On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 07:24:12 +0100, "Ian White, G3SEK"
wrote:

Richard Clark wrote:
Hi Ian,

A Directional Coupler consists of two transmission lines.

You say that after cutting out all the examples that I gave of
directional couplers that don't.

There is NO material difference offered in your original to merit its
inclusion in the first place.

Transmission Lines are the media through which B/H waves migrate
inexorably fixed together. The premise (which you alone bring as a
clouded presumption) that the Bruene bridge somehow works with
independence from this is simply a convenience in discussing its
operation, a convention of discussion at best and not a reality.

The waves migrate along the *main* transmission line - and obviously
every directional coupler has to contain one of those. But many do not
contain any secondary transmission line, in any realistic physical sense
of that term.

Ian, you exhibit a whole lack of experience into the matter. There
are more such examples of Directional Couplers that fit the most
precise definition of transmission line than not. Those that do not
(your Bruene bridges) are simply lumped equivalents that still
maintain classic formalisms that observe all the strictures of wave
mechanics. That they can be described by simpler metaphors does not
diminish either their utility, nor their intellectual purity.

Your rejections of their application are preposterous examples of
pedagogical minutia.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC