On Apr 20, 12:46 pm, Cecil Moore wrote:
Keith Dysart wrote:
It would be educational if you could describe one of these
experiments.

I already did - Bruene's early 1990's QST article.

Sorry. Not a good enough description for any kind of analysis.

Remember, you are looking for a re-reflection of the reverse signal
at a generator whose source (output) impedance matches the line
characteristic impedance.

It happened with your pet generator from which you quickly
tried to divert attention. Zero power dissipation inside
a "matched" source is hard to sweep under the rug, huh?

Nothing to sweep under the rug, I am afraid. It is key that the
dissipation depends on the design of the generator. Some
times those 'reverse watts' cause the dissipation to drop
to 0, sometimes they cause it to increase by a factor of 4,
sometimes they cause it to increase by the numerical value
of the 'reverse watts'. Pretty much hard to argue that those
'reverse watts' are real when their heating effect is so
variable.

Either it works, or it doesn't.

Superposition works in some situations and doesn't work
in others. For instance, it doesn't work with power.

I'd suggest you think of power as a quantity not a situation.
Superposition works for linear, time invariant circuits with
multiple sources. Check any text book. The generators and
lines under discussion meet these requirements.

I realize the results of superposition are inconvenient for
your explanations, but it would be better to examine your
explanations than to discard superposition. You will then
be free to use superposition to solve problems you
currently consider unsolvable.

....Keith