Analyzing Stub Matching with Reflection Coefficients
 

Keith Dysart wrote:
If the zero power point is stationary then no energy
can be flowing.

Time for you to review EM waves, Keith. There is a zero
power point in every EM traveling wave every 1/2WL where
the E-field and H-field are both zero at the same time.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Analyzing Stub Matching with Reflection Coefficients
 

Keith Dysart wrote:
So you expect that some of the reverse wave is reflected at the
generator and yet experiment has shown that none of the
reverse wave is reflected at the generator when the generator]
source impedance is the same as the line characteristic
impedance. I am curious as to why you ignore these
experimental results.

Those "experimental results" paper-only results are a figment
of your imagination. You zero energy level source proved just
the opposite.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Analyzing Stub Matching with Reflection Coefficients
 

On Apr 20, 5:34 pm, Cecil Moore wrote:
Jim Kelley wrote:
There is no support for your claim.

There is plenty of support for my claim, Jim, but you
deleted it. I will simply repost it over and over until
you respond.

Given the following experiment with two signal generators
equipped with circulators and load resistors - the generators
are phased-locked to ensure coherency. The two feedlines
are of equal electrical lengths.

SGCL1 is turned on. SGCL2 is turned off.

100W | 25W
50 ohm---50 ohm line---+---291.4 ohm line---291.4 ohm
SGCL1 --Prev1 | SGCL2

What is Pref1 before SGCL2 is turned on? What is Pref1
after SGCL2 is turned on? Did Pref1 change after SGCL2
is turned on?

Since Pref1 *NEVER* encounters the impedance discontinuity
how can it possibly be affected by SGCL2 being turned on?
This is a perfect example of wave interaction.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

It's not an example of anything other than newsgroup rhetoric, Cecil.
Buy a good RF data acquisition system, all the equipment listed in
your problem, and run the experiment. I'd be happy to discuss the
results with you afterward.

73, Jim AC6XG

Analyzing Stub Matching with Reflection Coefficients
 

Jim Kelley wrote:
It's not an example of anything other than newsgroup rhetoric, Cecil.
Buy a good RF data acquisition system, all the equipment listed in
your problem, and run the experiment. I'd be happy to discuss the
results with you afterward.

Translation: I am clueless to explain one of the most
simple of experiments involving s-parameters.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Analyzing Stub Matching with Reflection Coefficients
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
Keith Dysart wrote:
If the zero power point is stationary then no energy
can be flowing.

Time for you to review EM waves, Keith. There is a zero
power point in every EM traveling wave every 1/2WL where
the E-field and H-field are both zero at the same time.

Cecil,

Four questions:

* Does your IEEE dictionary have an entry for "stationary"?

* Which part of "every EM traveling wave" is stationary?

* Do you actually read any of the messages to which you respond?

* Do you want to retract your answer?

8-)

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Analyzing Stub Matching with Reflection Coefficients
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
You are going to pull a brain muscle by stretching so much. Are you
suggesting that two wiggling points on a web page are the key to
understanding the universe?

No, just wave cancellation. If the graphic is completely
incorrect, as you say, why did they publish it?

Cecil,

I did not say the graphic was incorrect, but rather that it is
irrelevant. It correctly shows the addition of two sine waves.

Big deal.

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Analyzing Stub Matching with Reflection Coefficients
 

Gene Fuller wrote:
* Does your IEEE dictionary have an entry for "stationary"?

I'm afraid you have been taken in by my devil's
advocate argument based on Keith's faulty concepts.
If what he says is true about standing waves, then
the same concepts apply to traveling waves. If there
are no traveling wave energy components being transferred
when two traveling waves are flowing in opposite
directions, then it logically follows that there can
be no traveling wave energy component being transferred
when one traveling wave is flowing in one direction.

The *NET* energy flow is zero in a standing wave.
But the component energy flow in the underlying EM
waves is alive and well and flowing right through
those current and voltage nodes without even knowing
that they are there. The illusion of zero energy flow
in EM traveling waves is one of the problems with
shortcuts. EM waves have a set of boundary conditions
that must be satisfied for them to exist. One of
those conditions is that they must necessarily
travel at c(VF). "Stationary" is not possible for
any single EM wave. Nobody has been able to provide
an example of a standing wave without the underlying
forward and reverse EM traveling wave components
(not even you) :-). Another condition for the existence
of an EM traveling wave is that it has an associated
energy level without which it cannot exist.

A stationary EM wave is a contradiction in terms,
an oxymoron. EM waves cannot stand still
and exist only as a concept in the human mind.
It is an illusionary temporarily superposed profile
of two waves that, in reality, are moving in opposite
directions at c(VF) and have absolutely *NO* effect on
each other. The forward EM wave possesses direction
and momentum that doesn't change until it encounters
a physical impedance discontinuity. The reverse EM
wave possesses direction and momentum that doesn't
change until it encounters a physical impedance
discontinuity. Anything else would violate the laws
of physics.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com



--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Analyzing Stub Matching with Reflection Coefficients
 

Gene Fuller wrote:
I did not say the graphic was incorrect, but rather that it is
irrelevant. It correctly shows the addition of two sine waves.

OK, if it is irrelevant, why did they publish it?
Why do they talk about "redistribution" of energy
in other directions during a destructive interference
event? Doesn't changing the direction and momentum of
a wave qualify as "interaction"?

And when those two sine waves are coherent, of equal
amplitude, and opposite phase, they permanently *CANCEL*
each other. Doesn't that satisfy the definition of
"interacting"?

I see you have been strangely silent on my example of
s11(a1) originating and flowing away from the impedance
discontinuity only to be canceled by s12(a2) when it
flows through the impedance discontinuity and encounters
the s11(a1) wave flowing away from the impedance
discontinuity. How can the effect of one wave on the
other not be interaction when both are flowing away
from the impedance discontinuity and are *NEVER*
incident upon any impedance discontinuity?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Analyzing Stub Matching with Reflection Coefficients
 

On Apr 23, 4:56 am, Cecil Moore wrote:

A stationary EM wave is a contradiction in terms,
an oxymoron.

It sounds just like a standing EM wave. :-)

Anything else would violate the laws
of physics.

The funny thing is, if you knew how to apply that constraint to all of
your claims, you wouldn't find yourself playing newsgroup Whack-a-Mole
day all day.

73, Jim AC6XG

Analyzing Stub Matching with Reflection Coefficients
 

Jim Kelley wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
A stationary EM wave is a contradiction in terms,
an oxymoron.

It sounds just like a standing EM wave. :-)

EM waves cannot stand still. They must necessarily move
at the speed of light, c(VF). The illusion of a stationary
EM wave is actually two EM waves moving in opposite directions
at the speed of light. Both waves include all of the boundary
conditions necessary for EM waves to exist.

Again, if you can present an example of an EM standing wave
devoid of the forward and reverse traveling wave components,
now would be a good time.

Anything else would violate the laws of physics.

The funny thing is, if you knew how to apply that constraint to all of
your claims, you wouldn't find yourself playing newsgroup Whack-a-Mole
day all day.

I just love it when you wax technical, Jim.
--
73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp