On Apr 29, 2:18 pm, Roy Lewallen wrote:
K7ITM wrote:
. . .
I'm very curious now to see exactly what Pearson & Maler and Van
Valkenburg say in their texts. Are they clear with a mathematical
definition, or do they end up just using words that can be interpreted
in different ways? . . .

Sorry, I've been swamped, but will post some quotes soon.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


More from my research (which is probably at an end at this point):

Bell, "Fundamentals of Electric Circuits," calls a phasor a rotating
vector, period.

IEEE Standard Dictionary of Electrical and Electronic Terms has
entries for both non-rotating and rotating definintions.

Christiansen, "Electronic Engineers' Handbook," defines a phasor
clearly as a non-rotating quantity.

This has been educational. Clearly there are people in both camps.
I'm obviously in the non-rotating camp, and it seems to be one with a
high population. I'll be careful to ask when someone writes of
phasors and their definition is not clear from the context, at least
if the distinction between the two definitions matters in that case.

Cheers,
Tom