On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 10:14:21 -0700 (PDT), Richard Fry
wrote:

Would you please respond in your own words

Hi Richard,

I conform to Mendenhall to the specific statement I responded to.

If you believe

What I believe has been succinctly laid out in my subscribing to
Mendenhall's explicit statement.

THEN PLEASE EXPLAIN WHY

I don't see that elaboration is going to improve what has been
presented.

Yes, it is a difficult concept that many struggle with and few have
had experience in making a sufficiently accurate determination of.
Consult Walt's 333 line posting and examine how experience comes to
bear and through my recitations reveal the dovetail fit to theory.

The Only Explanation Possible:

Here's a modest proposal, Mendenhall constructed a power amplifier
that is within the technical grasp of many here to achieve at a modest
workbench. The design is quite spartan. The design is quite
understressed (there is nothing "forcing" a conclusion). The design
conforms to all engineering standards.

Build your own. [It feels strange to have to offer that option to a
group of Hams.]

Having this amplifier before you, observe all the variables, play with
them. Measure their impact on NOhms. Account for the heat with
direct measurement and note what does not conform to convention.

When that is finished the real work begins. Calibrate your tools and
repeat this for accuracy.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC