"David Robbins" wrote in message ...


I believe this line (3) is only true if Zo is purely real.

If Zo is complex, i don't think you can apply
this.

I swore that I wouldn't get into this one, but enough's enough.

Equation (1) is an application of Kirchoff's voltage law.
Equation (2) is an application of Kirchoff's current law.
Equation (3) results from (2) if you apply Ohm's law three times, to the
three terms in Equation (2).

Which of these three principles (Kirchoff's voltage law, Kirchoff's
current law, or Ohm's law) is the one you don't believe? Or do you
disbelieve more than one of the three?

now, now, take it easy on him... he didn't say he didn't believe kcl or kvl
or ohm's law... he just doesn't understand that they still do apply to
phasor notation used in sinusoidal steady state analysis. an easy
misunderstanding.


Gee, thanks David. I was wrong! This was a little review for me!
Hehe... owww..

But it still doesn't answer my question.

I don't think Kurokawa and Besser and the ARRL just pulled it
out of thin air.

And how do you explain the rho 1 for a passive network?
Shouldn't be possible. And neither should a negative SWR.

I'm not sure what is wrong with your derivation, but there
must be something that they are missing to not have the conjugate
in the numerator. Or there is a particular step that you cannot do
with complex impedances.

Again, the normal equation is only for purely real Zo, or
when Zo*=Zo. If Zo is complex, you have to use the conjugate
equation.

Could you email a scan of some of the pages? Not that it
would absolutely help me too much, but perhaps you are missing
something.


Slick