Jim Kelley wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:

What is the benefit
of using a lot of frequencies when you could use
the frequency of interest?

Your memory is growing short. Do you not remember challenging me to do
that very thing - claiming it was impossible? I said I would use
pulses, then you said it wouldn't work, bla bla bla. Circuitious, isn't
it.

No, I'm still saying the same thing. What is the benefit
of using a lot of frequencies when you could use the
frequency of interest?

If you are asserting
that attaching a load resistor to a loading coil dramatically
changes the characteristics, the onus of proof is upon
you.

It should be readily apparent to just about anyone that one does in fact
significantly alter the characteristics of a system by changing it from
one which has a reflection at the end to one which doesn't.

So I guess it is up to you to prove that the system is
somehow non-linear in one direction only. Good luck on
that one.

A non-terminated Rhombic has both forward and reflected
currents. A terminated Rhombic has only forward current.
Exactly how is the physics of the Rhombic changed by
adding a termination resistor?
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
A non-terminated Rhombic has both forward and reflected
currents. A terminated Rhombic has only forward current.
Exactly how is the physics of the Rhombic changed by
adding a termination resistor?

The same physics applies to all antennas, Cecil. Would you assert
that fact gives all antennas the same characteristics?

But here's the point. Your claim is that the coil as you have modeled
it, performs the same in EZNEC as it does when it is employed as part
of a 75 meter Bugcatcher antenna. At the same time you want to claim
that there's no other way to do such testing.

It's not a reasonable viewpoint, Cecil. But you're entitled to it and
I'm happy if you want to go on having it. :-)

73, Jim AC6XG

Jim Kelley wrote:
But here's the point. Your claim is that the coil as you have modeled
it, performs the same in EZNEC as it does when it is employed as part of
a 75 meter Bugcatcher antenna. At the same time you want to claim that
there's no other way to do such testing.

No, you missed the point. If there is any other way
to do such testing, please present it. Valid testing
methods are what we are lacking.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com