Gene Fuller wrote:
For future reference, however, just remember: Fields first, then power
or energy. That's the way superposition really works.

Way back before optical physicists could measure light
wave fields, they were dealing with reflectance,
transmittance, and irradiance - all involving power
or energy. They are still using those concepts today
proven valid over the past centuries. Optical physicists
calculate the fields *AFTER* measuring the power density
and they get correct consistent answers.

Use whatever method works for you but don't try to change
or replace the body of the laws of physics that was in place
before your grandfather was born. Your rejection of those
laws of physics from the past centuries is why you are so
confused today by your steady-state short cuts. It's why
Keith doesn't recognize a 1.0 reflection coefficient when
it is staring him in the face. It's why Roy rejects energy
in reflected waves. Optical physicists have known for
centuries where the energy goes. That RF engineers are
incapable of performing an energy analysis is sad.

Irradiance (intensity) is a power density. Many problems
in physics can be solved without even knowing or caring
about the strength of the fields. Here is one such lossless
line problem for you.

100w--50 ohm line--+--1/2WL 300 ohm line--50 ohm load
Pfor1--|--Pfor2
Pref1--|--Pref2

Without using fields, voltages, or currents: Calculate
the magnitudes of the four P terms above. Using the RF
power reflection-transmission coefficients, please explain
the magnitude of Pref1. If you cannot do that, you really
need to broaden your horizons and alleviate your ignorance.

Quoting HP AN 95-1: "The previous four equations show that
s-parameters are simply related to power gain and mismatch
loss, quantities which are often of more interest than the
corresponding voltage functions."
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com