Cecil Moore wrote:
Jim Kelley wrote:
But you aren't measuring it. The point is, it's calculable.

But w8ji and w7el *are* measuring it and getting something
different from those calculations. They are reporting their
flawed measurements as technical fact. That's what the
whole argument is about.

Only because you keep dragging them into it. I'm perfectly happy just
comparing your results with the results I get from Reg's program.

There is no way in heck to get a
3 nS delay out of a 100 turn, 10", 2" diameter coil.

There is something odd about Tom's printout. It's not clear to me
exactly what the instrument is actually displaying.

The fact that it doesn't give you an answer that agrees with any other
method notwithstanding.


It means that the existing posted methods are invalid.

:-) There exists no other possibility, naturally. I believe they call
these delusions of grandeur.

If I were trying to measure delay I would use pulses.


How do you know the pulsed delay is the same as the
steady-state delay?

In the same way, and to the same degree that I know the delay will be
the same tomorrow as it is today.

Has anyone published a delay using
pulses?

Delays are typically measured using pulses.

If it is a DC pulse, there
would be known problems.

Oh, I would never use those. :-)

I would want the system to be configured in exactly the same way as I
intended for it to be used.


Then you will find it is impossible to measure the delay
through the coil during steady-state.

If I thought that was true, I wouldn't have said what I did.

ac6xg