On Jan 8, 2:39 pm, Jim Kelley wrote:
But when you write the equation for the superposition of
traveling waves and claim that resultant standing wave is a different
kind of electromagnetic wave, that is a misguided point of view.

That's not true unless you consider Eugene Hecht to be misguided. He
said standing waves are so different from traveling waves that they
probably shouldn't even be considered to be waves at all since they
are not even moving. Standing waves could hardly be any different from
traveling waves and tend to create strange illusions in human brains.
I have plotted the envelopes of the waves at http://www.w5dxp.com/TravStnd.gif
Those waveforms could hardly be any different yet you asserted that
they are linked by a trig identity.

A standing wave is not only different from an EM traveling wave, it
cannot correctly even be called an EM wave because it is not moving at
the speed of light in the medium, a technical requirement for EM
waves.

I have asked you to prove your assertion that, using your trig
identity, cos(kx-wt) = cos(kx)+cos(wt). Where is that proof?

... you almost inevitably end up lying ...

Misunderstanding you and repeating it back to you is not lying.
Neither are my personal opinions proof of lying. I joke a lot but
lying is against my ethics and religion. Being called a liar by liar
is unacceptable proof. Would it be too much to ask to post one of my
alleged lies instead of hoping that your handwaving and implications
will accomplish that underhanded trick.

P.S. I'm on my daughter's computer posting from Google.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com