Cecil Moore wrote:

Jim Kelley wrote:

Walt doesn't actually indicate 'why' here, either. He is reciting a
set of well known circumstances, and implying that one set of facts
results in another. While the facts are obviously correct, any cause
and effect relationship between them must be inferred.


From his writings in "Reflections" and his postings
here, Walt obviously understands destructive and
constructive interference and the fact that (from
the Florida State University site):

"... All of the photon energy present in
these (cancelled) waves must somehow be recovered or
redistributed in a new direction, according to the
law of energy conservation ..."

In a transmission line we have two directions.
1. Toward the load
2. Toward the source

When the "photon energy" is "redistributed in a new
direction" in a transmission line, I'll bet it
goes in exactly the direction that Walt says it
goes.

If anyone in addition to Cecil thought that I was debating the facts
that Walt presented in Reflections, I apologize. I thought that I had
clearly stated that inferring a causal relationship between certain
sets of those facts had not been demonstrated therein.

73, ac6xg