Richard Clark wrote in
:

....

You have not yet actually offered any treatment that denies the bone
of contention that lies in two subject lines:
1. Reverse power is manifest;
2. The source will absorb and dissipate it.

Richard, if you go back over my postings in this thread, I have not denied
either of these things.

I did comment on 2 as an explanation, one which I think is poor because of
the conclusions that might be drawn from it, eg any mismatch creates
reflected power which must be dissipated in the PA.

I did suggest that in the steady state, in a tx-line-load scenario, the
impedance looking into the line can be found, and that equivalent load
adequately explains the PA's behaviour.


You may have struggled with others over this in times past, but by
your own descriptions they had little intellectual horsepower, and
less experience in the matter.

I never said such a thing, if it is your conclusion, I disagree with it.

....

Owen

On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 08:55:24 GMT, Owen Duffy wrote:

Richard Clark wrote in
:

...

You have not yet actually offered any treatment that denies the bone
of contention that lies in two subject lines:
1. Reverse power is manifest;
2. The source will absorb and dissipate it.

Richard, if you go back over my postings in this thread, I have not denied
either of these things.

Hi Owen,

It is surprising the conclusions I've drawn from our correspondence
then. As I've steadfastly expressed nearly every posting in these
terms, you have not exactly responded to my misunderstanding in an
uniform manner.

I shall return to those postings to enquire further rather than
laboring the point here.

I did comment on 2 as an explanation, one which I think is poor because of
the conclusions that might be drawn from it, eg any mismatch creates
reflected power which must be dissipated in the PA.

This is not a denial? I see no positive characteristic you have
derived from 2 as allowing it is acceptable.

I did suggest that in the steady state, in a tx-line-load scenario, the
impedance looking into the line can be found, and that equivalent load
adequately explains the PA's behaviour.

Yes, this allowing reflected power in your terms, allowing you to
express it as a fiction suitable to providing a truth in creating the
lumped equivalent. This may have the heavy hand of my
editorialization, but it is forced by the equivocation I find in your
points I am responding to here.

You may have struggled with others over this in times past, but by
your own descriptions they had little intellectual horsepower, and
less experience in the matter.

I never said such a thing, if it is your conclusion, I disagree with it.

As I have never raised the discussion of "others" or how "they"
developed poor explanations or subscribed to faulty premises; then my
perhaps over-arching characterization is what you are rejecting as
your having said. You may note that at that time I explicitly offered
that their contributions were not germane to the facts.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC