Cecil Moore wrote:
Jim Kelley wrote:
Do you want him to tell you what he believes it is, or what he has
actually measured it to be?

If you had any idea of what you were talking about,
you would know that the total phase shift is unrelated
to the total delay.

But you're doing all the talking, Cecil - providing profound and
knowledgeable insights as in the above observation that phase shift and
delay are unrelated.

ac6xg

On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 13:52:16 -0700, Jim Kelley
wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
Jim Kelley wrote:
Do you want him to tell you what he believes it is, or what he has
actually measured it to be?

If you had any idea of what you were talking about,
you would know that the total phase shift is unrelated
to the total delay.

But you're doing all the talking, Cecil - providing profound and
knowledgeable insights as in the above observation that phase shift and
delay are unrelated.

Exceedingly profound. Is there a third, unpublished, cosine parameter
(Suppressed Hypothetical Interval Term) for delay that is not phase
nor position? This must be another one of Cecil's "you are right, but
you are wrong about what you thought you were thinking about."

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 13:52:16 -0700, Jim Kelley
wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
Jim Kelley wrote:
Do you want him to tell you what he believes it is, or what he has
actually measured it to be?
If you had any idea of what you were talking about,
you would know that the total phase shift is unrelated
to the total delay.
But you're doing all the talking, Cecil - providing profound and
knowledgeable insights as in the above observation that phase shift and
delay are unrelated.

Exceedingly profound. Is there a third, unpublished, cosine parameter
(Suppressed Hypothetical Interval Term) for delay that is not phase
nor position? This must be another one of Cecil's "you are right, but
you are wrong about what you thought you were thinking about."

Right. I suspect it was because Cecil was wrong about what he thought I
was thinking about. Again. Either that, or he was referring to
standing waves of current that 'begin undulating linearly & laterally'
at a 'cosinusoidal reduced amplitude phase'.

73, ac6xg

Jim Kelley wrote:
But you're doing all the talking, Cecil - providing profound and
knowledgeable insights as in the above observation that phase shift and
delay are unrelated.

I guess I should provide a context for the uninitiated.

If the system contains only traveling waves, the delay
is proportional to the phase shift. If the system contains
only standing waves, the delay is completely unrelated to
the phase shift since the phase shift is always zero over
any 1/2WL between the current nodes. EZNEC supports that
fact and w7el has admitted such in a previous posting.

Kraus and Balanis both agree with the above assertion. I
believe that you are aware of that fact so I have no choice
but to assume that you are deliberately trying to hoodwink
the uninitiated as are w7el and w8ji. Your ulterior motives
remain unclear to me since you will not doubt be proven
technically wrong at some point. You guys cannot possibly
plead ignorance after all these years of discussion.

Traveling wave current changes phase relative to the source
current. Every technical person agrees on that fact of physics.

Standing wave current does not change phase relative to
the source current. Everyone technical person agrees on
that fact of physics.

Therefore, standing wave current phase cannot be used to
measure delay through a wire or through a coil. This is
such a simple concept that any disagreement must be
considered to be a conspiracy to hoodwink the uninitiated.
Exactly what do you guys have to gain from hoodwinking
the unwashed masses???
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:

If the system contains only traveling waves, the delay
is proportional to the phase shift. If the system contains
only standing waves, the delay is completely unrelated to
the phase shift since the phase shift is always zero over
any 1/2WL between the current nodes. EZNEC supports that
fact and w7el has admitted such in a previous posting.

Kraus and Balanis both agree with the above assertion.

I'm surprised they ever used EZNEC, or discussed systems that have
standing waves, and nothing else.

Standing wave current does not change phase relative to
the source current. Everyone technical person agrees on
that fact of physics.

Yes, and that's by virtue of the fact that standing waves are entirely
dependent on traveling waves. In fact, standing waves don't do anything
on their own.

What's amazing is that you continue to insist on attributing
interference with supernatural powers - "redistribution"
being one, "delaying" itself apparently being another.

Therefore, standing wave current phase cannot be used to
measure delay through a wire or through a coil.

We've seen how you can calculate it. So, given that phase and delay are
completely unrelated as you have explained, please describe if you would
how one would go about actually measuring standing wave current delay -
whatever that is.

This is
such a simple concept that any disagreement must be
considered to be a conspiracy to hoodwink the uninitiated.
Exactly what do you guys have to gain from hoodwinking
the unwashed masses???

The suggestion sounds a little nutty to me, to be honest. Is it
possible that you might be mistaken about any of this?

ac6xg

Jim Kelley wrote:
I'm surprised they ever ... discussed systems that have
standing waves, and nothing else.

I'm not surprised because you have obviously never cracked
open their books - tsk, tsk. Reference page 288 of "Optics",
by Hecht, 4th edition, 7.1.4 Standing Waves.

What's amazing is that you continue to insist on attributing
interference with supernatural powers - "redistribution"
being one, ...

Obviously, you have never read the following FSU web page:

micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/scienceopticsu/interference/waveinteractions/index.html

"... when two waves of equal amplitude and wavelength that are
180-degrees ... out of phase with each other meet, they are not
actually annihilated, ... All of the photon energy present in
these waves must somehow be recovered or *redistributed* in a
new direction, according to the law of energy conservation ...
Instead, upon meeting, the photons are *redistributed* to regions
that permit constructive interference, so the effect should be
considered as a *redistribution* of light waves and photon energy
rather than the spontaneous construction or destruction of light."

Exactly what is it about the *redistribution* of energy that you
don't understand?

... please describe if you would
how one would go about actually measuring standing wave current delay -
whatever that is.

I cannot improve on Hecht's words in "Optics":

"This is the equation for a STANDING or STATIONARY WAVE, as
opposed to a traveling wave. Its profile does not move through
space; ... It doesn't rotate at all, and the resultant wave
it represents doesn't progress through space - its a standing
wave."

In other words, "standing wave current delay" does not exist.
Only an ignorant fool would think that it could exist given
the equation for a standing wave. Yet this is the current
that w7el and w8ji tried to use to measure the delay through
a 75m mobile loading coil.

The suggestion sounds a little nutty to me, to be honest. Is it
possible that you might be mistaken about any of this?

I could be mistaken about your ulterior motive but it is hard
for me to accept the fact that you guys are just dumb as a stump.
I would rather think that you, w7el, and w8ji have a modicum
of intelligence and are merely engaged in a conspiracy to
hoodwink the uninitiated. Your motive for such is unclear.
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com

On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 20:35:00 -0500, Cecil Moore
engaged in a conspiracy

Hmm, Trilateral commission?
Freemasonry?
Area 51?
Symbionese Liberation Army?
Hussein's "Oil for Food?"
Illuminati?
Ulster Loyalist Central Coordination Committee?
Bilderberg Group?
the 4th Reich?
AUM Shinrikyo?
Animal Liberation Front?
Leon Czolgosz?
Gulf of Tonkin incident?
Hollow earth theory?
New World Order?
Rosicrucians?
Servants of the Paraclete?
Watergate?
The Nazi-American Money Plot?
There is a point in a loading coil antenna where the phase shift is
instantaneous? [and yet it moves.....]

Richard Clark wrote:
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 20:35:00 -0500, Cecil Moore
engaged in a conspiracy

Hmm, Trilateral commission?

It was tongue-in-cheek humor, Richard.
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com

On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 05:55:34 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Richard Clark wrote:
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 20:35:00 -0500, Cecil Moore
engaged in a conspiracy

Hmm, Trilateral commission?

It was tongue-in-cheek humor, Richard.

Ah! That is what you thought I was thinking you were thinking I
thought and you were wrong twice, right once and on the third hand was
a draw.

On Apr 14, 5:35*pm, Cecil Moore wrote:

I cannot improve on Hecht's words in "Optics":

You could still improve on your understanding of their meaning.

In other words, "standing wave current delay" does not exist.
Only an ignorant fool would think that it could exist given
the equation for a standing wave.

And yet you keep posting your calculations and claiming to have made
measurements. I was trying to be polite, but yes. Evidently we're in
agreement now?

ac6xg