On Jun 18, 1:28*pm, K1TTT wrote:
Do you agree that wave reflection can cause a redistribution of wave
energy?

no. *wave reflection causes current and voltage waves to change
direction, magnitude, and phase.

The question asked by the original poster is, exactly what happens to
the reflected energy? Optical physicists know that a reversal of
energy flow direction accompanies the change in direction of the E-
field and the B-field which changes the direction of the ExB Poynting
vector, i.e. changes the "direction and momentum" of the EM wave
according to Eugene Hecht. How can you not know that a voltage/current
wave requires energy? How can the voltage and current change direction
without the energy changing direction? Does supernatural intervention
separate the voltage and current from the ExH energy?

Maybe you should reference, "Fields and Waves ...", by Ramo and
Whinnery where they describe the forward and reflected power-density
Poynting vectors.

Do you agree that superposition can cause a redistribution of wave
energy?

your observed 'redistribution of wave energy' is a results of
superposition of current and voltage waves and then another
calculation to convert the sum to power and another calculation to
integrate the energy.

Is that a yes or no answer? The same thing happens with light waves in
free space where voltage and current are completely irrelevant.

Do you agree that wave reflection and wave superposition are two
different mechanisms?

of course, i've never said otherwise.

You sure implied otherwise. Why did you argue with me when I said they
are two different mechanisms in action to redistribute energy, (1)
reflection and (2) superposition? You said superposition is not the
second mechanism.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

On 18 jun, 16:02, Cecil Moore wrote:
On Jun 18, 1:28*pm, K1TTT wrote:

Do you agree that wave reflection can cause a redistribution of wave
energy?

no. *wave reflection causes current and voltage waves to change
direction, magnitude, and phase.

The question asked by the original poster is, exactly what happens to
the reflected energy? Optical physicists know that a reversal of
energy flow direction accompanies the change in direction of the E-
field and the B-field which changes the direction of the ExB Poynting
vector, i.e. changes the "direction and momentum" of the EM wave
according to Eugene Hecht. How can you not know that a voltage/current
wave requires energy? How can the voltage and current change direction
without the energy changing direction? Does supernatural intervention
separate the voltage and current from the ExH energy?

Maybe you should reference, "Fields and Waves ...", by Ramo and
Whinnery where they describe the forward and reflected power-density
Poynting vectors.

Do you agree that superposition can cause a redistribution of wave
energy?

your observed 'redistribution of wave energy' is a results of
superposition of current and voltage waves and then another
calculation to convert the sum to power and another calculation to
integrate the energy.

Is that a yes or no answer? The same thing happens with light waves in
free space where voltage and current are completely irrelevant.

Do you agree that wave reflection and wave superposition are two
different mechanisms?

of course, i've never said otherwise.

You sure implied otherwise. Why did you argue with me when I said they
are two different mechanisms in action to redistribute energy, (1)
reflection and (2) superposition? You said superposition is not the
second mechanism.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

"-Do you agree that wave reflection can cause a redistribution of
wave
energy?-"
"-No. wave reflection causes current and voltage waves to change
direction, magnitude, and phase.-"

You see? Babel curse...! One ask about energy other answer with
current, voltage, etc. (same thing divided in pieces).

Do you agree cars have engines?, ¡Of course not! ¡cars have
crankshaft, cylinder, piston, rods...!
Thus you are never going to reach an agreement

On Jun 18, 8:23*pm, lu6etj wrote:
On 18 jun, 16:02, Cecil Moore wrote:





On Jun 18, 1:28*pm, K1TTT wrote:

Do you agree that wave reflection can cause a redistribution of wave
energy?

no. *wave reflection causes current and voltage waves to change
direction, magnitude, and phase.

The question asked by the original poster is, exactly what happens to
the reflected energy? Optical physicists know that a reversal of
energy flow direction accompanies the change in direction of the E-
field and the B-field which changes the direction of the ExB Poynting
vector, i.e. changes the "direction and momentum" of the EM wave
according to Eugene Hecht. How can you not know that a voltage/current
wave requires energy? How can the voltage and current change direction
without the energy changing direction? Does supernatural intervention
separate the voltage and current from the ExH energy?

Maybe you should reference, "Fields and Waves ...", by Ramo and
Whinnery where they describe the forward and reflected power-density
Poynting vectors.

Do you agree that superposition can cause a redistribution of wave
energy?

your observed 'redistribution of wave energy' is a results of
superposition of current and voltage waves and then another
calculation to convert the sum to power and another calculation to
integrate the energy.

Is that a yes or no answer? The same thing happens with light waves in
free space where voltage and current are completely irrelevant.

Do you agree that wave reflection and wave superposition are two
different mechanisms?

of course, i've never said otherwise.

You sure implied otherwise. Why did you argue with me when I said they
are two different mechanisms in action to redistribute energy, (1)
reflection and (2) superposition? You said superposition is not the
second mechanism.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

"-Do you agree that wave reflection can cause a redistribution of
wave
energy?-"
"-No. *wave reflection causes current and voltage waves to change
direction, magnitude, and phase.-"

You see? Babel curse...! One ask about energy other answer with
current, voltage, etc. (same thing divided in pieces).

Do you agree cars have engines?, ¡Of course not! ¡cars have
crankshaft, cylinder, piston, rods...!
Thus you are never going to reach an agreement - Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

it wouldn't be any fun if we agreed on everything!

On Jun 18, 3:23*pm, lu6etj wrote:
Do you agree cars have engines?

Some cars have engines but some cars have motors. :-)
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com