On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 12:48:32 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Richard Clark wrote:
You cannot show that any two powers used to compute Rho are negative
to fulfill this shift of your logic.

Walter C. Johnson when he was chairman of the
Princeton EE Dept. Here's how he calculated rho for a short:

rho = (Z1-Z0)/(Z1+Z0) = (0-Z0)/(0+Z0) = -Z0/Z0 = -1

So your argument is with Dr. Johnson whom I am merely quoting.

No my argument is with your perversion of yet another source in your
vain attempt to draw a faulty conclusion in applying direction as the
basis of the -1 drawn from your observation
I probably should have said rho^2 = Pref/Pfwd. When Pref = Pfwd,
rho can be plus or minus one.
I notice you continually flee from your assertion to prove a different
statement "Dr. Johnson" made.

It doesn't surprise me a bit that you are ignorant of Johnson.

The unreliable correspondent once again, in laziness, again fails to
offer which Johnson. Presumably Walter, but you don't say, and
several Dr. Johnsons have been employed as sources in this group.
Your characteristic failure to attend boundary conditions is
consistent with your inability to preserve your assertion that somehow
a negative association is made with the sqrt(Pref/Pfwd) and that it
proves a change of direction (wholly unsubstantiated by any but your
own Johnson).

Must be really difficult to communicate when you are so special as to
be the "only one here" who is "credentialed to that matter". Many of
the posters to this newsgroup have written books and articles which
I find to be communicated rather well.

And with whom you have such difficulty communicating with.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC