Richard Clark wrote:
Remove that differential, and the error corrected delay collapses
towards Tom's results!

This from the person who asserted that the reflections
from a non-reflective thin-film coating are brighter
than the surface of the sun. Richard will twist facts
until there is zero resemblance to reality.

Richard, I have no idea what your ulterior motive is
but is it certainly not leaning toward technical facts.

If you don't like my measurements, then please explain
the phase shift through the EZNEC coil model at:

http://www.w5dxp.com/coil512.ez

Almost anyone is capable of creating a forward traveling-
wave through a real-world coil on the bench, as I did, and
measuring the phase shift. Have you done that? Obviously
not, since to do so would force you to side with technical
facts, and not with the old wives' tale you are promoting.

Use a TDR to measure the delay through a 75m bugcatcher
coil and get back to us with the results.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 13:12:00 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:

the 21st response.

No contrary evidence noted.

Richard Clark wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:

the 21st response.

No contrary evidence noted.

For the Nth time, here is again - please explain it.

http://www.w5dxp.com/coil512.ez
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 13:32:51 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Richard Clark wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:

the 21st response.

No contrary evidence noted.

For the Nth time...
This represents the expected cries of anguish more than correspondence
to the immediate topic with N greater than the 20th question where
formerly Cecil was loath to proceed beyond...

As observed earlier, threads driven by data rarely present the
entertainment that enthralls many to submit upwards to 500 postings.

I see no further data regarding the topic is forthcoming, an expected
outcome, but certainly not Cecil's best option. However, Cecil is the
only one that can fill in the blanks of a measurement that appears
never to have been made. There appear to have been no witnesses that
can independantly supply that data either. As such, nothing is left
to be said that negates my conclusions set forth in this thread as
were drawn from the only data available.

Of course, Cecil could impeach his own data. :-)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
For the Nth time...

This represents the expected cries of anguish more than correspondence
to the immediate topic with N greater than the 20th question where
formerly Cecil was loath to proceed beyond...

Allow me to point out that the only thing you have proved
is that I am "loath to proceed" for obvious reasons. What
you are saying in no way proves that I was wrong. I have
just gotten tired of being nibbled to death by the gaggle
of guru geese. Please see my new thread titled:
"Please perform my experiment for yourself"
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com