Jim Kelley wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Also for the record: 3+ years ago, Jim Kelley convinced
me that "power flow" was a misconception. I agreed with him
and revised my magazine article to reflect that concept. Yet,
many times since then, Jim Kelley has attempted to propagate
the Big Lie that I support the concept of "power flow" all the
while being fully aware that I agree with him on the subject.
I have never encountered anyone before who refuses to allow me
to agree with him/her.

You've been more than welcome to agree with me as
much as you like. As I said, I can't recall a single instance in which
you said you did. I got nothing but grief from you on the subject - as
anyone reading this group can bear witness.

Yes, anyone reading this newsgroup knows that in response to your
numerous false accusations of supporting the concept of "power flow",
I have been posting this quotation from my magazine article for
at least three years and telling you that I agree with you on
the subject.

"The author has endeavored to satisfy the purists in this series
of articles. The term 'power flow' has been avoided in favor of
'energy flow'. Power is a measure of that energy flow per unit
time through a plane. Likewise, the EM fields in the waves do
the interfering. Powers, treated as scalars, are incapable of
interference."

I put those words into my 3+ year old magazine article because
of your input while reviewing the original article. For about
the 10th time or more, I agree with you that "power flow" is
probably an invalid concept and that powers cannot interfere.

The only thing I haven't done is kiss your ass. If that is
what you are waiting for, haul your ass over here to East
Texas and pucker up. Harassing someone who agrees with you
is at least a severe character flaw and probably pathological.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com