes Assertion A false?

Yes, I already did that more than once. You will not understand until
you understand how two light beams can cause zero power without even
knowing the other wave is there. There is absolutely no change in
the energy levels in the individual waves during complete destructive
interference.
--
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! =-----