Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
It is interesting that you can be so precise at times and so sloppy
at other times. I very carefully limited my discussion to steady state
conditions, which is what everyone is already talking about in this
case. You then conveniently inject modulation into the mix, completely
ignoring what I said.

*Every* real world system has noise modulation
that can be tracked through the system riding on
the forward and reflected traveling waves. Thus
steady-state is never reached in reality and your
argument is therefore just a mind game.

Cecil, every time someone *almost* succeeds in making you stick to the
point, you accuse them of messing with your mind.

Nobody is trying to restrict your freedom of thought or speech. Nobody
wants to, and nobody can. But lots of people are hoping, begging,
pleading that you develop the SELF-discipline to follow an argument all
the way through to its conclusion, without jumping outside of the
boundaries you laid down at the start.

This may indeed trouble your mind; but the process of scientific inquiry
wasn't ever *intended* to feel comfortable. Its only goal is to find
things out and get them right... and that involves staying on track,
even when it takes you outside of the comfort zone. In fact, then most
of all, because it's a sure sign that the track is leading somewhere.



--

73 from Ian GM3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek