"Nick Kennedy" wrote in message
om...
I see this paper as a variation on a line of reasoning that goes like
this:

1) A conjugate match results in maximum power delivered to a load, so
it is good.

2) A connection where the load has much higher resistance than the
Thevenin equivalent source resistance results in high efficiency, so
it is also good.

3) Since (1) and (2) are both good, they must be equivalent to each
other. Therefore a conjugate match is what it is not. This is an
apparent contradiction.

4) The contradiction is resolved by postulating a special kind of
resistance that adds to the source resistance. However, it has no
physical effect and exists only to resolve the contradiction in (3).

All good matches are now conjugate matches and everyone is happy!

73--Nick, WA5BDU

nick,
I like your summary. You have captured the essence of my original
efficiency puzzle...except for your #4. My puzzle was not intended to be an
equivlent to maximum power transfer. Only an "efficiency enhancement"
technique/concept.idea/proposal. I did not intend to imply that my solution
was transferring "maximum power" only a higher efficiency than the alternate
case that I described.
Your #3 is clearly only for the discussion. The "they are both good,
therefore, they are equivalent" concept clearly can't be a serious
conclusion, just an argument tool.


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