Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#13
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jun 27, 4:27*pm, Cecil Moore wrote:
On Jun 27, 2:23*pm, Keith Dysart wrote: Example 1: Step function applied to a transmission line. After the * * * * * *line settles, a forward and reflected voltage wave * * * * * *continue on the line but no energy is being transferred. As far as I am concerned, if Maxwell's equations don't work on an example, it might as well be ignored. There is nothing during DC steady-state that allows Maxwell's equations to work because there are no EM waves during DC steady-state. Why don't you already know that? I always thought that Maxwell's equations were more complete than that and worked all the way down to DC. Two of them do not even include time and nothing says that a derivative with respect to time can't be 0. I can take your approach and do you one better. Please prove that you exist. If you cannot prove that you exist, then nothing you say is of any consequence. See, I can do it also. From the above, you have proved that I exist. Thank you. Example 2: On a line with infinite VSWR no energy crosses a * * * * * *voltage minimum or maximum. Completely false assumption. You are back to asserting that since the north-bound traffic equals the south-bound traffic on the Golden Gate Bridge that there is no traffic and no bridge maintenance is required. When are you going to give up on that irrational wet dream of yours? No *NET* energy crosses at a voltage zero or current zero point. That doesn't make the north-bound energy equal to zero and doesn't make the south-bound energy equal to zero. It just makes them equal. Just because there is no NET traffic flow on the Golden Gate Bridge doesn't mean there is zero traffic flow in both directions. Please stop clowning around with such absurb notions. I suppose, but then you have to give up on P(t)=V(t)*I(t), generally considered to be a rather fundamental equation. Example 3: With the 1/8 wavelength line described in * * * * * *http://www.w5dxp.com/nointfr.htmtheenergy can not be * * * * * *properly accounted for on a moment by moment basis. There is no conservation of power principle. There is no mention of power above; simply energy. Are you saying that conservation of energy only applies some of the time? If you would track the RF joules and the conversion of RF joules to heat instead of the joules/ second, everything would become clear to you. As it is, you are laboring under some serious misconceptions about the laws of physics. Power simply doesn't balance within a single cycle - because it doesn't have to - because there is no conservation of power principle. In your example, the RF energy does seem to disappear and re-appear, when tracked on a moment by moment basis. People who don't learn from their mistakes are doomed to commit the same mistakes over and over. Keith, you seem to be all output and no input. Please enable your input channels for a change. Well, it would help if you could actually find and articulate a flaw in http://sites.google.com/site/keithdysart/radio6. ....Keith |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Reflected Energy | Antenna | |||
Reflected power ? | Antenna |