On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 06:40:33 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Richard Clark wrote:
You are simply hoping your scope
is within its range of capability ...

Measuring the delay of a 4 MHz RF signal through a device

This is all the naive hope of absolute faith (a binary choice) in an
instrument where you cannot distinguish between capability and desire.
Let's face it. The enumeration of readings, the descriptions of all
elements in full is very trivial and within the grasp of any ordinary
bench tech. That it is so wholly missing from your discussion means
that its revelation would expose a major error of design, or would
reveal you are not practiced in the art of analog engineering.

You've had time enough to back-fill your virtual notebook with these
details of normal procedure. Their sudden arrival in successive
discussion won't have much authenticity.

What is it about the phase shift in 90 degrees of
monopole that you don't understand?

You are more flummoxed by the simpler problem of your own instrument's
introduction of phase error at the -3dB point. If you cannot
reconcile that at the bench, then this navel gazing problem of yours
is sterile and pointless.

From your data, from your math, and from your argument.

There was no missing energy.

More faith and hoping which culminates in the absurd:

A three watt wave

This arrives from your fog of memory, a poor device I warned you about
in the last post. As I pointed out, same outcome.

Is your apology of age, infirmity, or sloughing accuracy for speed
next?