Art Unwin KB9MZ wrote:

Cecil
I would like to ask you a question regarding inductance coils even tho you
know I believe the current is constant

Current *is* constant in EZNEC's lumped inductive reactances, Art, but
that doesn't represent reality. This weekend, or maybe even tonight, I
will be posting coils modeled out of wire, like Wes has done, to make
my point.

An inductor develops a field that travels thru the core
and then slays out thru 360 degrees to return to the other end of the coil.
Thes lines are directly correllated to the current flow within the
inductance and are in equilibrium
in terms of mechanical forces.
If the current is not constant thru-out the inductance
then there are more lines of force at one end than there is at the other,
such that the ends would not repel each other,one end will domimate
something I have not seen happen.
How do you account for the inbalance of the end fields
because of so called current gradient that you refer to.If there is no
imbalance what happens to dissapate the energy created by the increase of
current flow ?
I would appreciate your input on the above problem.
even tho it appears so simplistic.

Capacitance is the answer, Art. If a transmission line didn't possess capacitance,
it wouldn't be able to exchange energy between the capacitive reactance and the
inductive reactance to allow the currents at 1/2WL intervals to be traveling in
opposite directions. A coil completely devoid of any capacitance would indeed have
a constant current. But there are no real-world coils that are completely devoid of
capacitance as illustrated by Roy's and Tom's real-world measurements.
--
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 Thu, 05 Feb 2004 19:40:52 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:
Instantaneous standing wave current moves
UhHuh

Richard Clark wrote:

wrote:
Instantaneous standing wave current moves

UhHuh

Richard, can you give an example of a situation where RF current
ever stands still? If charges are not moving, how can there be any
current? If a tree falls in the forest, ...
--
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! =-----

Tdonaly wrote:
Actually, net current doesn't flow at all in a standing wave.

Instantaneous standing wave current moves in one direction during
1/2 cycle, and in the opposite direction during the next 1/2 cycle.
If you think otherwise, you are simply wrong. Have you never observed
standing waves on an o'scope? It looks like a kid's jump rope.


You didn't read the rest of my posting. Current is dQ/dt, the rate of
flow of charge with time.



And Tom, one of the strictest laws of physics is that current cannot
stand still. Saying that "current doesn't flow at all" is ridiculous.


Wrong. It's the charge that moves. In general, if you're talking about
instantaneous current, it changes constantly at a point. But you never
talk about instantaneous current, Cecil, the current you always refer to
is RMS current. However, if you want to refer to instantaneous current,
that's fine with me. In that case, you have a traveling, standing wave
oscillating in and out of your coil. That's interesting, but it isn't what is
happening.


When the current is flowing into both ends of the coil at the same time,
charge is being stored in the coil. 1/2 cycle later, the charge flows
out of the coil at both ends.

In one of my examples, the current at the bottom of the coil is 0.18
at - 54 degrees. The current at the top of the coil is 0.2 at 126 degrees.
Last time I checked, 54+126 = 180 degrees indicating that the current
at the bottom of the coil is 180 degrees out of phase with the current
at the top of the coil. That means the two currents are flowing in
opposite directions at the two ends of the coil.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Actually, the two charge collections are oscillating in opposite directions at
the same time, and, I'll tell you that each individual infinitesimal volume of
charge doesn't go very far before it's whacked back the other way.
The problem here is that you don't remember your basic definition of
current. Go dig out your old physics book and read the definition.
73,
Tom Donaly

Cecil wrote,

Tdonaly wrote:
I wrote "charge," not "energy." There's a difference. Cecil writes that
current, by which I think he means charge, can flow into both ends of
a coil at the same time. He's right, if he indeed is talking about charge
and not current, in which case, the charge density will increase in some
part of the coil, energy will be stored in an electric field, and the coil
will
be acting just like a capacitor (with the capacitance to free space
understood).

Nice crawfishing job, Tom. The direction of charge flow is the same as
the direction of current flow, assuming electron current flow (as opposed
to hole current flow). If charge is flowing into each end of the coil at
the same time, then instantaneous current is, by definition, flowing into
each end of the coil at the same time for 1/2 of the RF cycle. Good to
see you coming to your senses like I knew you would.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



Instantaneous current changes with time in a standing wave but it doesn't
go anywhere. The only way current can go anywhere is to be part of a
travelling wave, in which case it stays the same in time, but travels in
space. You want it to do both, Cecil, and that doesn't happen very often.
73,
Tom Donaly
(PS Check your definition of current, again.)

On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 22:06:11 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:
Instantaneous standing wave current moves

UhHuh

Richard, can you give an example of
Obviously you've been seduced by the fictions of your own invention.

Art Unwin KB9MZ wrote:
... surely Bart's posting gives you something to ponder upon as
your present stance has not won over any converts and which could possibly
be presented in a different manner to make your case more digestable.

Bart, an intelligent, educated, and knowledgeable engineer, and I have
been in email contact for years, so I have pondered much of what he
has said. His virtual "center tap to ground" is certainly a valid concept.

But I can demonstrate a 180 degree phase reversal in a helical coil
in free space so the capacitance to ground is not the complete answer
to what is happening. A real-world helical coil is made out of real-world
wire and possesses some of the characteristics of real-world wire including
the ability to change the phase of the current every 1/2 wavelength
whether over ground or in free space. Light exhibits the same
characteristic. Technically, RF is light, just not visible light.
--
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! =-----

Tdonaly wrote:
You didn't read the rest of my posting. Current is dQ/dt, the rate of
flow of charge with time.

Yes, and at a current loop in a standing wave, dQ is positive
for 1/2 cycle and negative for 1/2 cycle. If the forward and
reflected current are in phase at zero degrees, dQ is moving
toward the load. If the forward and reflected current are in
phase at 180 degrees, dQ is moving toward the source. That's
the convention.

You seem to have lost contact with reality when it comes to AC.
Remember the e^jwt term? The standing wave current at a loop
changes sign, and therefore direction, every 1/2 cycle. Current
cannot stand still because dQ would be zero.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP

Someone wrote:
"Instantaneous standing wave current moves."

Current is movement. Standing waves stand still.

Forward (incident) waves move forward. Reverse (reflected) waves move
rearward. Interference between incident and reflected waves makes a
stationary current pattern. It also makes a stationary voltage pattern
(VSWR). Voltage and current standing wave patterns are displaced by
90-degrees.

In dealing with a-c (r-f) it is usually convenient to use effective
(rms) values because instantaneous values change from instant to
instant. The peak instantaneous value is simply: (sq.rt.2)(vrms).

Instantaneous currents move in the same directions and have peak
amplitudes in all locations which are related by 1.414 (sq.rt.2) to the
rms values.

Best regardfs, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Cecil, W5DXP wrote:
"But I can demonstrate a 180 degree phase reversal in a helical coil in
free space so the capacitance to ground is not the complete answer to
what is happening."

Cecil has used the Kraus example of a coil installed as a phase inverter
between 1/2-wave segments of a collinear radiator. Kraus` example uses
self-resonant coils. Self-capacitance resonates with self-inductance in
the Kraus coils.

Inversion is caused by current exchanged between L and C. When the
magnetic field collapses, current flows in a loop through capacitance
and coil whether the resonating capacitance is external or internal to
the coil. The apparent instantaneous current direction is into one end
of the coil and out of the other end of the coil. In the next part of
the cycle, the instantaneous current direction is reversed when the
capacitance is discharging the energy back into the inductance.

Point is, opposite ends of the reactances are 180-degrees out-of-phase
at resonance.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Cecil, W5DXP wrote:
"His virtual "center tap to ground" is certainly a valid concept."

Yes. Inertia is a valid idea. A balanced circuit remains balanced unless
something is done to unbalance it.

Work with phone lines and you find center-tapped lines are not required
for balance, or may make balance worse.

Equal exposure and occasional transposition usually maintain balance.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Richard Harrison wrote:

Someone wrote:
"Instantaneous standing wave current moves."

Current is movement. Standing waves stand still.

Forward (incident) waves move forward. Reverse (reflected) waves move
rearward. Interference between incident and reflected waves makes a
stationary current pattern.

Neither the instantaneous magnitude nor instantaneous phase is constant.
Even at the point where the peak of the current loop occurs, that point
goes through a zero transition twice in every cycle. Yes, instantaneous
standing wave current equals zero all up and down the line twice each cycle.

Consider a lossless open-circuit transmission line with reflections.
At one current loop maximum on the line, the instantaneous current
will be positive, i.e. flowing toward the load. At the next current
loop maximum, the instantaneous current will be negative, i.e. flowing
toward the source. 1/2 cycle later, these values reverse sign and
direction. Assume the following graphic snapshot of a standing wave
is sinusoidal and includes magnitude and phase.
_
/ \
/ \
_/__________\________________
\ /
\ /
\ _ /

1/2 cycle later the snapshot will look like this. Anyone who doesn't
believe it has never seen it on an o'scope.
_
/ \
/ \
______________/__________\_
\ /
\ /
\ _ /

1/4 cycle later the instantaneous standing wave pattern looks like this:

__________________________________________________ _______________________

Here is a dynamic graphic of what a standing wave really looks like.
The black line is the standing wave. Note that neither the magnitude
nor phase is standing still.

http://einstein.byu.edu/~masong/HTMs...newave2EX.html

The positive peaks of the current are flowing toward the load because the
phase angles of both the forward and reflected waves are zero, i.e. at
that point, the instantaneous forward current and instantaneous reflected
current are both flowing toward the load. Remember, half the time, the
instantaneous forward current is flowing toward the source and half the
time, the instantaneous reflected current is flowing toward the load.

The negative peak of the current is flowing toward the source because
the phase angles of both the forward and reflected waves are 180 degrees,
i.e. at that point, the instantaneous forward current and instantaneous
reflected current are both flowing toward the source.

1/2 cycle later, the positive peak will have become negative and the
negative peak will have become positive, i.e. their respective directions
of flow have been reversed.

In our enthusiasm for RMS values, we forget what the AC waveforms are
actually doing. RF forward current reverses its direction every 1/2 cycle.
So does RF reflected current.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP

On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 12:04:36 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:
Neither the instantaneous magnitude nor instantaneous phase is constant.
Uh-huh

Richard Clark wrote:

wrote:
Neither the instantaneous magnitude nor instantaneous phase is constant.

Uh-huh

See for yourself at:

http://einstein.byu.edu/~masong/HTMs...newave2EX.html

The only place the instantaneous magnitude of a standing
wave is constant is at a node where it is equal to zero.
Between nodes, magnitude and phase are continually changing.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP

Cecil Moore wrote:
Consider a lossless open-circuit transmission line with reflections.
At one current loop maximum on the line, the instantaneous current
will be positive, i.e. flowing toward the load. At the next current
loop maximum, the instantaneous current will be negative, i.e. flowing
toward the source. 1/2 cycle later, these values reverse sign and
direction.

I think the word you're looking for is *Node*.

Assume the following graphic snapshot of a standing wave
is sinusoidal and includes magnitude and phase.



_
/ \
/ \
_/__________\________________
\ /
\ /
\ _ /

1/2 cycle later the snapshot will look like this. Anyone who doesn't
believe it has never seen it on an o'scope.
_
/ \
/ \
______________/__________\_
\ /
\ /
\ _ /

Right. But the antenna current plots are of the amplitude term of the
standing wave, shown as a function of position. It's not a time plot.
In the equation E*sin(w), E is the amplitude term. The amplitude term
is a contant. It does not vary with time. It varies with position
along the antenna. The solution to E*sin(w) does vary with time because
it is a function of time. You're confusing the two different
functions. Your answer, typically, is that the math is wrong.

73, Jim AC6XG


_
/ \
/ \
______________/__________\_
\ /
\ /
\ /
\ _ /

By the way, here is an I(t) plot where there is a *net* flow of current.

On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 12:35:47 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:
Neither the instantaneous magnitude nor instantaneous phase is constant.
Uh-huh
See for yourself at:
Pathetic

Cecil Moore wrote:

Jim Kelley wrote:
The amplitude term is a contant. It does not vary with time.

Uh Jim, please look at this web page and tell me again
that the amplitude is constant and doesn't vary with time.

The amplitude term of an equation, and the one being plotted on an
antenna current plot, is a constant for any given position in a standing
wave. It's the peak amplitude of the time varying function. It's
really not a matter of opinion.

73, Jim AC6XG

Please don't take me for a fool, Cecil. I've done that demo for the
students for 17 years.

At this point you really need to worry less about producing verbal
output, and worry more about being able to properly absorb and utilize
input information. That part seems to be out of order.

Cecil Moore wrote:

Jim Kelley wrote:
The amplitude term is a contant. It does not vary with time.

Uh Jim, please look at this web page and tell me again
that the amplitude is constant and doesn't vary with time.
The standing wave loop looks like a kid's jump rope. Note
that the amplitude of the standing wave is zero everywhere
two times per cycle. How can the amplitude be constant?
It's RF, for goodness sake.

http://einstein.byu.edu/~masong/HTMs...newave2EX.html
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP

Jim Kelley wrote:
The amplitude term is a contant. It does not vary with time.

Uh Jim, please look at this web page and tell me again
that the amplitude is constant and doesn't vary with time.
The standing wave loop looks like a kid's jump rope. Note
that the amplitude of the standing wave is zero everywhere
two times per cycle. How can the amplitude be constant?
It's RF, for goodness sake.

http://einstein.byu.edu/~masong/HTMs...newave2EX.html
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP

Richard Clark wrote:

wrote:
See for yourself at:
http://einstein.byu.edu/~masong/HTMs...newave2EX.html

Pathetic

Discovered why you were confused?
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP

Cecil, W5DXP wrote:
"Neither the instantaneous magnitude nor instantaneous phase is
constant.'

To keep it simple, phase difference between forward and reflected waves
is locked. Velocity and distance to any point (P) on a transmission line
don`t change. So, pick any reference point you like and the phase
difference is simply (beta)(l), where "beta" is the phase shift per unit
length, and "l" is the number of units (length) between the selected
points.

Whether "magnitude" changes depends on definition. Magnitude sometimes
means maximum amplitude of a wave and does not ordinarily change.
However, magnitude used as a synonym for instantaneous amplitude varies
sinusoidally with time.

At complete nulls, volts or amps, depending on the null site we choose,
forward and reverse volts or amps are equal and opposite in both phase
and amplitude at every point in the electrical cycle. Their combination
is always zero.

At node maxima, volts and amps when we have a complete reflection on a
line with negligible loss produce doubles of volts and amps. Maxima of
volts are displaced from maxima of amps by 90-degrees.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 13:41:13 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:
Neither the instantaneous magnitude nor instantaneous phase is constant.
Uh-huh
See for yourself at:
Pathetic
Discovered why you were confused?
even more pathetic

Cecil wrote,

Tdonaly wrote:
You didn't read the rest of my posting. Current is dQ/dt, the rate of
flow of charge with time.

Yes, and at a current loop in a standing wave, dQ is positive
for 1/2 cycle and negative for 1/2 cycle. If the forward and
reflected current are in phase at zero degrees, dQ is moving
toward the load. If the forward and reflected current are in
phase at 180 degrees, dQ is moving toward the source. That's
the convention.

You seem to have lost contact with reality when it comes to AC.
Remember the e^jwt term? The standing wave current at a loop
changes sign, and therefore direction, every 1/2 cycle. Current
cannot stand still because dQ would be zero.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP


You're not getting it again, Cecil. The instantaneous current is
changing with time, but it isn't moving anywhere. e^jwt doesn't
have any space information in it.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Richard Harrison wrote:
To keep it simple, phase difference between forward and reflected waves
is locked.

Nope, it's not, Richard, as illustrated on this web page:

http://einstein.byu.edu/~masong/HTMs...newave2EX.html

The forward phasor and reflected phasor are rotating in
opposite directions. Sometimes they are in phase (loop)
and sometimes they are 180 degrees out of phase (node).
The variable phase difference between the forward wave
and reflected wave is what causes the standing waves.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP

Hey Tom,

Did you hear the cops pulled over Janet Jackson last night?

She had a headlight out.

73, Jim AC6XG

Tdonaly wrote:

Cecil wrote,

Tdonaly wrote:
You didn't read the rest of my posting. Current is dQ/dt, the rate of
flow of charge with time.

Yes, and at a current loop in a standing wave, dQ is positive
for 1/2 cycle and negative for 1/2 cycle. If the forward and
reflected current are in phase at zero degrees, dQ is moving
toward the load. If the forward and reflected current are in
phase at 180 degrees, dQ is moving toward the source. That's
the convention.

You seem to have lost contact with reality when it comes to AC.
Remember the e^jwt term? The standing wave current at a loop
changes sign, and therefore direction, every 1/2 cycle. Current
cannot stand still because dQ would be zero.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP


You're not getting it again, Cecil. The instantaneous current is
changing with time, but it isn't moving anywhere. e^jwt doesn't
have any space information in it.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Tdonaly wrote:
You're not getting it again, Cecil. The instantaneous current is
changing with time, but it isn't moving anywhere. e^jwt doesn't
have any space information in it.

Stick a one ohm resistor at a current loop, Jim, and then look at
the voltage across it. Surprise!!!! It's a sine wave with a positive
part, a zero crossing, a negative part, and another zero crossing.
When the voltage is +, the current is flowing through that resistor
in one direction. When the voltage is -, the current is flowing
through that resistor in the opposite direction. Sorry about that.

To maintain that there's no current flowing through a resistor when
there's an AC voltage across the resistor is ridiculous.
--
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 Fri, 06 Feb 2004 14:14:46 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:
Richard Harrison wrote:
To keep it simple, phase difference between forward and reflected waves
is locked.

Nope, it's not
Uh-huh

On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 14:51:17 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:
When the voltage is +, the current is flowing through that resistor
in one direction. When the voltage is -, the current is flowing
through that resistor in the opposite direction.
which makes the resistor capacitive or inductive?

Cecil Moore wrote:

To maintain that there's no current flowing through a resistor when
there's an AC voltage across the resistor is ridiculous.

You're arguing asynchronously. You're arguments bear no relation to the
points being made by your correspondents.

ac6xg

Standing wave is expressed as a ratio, the ratio does not change. The rest
is all bafflegab...

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Richard Harrison wrote:
To keep it simple, phase difference between forward and reflected waves
is locked.

Nope, it's not, Richard, as illustrated on this web page:

http://einstein.byu.edu/~masong/HTMs...newave2EX.html

The forward phasor and reflected phasor are rotating in
opposite directions. Sometimes they are in phase (loop)
and sometimes they are 180 degrees out of phase (node).
The variable phase difference between the forward wave
and reflected wave is what causes the standing waves.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP

Richard Clark wrote:

wrote:
When the voltage is +, the current is flowing through that resistor
in one direction. When the voltage is -, the current is flowing
through that resistor in the opposite direction.

which makes the resistor capacitive or inductive?

Nope, since the current is in phase with the voltage, it makes the
resistor resistive. That means when you look at the voltage waveform
across a one ohm resistor, you are also looking at the current
waveform.
--
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! =-----

Jim Kelley wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
To maintain that there's no current flowing through a resistor when
there's an AC voltage across the resistor is ridiculous.

You're arguing asynchronously. You're arguments bear no relation to the
points being made by your correspondents.

Nice copout, Jim, really nice. The point is that the standing wave
current indeed does look like a sine wave with magnitude, direction,
and phase, and not as you implied, like an unchanging DC parameter
that just stands there.
--
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! =-----

Cecil Moore wrote:
The point is that the standing wave
current indeed does look like a sine wave with magnitude, direction,
and phase, and not as you implied, like an unchanging DC parameter
that just stands there.

Not a DC parameter. An AC amplitude. Like the I in i(t)=I*sin(w).
You plotted I as a function of position for your antenna standing wave
plots. It's the topic of discussion.

73, Jim AC6XG

Jim Kelley wrote:
You plotted I as a function of position for your antenna standing wave
plots. It's the topic of discussion.

That was a snapshot by EZNEC, frozen in time, Jim. Here's what the standing
wave current looks like when it is not frozen in time. That's the topic of
discussion that everyone seems to want to avoid. Standing waves don't stand
still. They probably should have been called "looping waves".

http://einstein.byu.edu/~masong/HTMs...newave2EX.html
--
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! =-----

Jim wrote,


Cecil Moore wrote:
The point is that the standing wave
current indeed does look like a sine wave with magnitude, direction,
and phase, and not as you implied, like an unchanging DC parameter
that just stands there.

Not a DC parameter. An AC amplitude. Like the I in i(t)=I*sin(w).
You plotted I as a function of position for your antenna standing wave
plots. It's the topic of discussion.

73, Jim AC6XG


Right. It's what EZNEC shows, the same EZNEC Cecil just used to
try to prove his theories.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 16:57:24 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:
which makes the resistor capacitive or inductive?

Nope, since the current is in phase with the voltage
The standing wave current at a loop
changes sign, and therefore direction, every 1/2 cycle.

Uh-huh

Tdonaly wrote:
Jim wrote,
You plotted I as a function of position for your antenna standing wave
plots. It's the topic of discussion.

Right. It's what EZNEC shows, the same EZNEC Cecil just used to
try to prove his theories.

Don't you guys understand that EZNEC gives a freeze-frame snapshot of
the current referenced to the source which is specified by the user?
For instance, when the source is 1 amp at zero degrees, EZNEC shows
a freeze-frame snapshot of the current referenced to that source
current. Why don't you guys know that? Just because a freeze-frame
snapshot stands still doesn't mean the actual current is frozen in
time. Good Grief! Try to understand the following web page and then
come back and tell us that the standing wave current is not changing.

http://einstein.byu.edu/~masong/HTMs...newave2EX.html
--
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:
The standing wave current at a loop
changes sign, and therefore direction, every 1/2 cycle.

Uh-huh

Is this your Quasimodo imitation?
--
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 Fri, 06 Feb 2004 19:39:33 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:
Don't you guys understand that EZNEC gives a freeze-frame snapshot
It keeps the card sharks from dealing off the bottom

Cecil wrote,

Tdonaly wrote:
Jim wrote,
You plotted I as a function of position for your antenna standing wave
plots. It's the topic of discussion.

Right. It's what EZNEC shows, the same EZNEC Cecil just used to
try to prove his theories.

Don't you guys understand that EZNEC gives a freeze-frame snapshot of
the current referenced to the source which is specified by the user?
For instance, when the source is 1 amp at zero degrees, EZNEC shows
a freeze-frame snapshot of the current referenced to that source
current. Why don't you guys know that? Just because a freeze-frame
snapshot stands still doesn't mean the actual current is frozen in
time. Good Grief! Try to understand the following web page and then
come back and tell us that the standing wave current is not changing.

http://einstein.byu.edu/~masong/HTMs...newave2EX.html
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


Yep, and you're changing the subject. How does that wave, that flip flops
like a jump rope, move in and out of your coil?
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH