Jim Kelley wrote:
I think you know that I'm just pointing out the problem inherent in
using a valid equation in the way you describe without considering the
many assumptions being made. It led you, for example, to write that
there is a 4th mechanism of reflection -

Here's a quote from my energy article:

"Note that the author previously used the word "reflection" for both
actions involving a single wave and the interaction between two waves.
Now the word "reflected" is being used only for single waves and the
word "redistributed" is being used for the two wave interference scenario."

Nowhere in my present article do I say there is a 4th mechanism
of reflection. Why do you continue to incessantly harp on past
semantic blunders that were corrected years ago?

Do you still believe that interference actually moves power
from one place to another?

Do you ever stop beating dead horses? :-)

Since I stated in my article that power doesn't flow, you are just
once more bearing false witness. Maybe you should have that burr
under your blanket looked at by a competent veterinarian. :-)

I said that the redistribution of energy, which necessarily obeys
the conservation of energy principle, is associated with a wave
cancellation interference event. I never uttered your false
statement that "interference moves power". Here's what I said:

"The term "power flow" has been avoided in favor of "energy flow".
Power is a measure of that energy flow per unit time through a
plane. Likewise, the EM fields in the waves do the interfering.
Powers, treated as scalars, are incapable of interference."

Yet, a couple of times a year just like clockwork, you accuse
me of saying that power moves (which I have never said). One
wonders what drives your never-ending vendetta obsession.

Here is the definition that I am using for RF "interference"
adopted from "Optics", by Hecht:

RF wave interference corresponds to the interaction of two
(or more) RF waves yielding a resultant power density for
the total wave that deviates from the sum of the two power
densities in the superposed component waves.

It is simple physics to realize that (V1+V2)^2 is not usually
equal to (V1^2 + V2^2). When they are not equal, interference
has occurred. Why do you have such a problem with such a simple
concept?

In a transmission line, the power equation indicates exactly
by how much the resultant power deviates from the sum of the
component powers. The magnitude of that deviation from the
sum of the component powers is called the "interference term"
according to Hecht.

Ptotal = P1 + P2 + 2*SQRT(P1*P2)cos(A)

'A' is the angle between the V1 and V2 voltage phasors.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com