On May 28, 12:21*am, Richard Clark wrote:
On Fri, 28 May 2010 00:08:10 GMT, Owen Duffy wrote:
Zs can be measured by a number of methods. It is interesting to note that
in many of the discussions on the 'net on this topic, more focus is given
to dismissing the experiment design for experiments that produce
unfavourable results to some, than questioning the proposition that Zs is
50+j0 or thereabouts.

Hi Owen,

Even this Zs = 50+j0 or thereabouts is a distraction. *Quite simply,
being able to reject a single value is an evasion of facing the
evidence of source resistance.

What is more comic is both sides couldn't agree more! *Truly Kabuki.

Whilst Walt has documented a quite rigourous experiment, and it produced
a favourable outcome, it is my view that that in itself is not proof of
the proposition.

Propositions seem to abound as n+1 the number of participants. *I dare
say no two participants can agree what any single proposition is
without adorning further distractions to it like bulbs on a Christmas
tree.

Whilst one favourable experiment cannot proove the proposition correct,
just one valid experiment can prove the proposition to be not generally
true. No doubt the reason for the focus on proving experiments invalid.

Proving a straw man invalid is simple. *Proving a murky proposition
invalid is simple too. *Unfortunately, the occurrences of actually
stepping up to the bench and showing results other and conclusively
different from those offered is a void in the discussion. *

It would seem the qualitative counter-proof comes cheap and that
submitted quantifiables are unchallenged. *Quite a paradox.

If you give some thought to what you could use Zs for, then every valid
experiment that is designed around that application must produce a
favourable outcome if Zs is as proposed. If they don't, then the value
assumed for Zs must be wrong.

I posted a simple test earlier that in my experience does not support the
proposition that typical ham HF transmitters have Zs=50+j0 or close to
it. The test is documented so that individuals can try it and make their
own mind up. Some might get favourable results on limited trials... but
in my view, that is outweighed by unfavourable results from valid
experiments.

For years I have read that Zs is not ____. *Just as quantifiables are
brushed off the table of discussion, I have yet to see measure of what
the objectors' Zs IS instead under any circumstance that they can
conveniently arrange with their own tools and source. *

It is a tautology that if it is not X, it must be Y, or Z, or.... None
seem to know an explicit answer under any circumstance or
configuration of their own gear. *Without some value such as 10 Ohms,
50 Ohms, 10,000 Ohms, it leaves a most curious happenstance that any
garden variety ham transmitter exhibits either 0 or infinite source
resistance - but I dare say no one is going to step forward to accept
these boundary limits either! *

No counter-proclaimants of ANY value between and including 0 to
infinity. *It would be a commitment anyone could validate or refute on
the basis of science at the bench - and what would follow from that
examination? *I would find such discussion refreshing in comparison.

What a happy state of ignorance this topic draws out of the wallpaper.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard, I'm not sure I understand thrust of your theme correctly. Are
you accepting my measurement data as proof of my position, or are you
including my data as a happy state of ignorance on this topic?

Walt, W2DU