"Gene Fuller" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
. ..
Roy Lewallen wrote:
Congratulations, Cecil! Your reputation among your peers is intact.
Technical truth is the only winner here, Roy. Nobody
has provided an example of a standing wave existing
without the component forward and reverse waves.
Nobody has explained how the photons in the standing
wave can possibly stand still. Looks like the wave
reflection model is alive and well in spite of the
obvious agenda to kill it off.

Are you still standing by your use of standing wave
current with its unchanging phase to "prove" that
there is no phase shift through a loading coil? I
can also use that same technique to prove there is
no phase shift in a 90 degree stub.

This is all because 'standing waves' don't exist! they are a figment of
early experimenter's attempts to make tuning measurements on open wire
lines using improvised tools. Because the current or voltage peaks and
dips they were measuring seemed to be wave shaped and occured at
intervals of 1/2 wavelength along their feedlines, and didn't move, they
called them 'standing waves'. A complete misnomer, but quite adequate
for the purpose they were used for... and are still used for. Though
today we understand that the effect is caused by the superposition of
forward and reflected waves and can measure the separate component waves,
the legacy term still remains in common use.





WOW!!!

Yet another person who does not believe in superposition for linear
systems.

no, i heartily DO believe in superposition. what i hate the misnomer
'standing waves' that has misled many non technical people to an incorrect
view of how waves work.