On 6/29/2011 11:04 AM, Cecil Moore wrote:
On Jun 25, 5:25 pm, John wrote:
But, it does. First, it causes the 50 ohms line (looking into the 291.4
ohms line to see a match due to the reflection. Second, the
re-reflection from that discontinuity is half of what maintains the
circulating energy on the line. The other half is the discontinuity of
the non-virtual load.

You are confusing reflection with wave cancellation (destructive
interference). I suggest that you study the separate sections on
reflections vs interference in "Optics", by Hecht. Nowhere does any
optical textbook indicate that superposition and reflection are the
same thing (and they are indeed NOT the same thing).

You always fall back on the optics thing, don't you?

On Jun 29, 2:13*pm, John S wrote:
You always fall back on the optics thing, don't you?

That's because optical physicists seem to be the only technical
people who understand interference effects. However, most of what one
needs to understand about the subject is contained in my Worldradio
energy article:

http://www.w5dxp.com/energy.htm
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

On Jul 1, 7:56*am, W5XP wrote:

My apologies to JAMES W GRIFFITH, W5XP. I apparently made a typo and
left out a 'D' from my call.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

"W5DXP" wrote in message
...

On Jul 1, 7:56 am, W5XP wrote:

My apologies to JAMES W GRIFFITH, W5XP. I apparently made a typo and
left out a 'D' from my call.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com
****************
-
LOL....I saw the callsign, knew something was wrong, but didn't know what.
......that happens at my age
--Wayne
W5GIE (exiled to W6)