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,

Since a standing wave is an interference pattern created by traveling
waves, having 'only standing waves' would obviously be an impossible
circumstance.

Traveling wave current changes phase relative to the source
current.

Yes, especially with distance - but only if it's a source of traveling
waves. Evidently there's some chance it could be a source that produces
only standing waves. :-)

Standing wave current does not change phase relative to
the source current.

I urge you to please investigate the mathematical issues associated with
summing counter-rotating vectors.

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

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know you are the only one
suggesting that standing wave current phase - whatever that is - could
be delayed, measured, and calculated.

ac6xg

Jim Kelley wrote:
Since a standing wave is an interference pattern created by traveling
waves, having 'only standing waves' would obviously be an impossible
circumstance.

Nonsense. All it takes is two identical waves traveling in
opposite directions along the same path. Such happens at the
open-circuit or short-circuit point in a 1/4WL stub.

I urge you to please investigate the mathematical issues associated with
summing counter-rotating vectors.

I have, Jim. It is you who seems confused. If two coherent
phasors of equal amplitudes and opposite rotations are
phasor-added, the resulting total phase is a constant.

1 at zero deg + 1 at zero deg = 2 at zero deg
1 at 45 deg + 1 at -45 deg = 1.4.4 at zero deg
etc.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know you are the only one
suggesting that standing wave current phase - whatever that is - could
be delayed, measured, and calculated.

Nonsense, Jim, standing wave current phase is what EZNEC
reports for a standing-wave antenna.

If you are incapable of comprehending, don't feel bad.
My dog doesn't understand it either but I still love her.
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
Jim Kelley wrote:
Since a standing wave is an interference pattern created by traveling
waves, having 'only standing waves' would obviously be an impossible
circumstance.

Nonsense. All it takes is two identical waves traveling in
opposite directions along the same path. Such happens at the
open-circuit or short-circuit point in a 1/4WL stub.

Here we have an excellent illustration of the kink in your understanding
of wave phenomena. Because just as interference does not cause waves to
reflect, waves do not make other waves do things, or turn into something
else. A standing wave interference pattern is a result of the presence
of traveling waves. One does not replace the other.

I urge you to please investigate the mathematical issues associated
with summing counter-rotating vectors.

I have, Jim. It is you who seems confused. If two coherent
phasors of equal amplitudes and opposite rotations are
phasor-added, the resulting total phase is a constant.
1 at zero deg + 1 at zero deg = 2 at zero deg
1 at 45 deg + 1 at -45 deg = 1.4.4 at zero deg
etc.

I you were producing numbers which made sense and were correct, we
wouldn't be having this discussion, Cecil. A wave is at various phases
along it's length. The phase varies from 0 to 360 every complete cycle.
This includes standing waves. Its phase is not "zero" at every point.
It's ridiculous to have to point this out to a self proclaimed "expert"
on any and every subject such as yourself.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know you are the only one
suggesting that standing wave current phase - whatever that is - could
be delayed, measured, and calculated.

Nonsense, Jim, standing wave current phase is what EZNEC
reports for a standing-wave antenna.

In my experience, incorrect assumptions produce incorrect results. The
EZNEC results you refer to are an archetypal example of the effect.

ac6xg

Jim Kelley wrote:
A standing wave interference pattern is a result of the presence
of traveling waves. One does not replace the other.

Exactly what I have been saying for years against some
stiff opposition - welcome aboard.

You missed the point which is: If one parses all the energy
to the standing wave, it cannot separately be parsed to the
traveling waves. Doing so would violate the conservation
of energy principle.

I you were producing numbers which made sense and were correct, we
wouldn't be having this discussion, Cecil. A wave is at various phases
along it's length. The phase varies from 0 to 360 every complete cycle.
This includes standing waves. Its phase is not "zero" at every point.

You obviously don't understand. Whatever the actual phase
angle is, for a pure standing wave, at any instant of time,
it is constant all up and down the standing wave. NOBODY HAS
EVER SAID IT IS ZERO AT EVERY POINT!!! Such an allegation is
a ridiculous blowing of smoke.

The
EZNEC results you refer to are an archetypal example of the effect.

The EZNEC results are what they are and have been confirmed
by w7el himself. All I can say is: Please correct your mistaken
concepts and then rejoin the discussion. What is it about the
following EZNEC results that you don't understand? Do you need
help in comprehending that a 2.71 degree phase shift in 90 degrees
of antenna is a shortfall of 87.29 degrees?

EZNEC+ ver. 4.0
thin-wire 1/4WL vertical 4/17/2009 2:57:42 PM
--------------- CURRENT DATA ---------------
Frequency = 7.29 MHz
Wire No. 1:
Segment Conn Magnitude (A.) Phase (Deg.)
1 Ground 1 0.00
2 .97651 -0.42
3 .93005 -0.83
4 .86159 -1.19
5 .77258 -1.50
6 .66485 -1.78
7 .54059 -2.04
8 .40213 -2.28
9 .25161 -2.50
10 Open .08883 -2.71

If w7el "measures" the phase shift between segment 3
and segment 7, he will "measure" 1.21 degrees. The actual
delay between segment 3 and segment 7 is about 36 degrees.
When will anyone understand that fact of physics?
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com

Jim Kelley wrote:
Since a standing wave is an interference pattern created by traveling
waves, having 'only standing waves' would obviously be an impossible
circumstance.

Time to hit the books, Jim. Standing waves are described
in Born and Wolf, section 7.4, pages 297-281, 4th edition.

"We see that at each instant in time the *phase is constant*
through the first medium." The first medium is where the
pure standing waves are. Born and Wolf agree that the phase
of the standing wave doesn't change throughout the medium.
Therefore, its phase cannot be used to measure delay.

The same material is covered in "Optics", by Hecht, section
7.1.4, pages 288-293, 4th edition.

"[Standing wave phase] "*doesn't rotate* at all, and the
resultant wave it represents doesn't progress through space -
its a standing wave."

If you are incapable of understanding that material,
I'm afraid I cannot help you.
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
Jim Kelley wrote:
Since a standing wave is an interference pattern created by traveling
waves, having 'only standing waves' would obviously be an impossible
circumstance.

Time to hit the books, Jim. Standing waves are described
in Born and Wolf, section 7.4, pages 297-281, 4th edition.

"We see that at each instant in time the *phase is constant*
through the first medium." The first medium is where the
pure standing waves are. Born and Wolf agree that the phase
of the standing wave doesn't change throughout the medium.
Therefore, its phase cannot be used to measure delay.

The same material is covered in "Optics", by Hecht, section
7.1.4, pages 288-293, 4th edition.

"[Standing wave phase] "*doesn't rotate* at all, and the
resultant wave it represents doesn't progress through space -
its a standing wave."

If you are incapable of understanding that material,
I'm afraid I cannot help you.

I understand it well enough to note that it fails to make your point for
you. However it does clearly make a point that has never been in
contention. Bravo.

(Evidently you've forgotten that I was the person who introduced you to
Born and Wolf in the first place.)

ac6xg

Jim Kelley wrote:
I understand it well enough to note that it fails to make your point for
you.

You obviously don't understand why a signal that doesn't
change phase cannot be used to measure a delay based
on phase shift either through a wire or a coil.

1. Every reference says a pure standing wave does not
change phase.

2. The current on a 75m mobile antenna is at least 90%
standing wave current.

3. Therefo The phase of the current on a 75m mobile
antenna cannot be used to measure the delay through
the loading coil or even through the straight wire
parts of the antenna.

4. Yet, this is exactly the current that w7el and w8ji
used in their measurements which yielded "no detectable
phase shift" completely unrelated to delay.

Here's a question for you: What is the phase shift
in the current in 90 degrees of an ideal lossless
1/4WL stub? Until you can provide a valid direct
answer to that direct question, you will never
understand.
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
Jim Kelley wrote:
I understand it well enough to note that it fails to make your point
for you.

You obviously don't understand why a signal that doesn't
change phase cannot be used to measure a delay based
on phase shift either through a wire or a coil.

1. Every reference says a pure standing wave does not
change phase.

Certainly not as a function of time. Which means it's not an
alternating current, and which is why it not considered an actual wave.

2. The current on a 75m mobile antenna is at least 90%
standing wave current.

And what's the other 10% supposed to be? Please explain how one would
go about getting "standing wave current" to flow through something -
anything - like a measuring instrument for example.

3. Therefo The phase of the current on a 75m mobile
antenna cannot be used to measure the delay through
the loading coil or even through the straight wire
parts of the antenna.

Have you tried pulsing a current through one? I can't imagine there
wouldn't be a delay in getting from one end to the other and back.

4. Yet, this is exactly the current that w7el and w8ji
used in their measurements

No, it is not.

Here's a question for you: What is the phase shift
in the current in 90 degrees of an ideal lossless
1/4WL stub?

I'm reminded of the troll at the bridge.

To what phase shift do you refer? With respect to voltage, from one
point to another, out and back - you need to be considerably less
imprecise if you expect someone to bother to answer (to) you.

ac6xg

Jim Kelley wrote:
2. The current on a 75m mobile antenna is at least 90%
standing wave current.

And what's the other 10% supposed to be?

The other 10% is the traveling wave that gets radiated
of course (neglecting losses).

Please explain how one would
go about getting "standing wave current" to flow through something -
anything - like a measuring instrument for example.

Opps, standing wave current doesn't flow so you must
have meant how does one eliminate reflections so that
nothing except traveling wave current is present.
Do you need that explained to you?

Have you tried pulsing a current through one? I can't imagine there
wouldn't be a delay in getting from one end to the other and back.

Exactly, but some would say that's digital, not RF,
or that is not steady-state conditions.

4. Yet, this is exactly the current that w7el and w8ji
used in their measurements

No, it is not.

Sorry, you are wrong about that. w7el described in detail
what he had measured and it was "total current" which was
about 90% standing wave current. Here's what he said:

"The result from the second test was a current difference
of 5.4%, again with no measurable phase shift." All using
the total antenna current which is about 90% standing
wave current. What he didn't realize is that a current
difference of 5.4% is a calculated phase shift of ~19
degrees, i.e. ARCCOS(1-.054) = ~19 degrees, to which
you have previously alluded.

Here's a question for you: What is the phase shift
in the current in 90 degrees of an ideal lossless
1/4WL stub?

I'm reminded of the troll at the bridge.

I'm reminded of people who refuse to answer simple questions.
One wonders why? The answer is zero degrees.

To what phase shift do you refer? With respect to voltage, from one
point to another, out and back - you need to be considerably less
imprecise if you expect someone to bother to answer (to) you.

The context was specified as current. Here is an EZNEC simulation
which should help you.

http://www.w5dxp.com/stub_dip.EZ

Click on currents. You will see that the current phase
varies by ~2 degrees end to end in 90 degrees of stub
just as it does in a 1/4WL monopole over ground.
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
The other 10% is the traveling wave that gets radiated
of course (neglecting losses).

Absurd. Current does not "get radiated".

Please explain how one would go about getting "standing wave current"
to flow through something - anything - like a measuring instrument for
example.

Opps, standing wave current doesn't flow so you must
have meant how does one eliminate reflections so that
nothing except traveling wave current is present.
Do you need that explained to you?

You claim that W7EL measured the phase shift of standing wave current.
He of course made no such claim. So yes, I need you to explain how it
is possible for someone do measure a "current" that does not flow. This
should be good.

ac6xg