On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 13:08:40 -0700, Jim Kelley
wrote:

Hence for
something less than total superposition of ALL energies, it hardly
bodes a better yield in total cancellation - the energy just isn't
there in the first place. 0.098X 0.11X is the simple economics of
the balance.

Sounds good. It's wrong, but the sound of it is good nevertheless.

Hi Jim,

As the total energy returning from the second interface is 0.098X, not
0.11X, and not even all of that passes through the back of the first
interface, where do you come up with the remaining difference to
accomplish a complete cancellation?

Even if an infinite summation of ALL reflections kept any energy from
transiting the second interface (a generous allowance not likely to be
observed anywhere), then it cannot exceed what energy was initially
introduced into the system. With that generous allowance, the
infinite summation can only equal 0.098X which remains less than the
reflection from the first interface of 0.11X. Without that generous
allowance, it must be something less, which can only increase the
total, uncancelled reflection product. Either way, "total
cancellation" is not total.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC