Cecil Moore wrote:
Richard Harrison wrote:
Power is acceptable and accepted. Why avoid the term?

Jim Kelley, AC6XG, has convinced me to make the
distinction between the nature of EM energy and
the nature of EM power. Power is what exists at
a point or plane. Energy is what is moving past
the point or through the plane. Reflected power
is measured at a point. Reflected energy is
what is doing the moving past that point.

In addition, there's the difference in definitions
between the fields of RF engineering and the field
of physics. In physics, zero work implies zero power.

I am not avoiding power. I am avoiding "power waves"
and "power flow". The dimensions of power flowing past
a point would be watts/second. I don't know what physical
quantity that would represent.

Cecil,

Utter nonsense. Jim was pulling your chain, and I guess you fell for it.

I have been a professional physicist for nearly 40 years. Real
physicists fully understand the difference between power as work and
power as energy transport. Both definitions are used as needed. I would
hazard a guess that most engineers understand and use both definitions
as well.

All of your ramblings about the difference between energy and power, as
well as joules and watts, add nothing but noise to the discussion. It is
highly likely that everyone reading this group understands the concept
of time.

73,
Gene
W4SZ