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

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