On Jun 30, 6:43*am, Keith Dysart wrote:
You have really latched on to that haven't you. I remember the good
ol' days when you were superposing powers and the very same people with
whom you are arguing today were trying to convince you that
superposing power was an invalid operation.

And I remember the good ol' days when you were still messing your
diapers. Do you still do that? I probably did try to superpose power
back when I was young and foolish but I learned the error of my ways
and corrected it.

When I add up the energy flows for the same purpose, that does not
mean that superposition is at work.

But you are NOT adding up the energy flows - you are adding up the
power. That's superposition of power and is a no-no. Power does not
obey any conservation of power principle. The instantaneous maximum
charge on a capacitor contains any amount of energy while power equals
zero. What is it about that concept that you don't understand?

True. You must always use the actual energy flows in the entity and
not the powers that are not real.

What happens when energy = 1 joule, and de/dt = 0 watts. This happens
all the time during an RF cycle so you are not using actual energy
flows. You are using power which goes to zero even when maximum energy
is still present. There is obviously NOT a one-to-one correspondence
between power and energy.

YOU CANNOT USE WATTS TO TRACK ENERGY UNLESS THERE IS A ONE-TO-ONE
CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN WATTS AND JOULES.

Also true. And as is done in my example.

Actually false, as I have proved above. Please plot the joules, not
the watts.

Please provide an example of such an error, preferably from one
of my expositions.

At a current node in a standing wave, you claim there is zero power
which is true. You claim that since there is zero power, there is also
zero energy which is absolutely false since that is a voltage maximum
point and you will fry yourself if you grab it. The energy in the
voltage maximum is unrelated to the power being zero - just one more
proof that energy does not correspond to power. At the zero power
points, there is a maximum of energy in one of the fields which you
are ignoring.

Of course it does. Energy must always balance; not just at the end
of the cycle.

Energy must balance but power doesn't have to balance and usually does
not balance. Power only balances for special cases. You are using
power in the general case as an example so anything you say is
invalid.

Now you are allowing us to create and destroy energy as long as it
balances at the end of the cycle?

No, energy cannot be created or destroyed. But power is created and
destroyed all the time because there is no conservation of power
principle. Your glaring error is that you are using power as if it
were energy and it is not. I have given numerous examples. In an LC
oscillator, when all of the non-destructable energy is stored in the
capacitor, there is ZERO power, i.e. power has been destroyed. Why do
you refuse to discuss that fact of physics? 90 degrees later in the
cycle, power has been created.

Every time one of your instantaneous power curves crosses the zero
axis, power has been destroyed. Every time one of your instantaneous
power curves reaches a peak, power has been created.

We do not suffer from the same constraints as optics.

You suffer from the delusion that power obeys the same laws of physics
that energy does. You willy-nilly interchange power and energy. Until
you admit the error of your ways, there is little that can be done to
alleviate your ignorance.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com