Cecil Moore wrote:

Saying that you already knew everything that will ever be known
is getting pretty old.

:-) I think that's your trick, Cecil. Funny how when you get backed
into a corner you start doing a lot of projecting - projecting your very
distinctive personality flaws onto others.

Please don't tell me that the hard
time you have been giving me was over an implied semantic context that
everyone already understands is a standard accepted convention.

You started an enormous argument with a whole group of people on this
newsgroup because of your alleged "accepted convention". Had you not
worded the idea of a current taper in the way you did, you could have
avoided much of it. Since I've supported Yuri's claim from the very
beginning, my only point to all of this was to try to peruade you to put
forward the most cogent argument. Obviously, you care for little other
than the arguing part of it.

More alternating current does NOT go into one end of ANY series
component than comes out the other. It's a completely stupid idea no
matter how many words you use to try to get around it. It's just bloody
wrong.

Those currents are not standing still.

Never said current stands still, Cecil.

Would you like for me to re-post your posting that says the standing
wave current doesn't move and never enters the coil?

Would you like for me to try to explain to you again what the words I
used mean? Evidently I need to. Perhaps then you would be able to
recite them more accurately.

They are flowing
in and out of the coil and have been proven not to be equal by actual
measurements.

Exactly what I've been saying ...

Now everyone can see that you are just flat out lying.

I used exactly those words in a previous post, Cecil. You apparently
have a pretty low opinion of 'everyone' if you think they're that
gullable. Although it does seem Steve fell for it hook, line, and
sinker. I guess my congrats would be in order for that.

You insisted that
standing wave current does not flow into a coil and argued with me when

Nope. I'm on record here as having observed simply that standing waves
stand, hence the name. The 'wave' does not move. As most others here
were probably able to ascertain, I was illustrating the simple fact that
the graph you refer to is a standing wave plot. A standing wave plot
shows current amplitude as a function of postion. It doesn't show
current moving in some direction - i.e. into the bottom or out of the
top of something. Unless you're talking about wave propagation, there's
no utility in that notion - particularly since any useful information
about the waveforms is conveyed in the wave function equation.

I said it did. Hint for you, Jim: The current cannot flow in and out
without first flowing in, which you asserted doesn't happen.

:-) Is there no limit to how asinine you allow yourself to be?

73, Jim AC6XG