Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
As far as I can tell, W8JI did not do any math or other type of
analysis to come up with the 3 ns delay. There was some surrounding
discussion, but the delay itself was simply read from an instrument.
So let me repeat my earlier questions.

I previously answered your question in capital letters.

What went wrong? Why is that number incorrect?

This is about the 20th time that I have explained the error
that W8JI made. The signal he used to measure phase shift
didn't possess a phase shift. W7EL made the same mistake in
his "delay through a loading coil" measurements. When the
phase of the total current changes hardly at all from one
end of a 1/2WL dipole to the other, that current CANNOT even
be used to measure the delay through the wire. Why do you,
W8JI, and W7EL think a current with an essentially unchanging
phase can be used to measure phase shift? This is all explained
on my web page.

And for the 21st time, we are talking about delay, not phase shift. That
point seems difficult for you to fathom.

One of the reasons this entire issue goes on and on is that the
terminology is a bit foggier than it might first appear. The
revolutionary Corum "n=0 sheath helix waveguide mode" is derived for a
single frequency in steady-state conditions. So how does one even define
"delay" under that condition? If you add some sort of marker signal, the
measurement of "delay" will be for the propagation of that marker
signal, not the original underlying steady-state wave.

By the way, Corum does not mention delay at all, with one minor exception.

73,
Gene
W4SZ