Well, Cecil, you've redefined Pref and Pfwd. Pref used to be solely a
function of the forward voltage and current waves, and Pref a function
of the reverse voltage and current waves. But now you've chosen to add
an extra term to one or the other of those, or both -- a term which
contains components of both forward and reverse waves. You might recall
from the analysis that I originally had two cosine terms, one arising
from the product of forward voltage and reverse current, and the other
arising from the reverse voltage and forward current. Which of these do
you assign to the "forward power" and which to "reverse power"? If the
choice is based solely on the sign, does the choice automatically change
when the cosine function returns a negative value? (To be truthful, I
haven't checked to see if that is, in fact, possible for possible values
of the argument.) When combined into a product of two sine functions as
I did in the analysis, do you assign this combined function to Pref or
Pfwd? The combined sine functions can, I know, return either positive or
negative values, so what do you do when it returns a negative value? If
I use another trig identitity to convert it to some trig functions
having a different sign, does it then switch from being part of Pref to
part of Pfwd, or vice-versa?

So now when you say Pref and Pfwd, what do you mean?

If you were to stick with the definition you've always used in the past,
i.e., powers calculated from solely forward or reverse voltage and
current waves, the answer is yes. For evidence I offer my derivations.
Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Cecil Moore wrote:
William E. Sabin wrote:

4) The determination that rho magnitude in a transmission line can be
greater than 1.0 is correct. In a passively loaded line fed by an
oscillator, where there is no positive feedback from load to
oscillator, there is no problem about a rho magnitude greater than 1.0.


But can |rho|=Sqrt(Pref/Pfwd) ever be greater than 1.0 for a
passive load?