K7ITM wrote:

OK, so your definition is different from mine. So far, I've found two
actual definitions of the phasor on-line, and both agree with my books
and my own useage. But if it's common useage to consider a phasor to
be a rotating vector, I'll defer to that at least in this discussion.
So far, though, I haven't found a reason to give up my definition of a
phasor. ;-)

Cheers,
Tom

I find it's convenient to think of a phasor as rotating with respect to
some other frequency, or stationary when you want to show the phase
relation at some specific frequency in a circuit with complex impedances.

For example, if you are discussing the phase relations in AM modulation,
you can set the carrier as a vector pointing to the right, and the upper
and lower sidebands rotating in opposite directions with their centers on
the end of the carrier vector.

The sidebands each have one half the amplitude of the carrier, so when they
are aligned in the same direction as the carrier, the resulting vector is
twice the amplitude, or length. When they oppose the carrier, the result is
zero amplitude.

So a phasor can be stationary or rotating depending on its relation to
something else in the discussion.

Regards,

Mike Monett