Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
If you refuse to accept standard technical conventions, then there is
little hope of getting others to agree with you.

Gene, have you stopped beating your wife? Your usual ad
hominem attack completely devoid of any technical content
is duly noted.

In a one second long lossless transmission line where the
forward power is 200W and the reflected power is 100W, it
can be proved that the source has supplied 300 joules that
have not been accepted by the load. If those joules are not
contained in the forward and reflected waves, where are they?

Cecil,

I recall that you selectively quote only those parts of messages to
which you disagree. I guess you accepted the remainder of my comments.

You quite clearly said that "steady state" is not really steady. I
challenged that in a straight-forward manner. So what is "ad hominem"
about my message?

ad-hominem

This is a typical trick, Cecil, when you have been caught dealing
nonsense. You ignore the issue and attempt diversion. It won't work
here. The meaning of steady state is not controversial.

/ad-hominem

73,
Gene
W4SZ