Roy Lewallen wrote:
Gene is of course correct. Perhaps the difficulty with basic concepts
such as phase reference is part of the reason why Cecil finds it
necessary to invent and promote his alternative theories.

A moment's thought would reveal one good reason not to reference phase
angles to "the source" -- NEC and EZNEC allow multiple sources, each
having a phase angle chosen by the user.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Hello, Roy and all. Every unmoderated science newsgroup I've lurked in
always has one or more individuals that seem to delight in bucking
conventional science wisdom even in those cases where experimental
evidence completely validates the predictions of applied mathematics.
(Gosh, what ever happened to cold fusion?) One guy regularly complains
that respected physics journals won't publish his papers. Of course he
imagines there's someone or some agency out to get him, never
considering other reasons for his rejection. Perhaps on usenet he
acquires some validation.

Hey, people are free to view nature and its processes however they
choose but if they want others to view it that way it takes more than
"Because I say so." Especially to a roomful of skeptics. Of course I'm
also reminded of the hornet's nest that Marilyn vos Savant stirred up a
few years back in academia with the "Monty Hall" problem. (Turned out
she was right after all) The truth always emerges eventually. Theories
often have to be modified as new discoveries occur.

Are you sure I can't interest you in an energy-saving power factor
correction capacitor for your home/ham shack? How about a broadband
dipole with a feedpoint VSWR 1.6 over the contiguous 2-30 MHz band?
Sincerely, and 73s N4GGO,