Ian White G/GM3SEK wrote:
As you begin to admit when challenged, the instrument itself does
nothing but add or subtract RF voltages derived by sampling the line
voltage and current.

You missed the point, Ian. THE VOLTAGE SAMPLE IS DIRECTLY
PROPORTIONAL TO THE E-FIELD AND THE CURRENT SAMPLE IS DIRECTLY
PROPORTIONAL TO THE H-FIELD. Given the assumptions about the
boundary conditions in which the Bird is placed, the Bird is
INDEED indicating the value of the Poynting Vector no matter
how indirectly. IF IT WASN'T, BIRD COULD NOT REMAIN IN BUSINESS.
That's what Bird Wattmeters do - indicate the magnitude and
direction of the Poynting Vector - assuming the instrument is
properly used.

Pz+ = E^for x H^for = Bird wattmeter reading for slug ==

Pz- = E^ref x H^ref = Bird wattmeter reading for slug ==

This is all covered in "Fields and Waves ..." by Ramo and
Whinnery. I have NOT introduced anything new. I have simply
tied together some loose ends from all the references available.
Anyone with an open and logical mind could have done exactly
the same thing.

No multiplication is involved.

On the contrary, non-linear calibration of linear meters is an
old technique for analog multiplication. I assumed you knew that
already, but maybe you are not that old. When I was in college,
we put a '1' mark at one milliamp. We put a '4' mark at 2 milliamps.
We put a '16' mark at 4 milliamps. It's a very, very, very old
technique for analog multiplication.

The calibration to indicate power is performed ENTIRELY on the meter
scale.

EXACTLY!!! YOU GOT IT!!! THAT'S ANALOG MULTIPLICATION!!! I did the
exact same thing for analog multiplication when I was in college.
Non-linear calibration of linear meters is a very, very, very old
analog computing technique. Do you even remember analog computers?
If not, I can loan you my analog computing college textbook.

It is an analog calculator.

No, it isn't.

Yes, it is. I learned all those analog techniques while in
college at Texas A&M in the 50's. Maybe you should review
a very old reference on the subject. When I was in college,
analog computers were more popular than digital computers.
Op-amps using tubes were more numerous than anything digital
(and the Texas A&M mascot was a T-Rex). You young sprouts are
just digitally-spoiled brats. :-)

In your earlier statement you said it "performs multiplication", which
is totally false. But for your final paragraph you've switched it to
"analog calculations", which is more general and thus partly true; and
then you invite me to disprove that.

It INDEED does perform analog multiplication, Ian, through the non-
linear calibration of the linear meter. I'm not trying to confuse
anyone. I just assumed you knew that already. Some of the OF's on
this newsgroup can verify what I am saying.

Cecil, I don't think you even realise you're pulling these dishonest
debating tricks... but after too many years to count, I just don't have
any more time for them.

Your ignorance does NOT equate to dishonesty on my part, Ian.
Is admitting ignorance ever worth sacrificing integrity?

plonk

Ian, instead of plonking me, as Roy did, why don't you just prove
me wrong? Wouldn't that be extremely easy given how wrong you assert
that I am?
--
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! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----