On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 09:55:18 -0600, Cecil Moore wrote:
Richard Clark wrote:
On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 22:08:12 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:
forward ... current ... flowing toward
the source.

Uh-huh

Richard, do you actually believe
forward ... current ... flowing toward
the source.

Uh-huh

On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 10:36:24 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:
a standing wave changes phases except at the nodes.
Uh-huh
and travels towards the source when it is a forward traveling wave
and travels towards the load when it is a reverse traveling wave
and moves instantaneously as *net* current
and now changes phases too

Richard Clark wrote:

wrote:
a standing wave changes phases except at the nodes.

and now changes phases too

As illustrated in Kraus' book. Just because the ink on a
page of a book doesn't move, do you think that is proof
that the illustrated signal doesn't move in real time?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 10:30:12 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:
phase is changing from positive to negative
Uh-Huh.
What happened to the other 358 degrees? No such angles in the
Cecilian Quasi-Electromagnetics. Phase = +/-
This has been more fun than fractals.

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:
lets have more fun... the 'standing wave' isn't really a wave at all.
it
doesn't move, it doesn't transfer energy, it really doesn't do anything
except sit there.... and part of the time it doesn't even exist, being
zero
at all points along the line at the same time when the two traveling
waves
cancel each other. so i propose that the term 'standing wave' is a
complete
misnomer and in fact is probably an oxymoron and should be abolished,
along
with the term 'standing wave ratio' and the infamous (at least in the
news
group) 'swr meter'!

Like a traveling wave, a standing wave changes phases except at the nodes.
In fact, by looking at only one toroidal pickup at one point on the line
(anywhere except a node) you cannot tell if that current wave is standing
or traveling or both.

And the standing wave does transfer energy from the source to the I^2*R
losses in the transmission line. That's why feedlines with high standing
wave ratios are lossier than matched lines.

this is almost too easy... i'll let someone else have it if you want.

On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 10:56:30 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:
Just because the ink on a page of a book doesn't move
Uh-huh. Ink doesn't conduct either.

Definitely more fun than fractal theory

Cecil wrote,

Richard Clark wrote:

On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 22:08:12 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:

forward ... current ... flowing toward
the source.

Uh-huh

Richard, do you actually believe that 60 Hz AC current flows the same
direction
all the time into your refrigerator? Wouldn't that make it DC? AC current
flows into the refrigerator for 1/2 cycle and flows out of the refrigerator
during the next 1/2 cycle. In the AC hot wire, AC current flows toward the
generator just as often as it flows toward the refrigerator. Every 8.333 mS,
it goes through a zero-crossing and changes direction.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


No, Cecil, it's the charge that moves, not the current. The current is
just the rate at which the charge is moving at a particular time.
In a traveling current wave, the *value* of a current will move along a line
but the charge itself stays put and just oscillates. They sure put some
funny ideas in your head at that engineering school you went to.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Richard Clark wrote:

wrote:

phase is changing from positive to negative

Uh-Huh.
What happened to the other 358 degrees? No such angles in the
Cecilian Quasi-Electromagnetics. Phase = +/-
This has been more fun than fractals.

There's no other 358 directions of travel, Richard. There are only two
directions in a transmission line. The sign of the cosine of the phase
angle determines the direction of travel. Unless you believe in the
supernatural, the cos(phase_angle) parameter yields both the real relative
magnitude and the real direction of travel. But I don't doubt that
you live in an unreal world.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Richard Clark wrote:

wrote:
Just because the ink on a page of a book doesn't move ...

Uh-huh. Ink doesn't conduct either.

Glad you agree. I was beginning to wonder. Did you know there
indeed exists conductive ink?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 17:26:05 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:
There's no other 358 directions
You've offered up/down back/forth.... that's enough?
but then you do offer the
supernatural