On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 03:32:59 -0800, Roy Lewallen
wrote:

Hopefully keeping this explanation in mind when you look at the nice
graphics displays will help you sort the bad ones from the good.

Hi Roy,

Your description of the Phase and the SWR contribution to how it is
perceived was excellent; and with enough words to get from start to
finish and be thorough.

It deserves acknowledgement.

However, with this buried beneath all the trash of this thread, it
should be included in your own site's miscellaneous files for easier
reference, because the misperceptions for this topic (and Cecil
stepped right up to shove a stick in the spokes) just aren't going to
go away.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:
Hi Roy,
Your description of the Phase and the SWR contribution to how it is
perceived was excellent; and with enough words to get from start to
finish and be thorough.

It deserves acknowledgement.

Roy simply posted my arguments in minute detail. I agree
with it and point out that it also proves that Roy's and
Tom's phase measurements using standing-wave current were
meaningless as they did *NOT* measure the delay through a
coil as asserted by both parties.

Roy's posting is entirely correct. He correctly points
out the difference in traveling-wave current and standing-
wave current which can be deduced from their different
equations. From Roy's own posting, anyone can deduce why
standing-wave current cannot be used to measure the delay
through a coil, yet last time I checked, Roy was still
"standing by" those meaningless measurements and also
supporting W8JI's equally meaningless measurements.

Would anyone who cares send Roy an email asking him to
make up his mind? He simply cannot have it both ways.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com