wrote:
Jim,

I don't have the measurement capabilities that some of you folk have,
so I'm just using EZNEC as my "experimental equipment". I'm being
assured that it's representative of what I would see "for real", and
it's easier pressing keys than building new test equipment Are you
suggesting that "real world" current measurements would be
significantly different than the EZNEC predictions?

Steve,

Try not to read too much into what I say. It'll save us both some
aggravation. What I have said is that in order to validate any
particular model, one should make measurements. I don't think there's
anything particularly inflammatory or hostile in that view. I respect
both Roy and Cecil for their work, though Roy is considerably more
careful is his use of mathematics, and I feel has considerably more
expertise in RF engineering and physics. I have no particular knowledge
or opinion on Cecil's EZNEC files, other than his rather odd take
standing wave current phase shift - whatever that is.

So why don't you tell us what you think.

73, ac6xg

Jim Kelley wrote:
I have no particular knowledge
or opinion on Cecil's EZNEC files, other than his rather odd take
standing wave current phase shift - whatever that is.

It's not my take, Jim, it is EZNEC's take. EZNEC
reports current on a standing-wave antenna that
closely matches the standing wave equations for
current whose phase cannot be used to measure
delay through a wire or through a loading coil.

Both w7el and w8ji used the current
on a standing wave antenna to measure phase shift
and predictably, there was negligible phase shift.
They erroneously attributed the lack of phase
shift with a lack of delay, i.e. they assumed the
proof - a well known logical fallacy.

There is no relationship between phase shift and
delay in the current on standing wave antennas
either through the wire or through a loading coil.
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com

On May 9, 7:48*am, Cecil Moore wrote:
Jim Kelley wrote:
I have no particular knowledge
or opinion on Cecil's EZNEC files, other than his rather odd take
standing wave current phase shift - whatever that is.

It's not my take, Jim, it is EZNEC's take. EZNEC
reports current on a standing-wave antenna that
closely matches the standing wave equations for
current whose phase cannot be used to measure
delay through a wire or through a loading coil.

Both w7el and w8ji used the current
on a standing wave antenna to measure phase shift
and predictably, there was negligible phase shift.
They erroneously attributed the lack of phase
shift with a lack of delay, i.e. they assumed the
proof - a well known logical fallacy.

There is no relationship between phase shift and
delay in the current on standing wave antennas
either through the wire or through a loading coil.
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, *http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil
I believe Steve has vindicated you in your struggle
so you should feel good. I would avoid the tactics if I were you when
attempts are made to reserect this debate.Corum are acknowledged
experts with respect to coils and tho not as absolute as Maxwells
equations one should feel confident with respect to their works so I
feel you have finally made your point.
Well done
Art