Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 28 May 2010 00:08:10 GMT, Owen Duffy wrote:
Zs can be measured by a number of methods. It is interesting to note that in many of the discussions on the 'net on this topic, more focus is given to dismissing the experiment design for experiments that produce unfavourable results to some, than questioning the proposition that Zs is 50+j0 or thereabouts. Hi Owen, Even this Zs = 50+j0 or thereabouts is a distraction. Quite simply, being able to reject a single value is an evasion of facing the evidence of source resistance. What is more comic is both sides couldn't agree more! Truly Kabuki. Whilst Walt has documented a quite rigourous experiment, and it produced a favourable outcome, it is my view that that in itself is not proof of the proposition. Propositions seem to abound as n+1 the number of participants. I dare say no two participants can agree what any single proposition is without adorning further distractions to it like bulbs on a Christmas tree. Whilst one favourable experiment cannot proove the proposition correct, just one valid experiment can prove the proposition to be not generally true. No doubt the reason for the focus on proving experiments invalid. Proving a straw man invalid is simple. Proving a murky proposition invalid is simple too. Unfortunately, the occurrences of actually stepping up to the bench and showing results other and conclusively different from those offered is a void in the discussion. It would seem the qualitative counter-proof comes cheap and that submitted quantifiables are unchallenged. Quite a paradox. If you give some thought to what you could use Zs for, then every valid experiment that is designed around that application must produce a favourable outcome if Zs is as proposed. If they don't, then the value assumed for Zs must be wrong. I posted a simple test earlier that in my experience does not support the proposition that typical ham HF transmitters have Zs=50+j0 or close to it. The test is documented so that individuals can try it and make their own mind up. Some might get favourable results on limited trials... but in my view, that is outweighed by unfavourable results from valid experiments. For years I have read that Zs is not ____. Just as quantifiables are brushed off the table of discussion, I have yet to see measure of what the objectors' Zs IS instead under any circumstance that they can conveniently arrange with their own tools and source. It is a tautology that if it is not X, it must be Y, or Z, or.... None seem to know an explicit answer under any circumstance or configuration of their own gear. Without some value such as 10 Ohms, 50 Ohms, 10,000 Ohms, it leaves a most curious happenstance that any garden variety ham transmitter exhibits either 0 or infinite source resistance - but I dare say no one is going to step forward to accept these boundary limits either! No counter-proclaimants of ANY value between and including 0 to infinity. It would be a commitment anyone could validate or refute on the basis of science at the bench - and what would follow from that examination? I would find such discussion refreshing in comparison. What a happy state of ignorance this topic draws out of the wallpaper. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
W2DU's Reflections III is now available from CQ Communications, Inc. | Antenna | |||
W2DU's Reflections III is now available from CQ Communications, Inc. | Boatanchors | |||
Reflections on rrap | Policy | |||
Reflections on rrap | Antenna | |||
Reflections on rrap | Policy |