Gene Fuller wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
You missed the point. A terminating capacitor is a two
terminal network. The point where two pieces of feedline
are connected is a four-terminal network. A two-terminal
network is different from a four-terminal network.

This appears to be an unusual definition.

Not unusual at all, Gene. The two input terminals to the
black box are on one side. The two output terminals from
the black box are on the other side. The impedance
discontinuity is inside the box. The black box is extremely
small.

Give me the four s-parameters, s11, s12, s21, and s22
and I can tell you virtually everything about what is
inside the black box without even applying a signal.


BZZZT! Wrong answer.

Nobody ever said anything about the "other side" of the black box.

That's obviously a lie. I said something about the other side
of the black box.

Yet by
your models and math the black boxes don't behave the same in your test
circuit.

That's another lie. All my models and math show the black
boxes all behaving exactly the same external to the two input
terminals. In fact, I have said it is impossible for it to
be any other way.

Is there no limit to how dishonest you will be?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
You missed the point. A terminating capacitor is a two
terminal network. The point where two pieces of feedline
are connected is a four-terminal network. A two-terminal
network is different from a four-terminal network.

This appears to be an unusual definition.

Not unusual at all, Gene. The two input terminals to the
black box are on one side. The two output terminals from
the black box are on the other side. The impedance
discontinuity is inside the box. The black box is extremely
small.

Give me the four s-parameters, s11, s12, s21, and s22
and I can tell you virtually everything about what is
inside the black box without even applying a signal.


BZZZT! Wrong answer.

Nobody ever said anything about the "other side" of the black box.

That's obviously a lie. I said something about the other side
of the black box.

Yet by your models and math the black boxes don't behave the same in
your test circuit.

That's another lie. All my models and math show the black
boxes all behaving exactly the same external to the two input
terminals. In fact, I have said it is impossible for it to
be any other way.

Is there no limit to how dishonest you will be?


No lies; just carelessness in a nit-picking contest.

As usual you have twisted the question so that you can provide some type
of answer. You still have not answered the original question posed by
Keith.

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Gene Fuller wrote:
As usual you have twisted the question so that you can provide some type
of answer. You still have not answered the original question posed by
Keith.

What was that question? I suspect the question was irrelevant
because Keith didn't understand what phase shift I was talking
about. I also suspect that Keith is beginning to understand
what I am talking about. His silence seems a little strange.
What are you going to do when your realize you are on the
wrong side of the technical argument? Sandbag - like some
others have done and try to obscure the technical facts?

How about an answer from you? What is the phase shift through
the impedance discontinuity between Vfor1 and Vfor2 below?

--43.4 deg 600 ohm line--+--10 deg 100 ohm line--open
Vfor1--|--Vfor2

I doubt that you even know how to solve the problem. Your lack
of an answer will speak volumes.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
As usual you have twisted the question so that you can provide some
type of answer. You still have not answered the original question
posed by Keith.

What was that question? I suspect the question was irrelevant
because Keith didn't understand what phase shift I was talking
about. I also suspect that Keith is beginning to understand
what I am talking about. His silence seems a little strange.
What are you going to do when your realize you are on the
wrong side of the technical argument? Sandbag - like some
others have done and try to obscure the technical facts?

How about an answer from you? What is the phase shift through
the impedance discontinuity between Vfor1 and Vfor2 below?

--43.4 deg 600 ohm line--+--10 deg 100 ohm line--open
Vfor1--|--Vfor2

I doubt that you even know how to solve the problem. Your lack
of an answer will speak volumes.


Twist, twist, twist.

Do you also open the (black) box to see how Schroedinger's cat is doing?

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Gene Fuller wrote:
Do you also open the (black) box to see how Schroedinger's cat is doing?

I do whatever I need to do to solve the problem, Gene.
If I have to open the box to see if the cat is dead
or alive, that's what I will do. I do not believe in
erecting silly artificial barriers in the quest for
knowledge - and we are not talking about a quantum
physics paradox.

So let me repeat: The phase shifts at the -j567 points
in the two following 1/4WL stubs are not the same.

--43.4 deg 600 ohm line--+--46.6 deg 600 ohm line--open

--43.4 deg 600 ohm line--+--10 deg 100 ohm line--open

The phase shift at '+' in the 1st example is zero.

The phase shift at '+' in the 2nd example is 36.6 deg.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On Dec 17, 7:10 pm, Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
As usual you have twisted the question so that you can provide some type
of answer. You still have not answered the original question posed by
Keith.

What was that question? I suspect the question was irrelevant
because Keith didn't understand what phase shift I was talking
about. I also suspect that Keith is beginning to understand
what I am talking about. His silence seems a little strange.

Snow storm - ski
ski - sleep
ISP then breaks DSL - no conectivity
ISP breaks PC IP stack while restoring connectivity - time spent
fixing IP stack
time spent fixing IP stack - employer's work not getting done
employer's work not getting done - reduction of free time
reduction of free time - no r.r.a.a

....Keith