Cecil Moore wrote:

I don't remember saying that and I apologize if I ever did. What I
remember saying is that an RF standing wave doesn't meet the
definition of an EM wave which is essentially the same thing that Dr.
Hecht said: "Standing Waves:....These might better not be called waves
at all since they do not transport energy and momentum."

You could shortcut the whole process and just have Dr. Hecht post his
ideas here instead. I bet ya anything there would be far fewer
arguments about physics. :-)

RF standing waves, unlike other EM waves, do not transport energy and
momentum at the speed of light in the medium. Therefore, they are
technically not EM (photonic) waves.

Technically, they're just spatial interference patterns, so of course
they don't propagate energy. They're like any other spatial
interference pattern in that regard.

ac6xg