"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Steve Nosko wrote:
In my nomenclature, all "resistance" dissipates power as heat.

You need to include the rest of my post to to it justice. I discuss
the terminology distinction. I go on the say that the term "real part (of
an impedance)" is better suited (as a name) to what some like to call
"loss-less resistance".

In the chopper case that Richard Harrison posed, there is no parallel to the
T-line situation. There, he was comparing a chopper with 50% duty cycle to
an equal valued resistor and calling the chopper a "loss-less resistance"



Even SQRT(L/C)???? The Z0 of transmission line is a resistance,

I don't consider that term (resistance) suitable for this situation.
"real part of Z" is better. I think to some this is the same thing, but
obviously it is not. I believe this is what is causing all the confusion.
Remember, the Z0 is properly called "Characteristic Impedance" or "Surge
Impedance". I think this distinction makes the subject easier to understand
since it eliminates the confusing term "loss-less resistance".


Seems the two "non-equivalent" IEEE definitions resolve the
contradictions in your posting.

I'd have to read the full this before having an opinion!


--
Steve N, K,9;d, c. i My email has no u's.