My analysis shows that fP - rP can have a negative value for some
load impedances when Z0 is complex. Please pay careful attention,
though, to the definitions of these terms. As I used them, fP = Re{fE
* fIc} and rP = Re{rE * rIc} where I'm using subscript c to denote
complex conjugate to avoid confusion with "*" for multiplication, and E
and I magnitudes are RMS. Although I didn't prove it in my analysis, the
total net average power, which includes a third average power term, into
a passive load of course can't be negative.

In past comments about my analysis you've chosen to define "forward
power" and "reverse power" differently. So when you speak of them, be
sure to tell us exactly what they consist of in your discussion.
Formulas would be best, as I've given above and in my analysis for my
meanings of the terms.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Cecil Moore wrote:

Richard Clark wrote:

wrote:

Chipman never said the reflected power can be greater than the
forward power
into a passive load.


You are the only one to just have suggested he did.


Because of a death in the family, I entered the discussion late, but
I thought that was what Roy was asserting using his calculations,
that fP - rP was a negative value.