Cecil Moore wrote:

[snip]

Steady-state had a beginning and it will have an end. It
cannot be analyzed without knowing what happened in the
beginning and what will happen in the end. Steady-state
is the rug under which you and others try to sweep the
laws of physics including the conservation of energy
principle. I'm doing what I can to call your bluff.

Cecil,

Countless mathematicians and scientists would disagree with your
characterization of steady state. Perhaps even a few engineers as well. 8-)

This sort of stuff is thoroughly covered in differential equations
courses and in any physics or engineering course that look at electrical
or mechanical response to impulses and other stimuli. Surely they dealt
with such matters at TAMU.

If you refuse to accept standard technical conventions, then there is
little hope of getting others to agree with you.

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Gene Fuller wrote:
If you refuse to accept standard technical conventions, then there is
little hope of getting others to agree with you.

Gene, have you stopped beating your wife? Your usual ad
hominem attack completely devoid of any technical content
is duly noted.

In a one second long lossless transmission line where the
forward power is 200W and the reflected power is 100W, it
can be proved that the source has supplied 300 joules that
have not been accepted by the load. If those joules are not
contained in the forward and reflected waves, where are they?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
If you refuse to accept standard technical conventions, then there is
little hope of getting others to agree with you.

Gene, have you stopped beating your wife? Your usual ad
hominem attack completely devoid of any technical content
is duly noted.

In a one second long lossless transmission line where the
forward power is 200W and the reflected power is 100W, it
can be proved that the source has supplied 300 joules that
have not been accepted by the load. If those joules are not
contained in the forward and reflected waves, where are they?

Cecil,

I recall that you selectively quote only those parts of messages to
which you disagree. I guess you accepted the remainder of my comments.

You quite clearly said that "steady state" is not really steady. I
challenged that in a straight-forward manner. So what is "ad hominem"
about my message?

ad-hominem

This is a typical trick, Cecil, when you have been caught dealing
nonsense. You ignore the issue and attempt diversion. It won't work
here. The meaning of steady state is not controversial.

/ad-hominem

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Gene Fuller wrote:
You quite clearly said that "steady state" is not really steady.

No I didn't. You either misunderstood or are trying
to set up a straw man.

The meaning of steady state is not controversial.

I never said it was so this is just another one of
your straw men.

--
73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
You quite clearly said that "steady state" is not really steady.

No I didn't. You either misunderstood or are trying
to set up a straw man.

The meaning of steady state is not controversial.

I never said it was so this is just another one of
your straw men.


Cecil,

Your exact words we

***
Steady-state had a beginning and it will have an end. It cannot be
analyzed without knowing what happened in the beginning and what will
happen in the end. Steady-state is the rug under which you and others
try to sweep the laws of physics including the conservation of energy
principle. I'm doing what I can to call your bluff.
***

This says that steady state depends on something else, namely the
beginning and the end of the steady state condition. That is simply
incorrect. In steady state conditions there is no concept of beginning
or end.

ad hominem

If you don't know the rules, you can't play the game.

/ad hominem

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Gene Fuller wrote:
This says that steady state depends on something else, namely the
beginning and the end of the steady state condition. That is simply
incorrect. In steady state conditions there is no concept of beginning
or end.

A 12VDC battery is sitting there with a 200 amp*hour charge. Are
you asserting that there is no concept of where the 200 amp*hours
came from? Please tell me you are not that stupid.

Consider the one second long transmission line with 200W of forward
power and 100W of reflected power. That requires 300 joules of
energy during steady-state. If the 300 joules was not supplied
during the transient state, then it must have magically appeared
out of thin air in violation of the conservation of energy principle?
Is that what you are trying to tell us?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
This says that steady state depends on something else, namely the
beginning and the end of the steady state condition. That is simply
incorrect. In steady state conditions there is no concept of beginning
or end.

A 12VDC battery is sitting there with a 200 amp*hour charge. Are
you asserting that there is no concept of where the 200 amp*hours
came from? Please tell me you are not that stupid.

Consider the one second long transmission line with 200W of forward
power and 100W of reflected power. That requires 300 joules of
energy during steady-state. If the 300 joules was not supplied
during the transient state, then it must have magically appeared
out of thin air in violation of the conservation of energy principle?
Is that what you are trying to tell us?

Cecil,

You can wave your hands all you want, but it won't have much impact on
the correct math and physics.

Try writing the appropriate equations for your puzzler, in steady state
conditions, and then figure out where to insert the transient behavior.
Good luck.

This is basic stuff taught in numerous math and technical courses. If
don't accept the basic math, then I guess we will not agree.

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Gene Fuller wrote:
If you refuse to accept standard technical conventions, then there is
little hope of getting others to agree with you.

I am advocating the wave reflection model as explained in:

Johnson's, "Transmission Lines and Networks", 1st Edition

Ramo/Whinnery's, "Fields and Waves in Modern Radio", 2nd Edition

Hecht's, "Optics", 4th Edition

Maxwell's, "Reflections" and "Reflections II"

"The ARRL Antenna Book", 15th Edition

I am also advocating the conservation of energy principle.
I hope that one doesn't need references.

Exactly what is it about the wave reflection model and the
conservation of energy principle with which you disagree?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
If you refuse to accept standard technical conventions, then there is
little hope of getting others to agree with you.

I am advocating the wave reflection model as explained in:

Johnson's, "Transmission Lines and Networks", 1st Edition

Ramo/Whinnery's, "Fields and Waves in Modern Radio", 2nd Edition

Hecht's, "Optics", 4th Edition

Maxwell's, "Reflections" and "Reflections II"

"The ARRL Antenna Book", 15th Edition

I am also advocating the conservation of energy principle.
I hope that one doesn't need references.

Exactly what is it about the wave reflection model and the
conservation of energy principle with which you disagree?

Cecil,

My only comment was in regard to the definition of steady state. I am
not sure why you directed this list to me. I have three out of the five
references you list, and I have multiple equivalents for the others.

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Gene Fuller wrote:
My only comment was in regard to the definition of steady state.

I doubt that we have different definitions of "steady-state".
I didn't post a definition and I don't recall you posting one.

What I said was that some of the 300 joules existing in the
one second long transmission line during steady-state was
supplied by the source before steady-state was reached,
i.e. during the initial transient state.
--
73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp