Cecil Moore wrote in message ...
Michael Tope wrote:
What I am getting at, is that both camps may be
wrong. The answer may lie somewhere in between
these two extremes ...

As I understood it, there is an extreme on only one side. One side
says the current through a loading coil doesn't change. The other
side says that the current through a loading coil does change.

The current through the coil is not the issue as far as my "camp" is
concerned.
I can see where the current could taper across the coil in certain
setups.
The issue as far as I'm concerned is: does this taper drastically
cause error in modeling compared to lumped elements? I don't think it
does to any great degree, and others data, including Richard Clarks,
and also W4RNL, seem to concur. Or at least as far as I can see. The
taper of the current through the coil is of no great concern to me.
The claim that this variation of current across the coil causes
drastic modeling error is what I have problems with. To me, it's
trying to explain a problem that doesn't really exist, with something
that really doesn't matter that much as far as that problem is
concerned. No one yet has shown any examples of large modeling errors
that is due to this tapering of current. And THATS what the real issue
is. Or at least as Yuri tells it. MK