what happens to reflected energy ?
 

On Jun 28, 5:50*pm, Keith Dysart wrote:
Cecil has not found any and would rather prattle on about
the difference between energy and power than actually understand.

I have listed a number of the laws of physics that you are violating.
Of course, energy and power are different. Consider an ideal LC
oscillator at the instant of time when the voltage on the capacitor is
maximum and the current is zero. The energy is certainly not zero and
can be calculated knowing the voltage and capacitance (assume 1000
volts and 1uf). Yet the instantaneous power is zero because the
instantaneous current is zero.

energy = (V^2*C)/2 = 0.5 joule

power = V(t)*I(t) = 0

Please prove a one-to-one correspondence between energy and power. How
can you possibly say that you are tracking all the energy when the
power equals zero and the energy does not? Good grief!

I am not sure where you think there is an error.

Again, you need to cut off your output and enable your inputs. There
are no waves during DC steady-state. Therefore, there are no forward
waves and no reflected waves. Therefore, you basic assumptions are
invalid. For waves to exist there must be acceleration and
deceleration of carrier electrons and such does not exist during DC
steady-state. Why don't you know that?
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

what happens to reflected energy ?
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote
...

Again, you need to cut off your output and enable your inputs. There
are no waves during DC steady-state. Therefore, there are no forward
waves and no reflected waves.
Therefore, you basic assumptions are
invalid. For waves to exist there must be acceleration and
deceleration of carrier electrons and such does not exist during DC
steady-state. Why don't you know that?

Why don't you know that oscillating current goes into the displacement
current. In EM no reflections.

You should decide: EM or electrons. The mixture is fun.
S*

what happens to reflected energy ?
 

On Jun 29, 11:44*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
You should decide: EM or electrons. The mixture is fun.

That's an interesting idea to which I don't know the answer. Let me
rephrase the question:

Although it is known that electrons cannot flow through the dielectric
of an ideal capacitor, how about photons? Can RF photons flow directly
through the dielectric layer of a capacitor? If they can, it would
explain a lot of things.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

what happens to reflected energy ?
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
On Jun 29, 11:44 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
You should decide: EM or electrons. The mixture is fun.

That's an interesting idea to which I don't know the answer. Let me
rephrase the question:

Although it is known that electrons cannot flow through the dielectric
of an ideal capacitor, how about photons? Can RF photons flow directly
through the dielectric layer of a capacitor? If they can, it would
explain a lot of things.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

photons can flow through a dielectric.. isn't that what EM propagation
is, after all?

what happens to reflected energy ?
 

On Jun 29, 12:54*pm, Jim Lux wrote:
photons can flow through a dielectric.. isn't that what EM propagation
is, after all?

Yes, after I posted it, I realized that it was a rhetorical question.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

what happens to reflected energy ?
 

On 29 jun, 15:08, Cecil Moore wrote:
On Jun 29, 12:54*pm, Jim Lux wrote:

photons can flow through a dielectric.. isn't that what EM propagation
is, after all?

Yes, after I posted it, I realized that it was a rhetorical question.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

Dear friends, I follow with interest your interesting digressions,
however in various different posts about differents matters, I notice
discussion arises about what is "real" and what is not. IMO that
contributes to the solution goes away from us (I remember making this
comment in a previous post). In this sense respecto to energy I would
like to quote a great physics:

"...there is a certain quantity, which we call energy, that does not
change in the manifold changes which nature undergoes. That is a most
abstract idea, because it is a mathematical principle; it says that
there is a numerical quantity which does not change when something
happens. It is not a description of a mechanism, or anything concrete;
it is just a strange fact that we can calculate some number and when
we finish watching nature go through her tricks and calculate the
number again, it is the same."

"It is important to realize that in physics today, we have no
knowledge of what
energy is. We do not have a picture that energy comes in little blobs
of a definite
amount. It is not that way. However, there are formulas for
calculating some
numerical quantity, and when we add it all together it gives "28"'—
always the
same number. It is an abstract thing in that it does not tell us the
mechanism or
the reasons for the various formulas."

From: Richard Feynman. "Six easy pieces"

Miguel LU6ETJ

what happens to reflected energy ?
 

On 29 jun, 20:57, lu6etj wrote:
On 29 jun, 15:08, Cecil Moore wrote:

On Jun 29, 12:54*pm, Jim Lux wrote:

photons can flow through a dielectric.. isn't that what EM propagation
is, after all?

Yes, after I posted it, I realized that it was a rhetorical question.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

Dear friends, I follow with interest your interesting digressions,
however in various different posts about differents matters, I notice
discussion arises about what is "real" and what is not. IMO that
contributes to the solution goes away from us (I remember making this
comment in a previous post). In this sense respecto to energy I would
like to quote a great physics:

"...there is a certain quantity, which we call energy, that does not
change in the manifold changes which nature undergoes. That is a most
abstract idea, because it is a mathematical principle; it says that
there is a numerical quantity which does not change when something
happens. It is not a description of a mechanism, or anything concrete;
it is just a strange fact that we can calculate some number and when
we finish watching nature go through her tricks and calculate the
number again, it is the same."

"It is important to realize that in physics today, we have no
knowledge of what
energy is. We do not have a picture that energy comes in little blobs
of a definite
amount. It is not that way. However, there are formulas for
calculating some
numerical quantity, and when we add it all together it gives "28"'—
always the
same number. It is an abstract thing in that it does not tell us the
mechanism or
the reasons for the various formulas."

From: Richard Feynman. "Six easy pieces"

Miguel LU6ETJ

Sorry, I forget to made clear that my comment not reference Cecil
recent post mentioning "real power" in mathematical sense, referencing
complex numbers. :)

Miguel

what happens to reflected energy ?
 

On 29 jun, 15:08, Cecil Moore wrote:
On Jun 29, 12:54*pm, Jim Lux wrote:

photons can flow through a dielectric.. isn't that what EM propagation
is, after all?

Yes, after I posted it, I realized that it was a rhetorical question.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

I learnt displacement current inside a condenser it was = eo* d(phi E)/
dt no EM radiation inside the condenser to made that current possible,
in any case EM radiation in physical condenser will come out from
condenser to the rest of the universe :).
I also learnt photons was necessary to explain certain energy
interchange phenomena such as fotoelectric effect or subatomic
particle interactions, wave-particle duality for me means "duality",
not "wave kaput" :) to account for EM wave well explainable
phenomenom.
As it was taught to me (I am not physicist), quantum nature of a 80 m
wavelenght energy it is useless for calculations and invisible to our
instrument resolution because its immensely large quantic number. Is
it wrong?

Miguel LU6ETJ

what happens to reflected energy ?
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote
...
On Jun 29, 11:44 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
You should decide: EM or electrons. The mixture is fun.

That's an interesting idea to which I don't know the answer. Let me
rephrase the question:

Although it is known that electrons cannot flow through the dielectric
of an ideal capacitor, how about photons? Can RF photons flow directly
through the dielectric layer of a capacitor? If they can, it would
explain a lot of things.

Photons are in the real light. The natural light is not coherent. It is
emitted in the portions (packets).
Radio waves are emitted continously. Radar waves are in the portions.

Radio waves and the light photons flow directly through the dielectric layer
of a capacitor.

The difference between EM and electrons is in compressibility.
Electrons are compressed in the ends of the open circuit (condenser and
antenna). There the voltage is doubled (at least). Alternate electric field
is created. It is radio wave. The longitudinal electric wave.

In Heaviside EM (hydraulic analogy) incompressible current (real +
displacement) create the magnetic whirl.
The oscillating magnetic whirl is the transverse wave.

Electrons are simple. Heaviside did not understand Maxwell and made a
complete mess.
S*

what happens to reflected energy ?
 

On Jun 30, 1:30*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
The difference between EM and electrons is in compressibility.
Electrons are compressed in the ends of the open circuit (condenser and
antenna). There the voltage is doubled (at least). Alternate electric field
is created. It is radio wave. The longitudinal electric wave.

Then shouldn't we all expect a condensor to be as good a radiator of
EM waves as a dipole?