Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 12:28:29 -0800, Roger wrote:
When we define both the source voltage and the source impedance, we also define the source power. Two of the three variables in the power equation are defined, so power is defined. Hi Roger, I see a free mixing of "perfect" voltage and current sources, source impedances, black boxes, and what appears (above) to be a forced presumption of source power. As is typical within these debates, something must be broken. For one, these "perfect" sources paired with an impedance specification necessarily describes a Thenvenin source (for some reason, no one sees the elephant in their living room here). For every Thevenin source, there is an equivalent Norton source; that, for either hidden within a black box, is indistinguishable from the other. Given this equivalency, the forced power presumption collapses. Power in the black box (if in fact that is the intent of this coy "perfection") cannot be known. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Standing Wave Phase | Antenna | |||
Standing wave on feeders | Antenna | |||
Dipole with standing wave - what happens to reflected wave? | Antenna | |||
Newbie ?: I've Built A Simple 1/4 Wave Dipole for 2 Mtrs. Could IMake a1/2 Wave? | Homebrew | |||
What is a traveling-wave antenna? | Antenna |