Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Jim Kelley wrote:
The waves themselves are indeed identical, i.e. you can't measure a difference between them on a transmission line. But one might indeed be transferring energy while the other is not. How can two waves that are identical possibly be doing different things. It doesn't make any sense at all. Waves cannot exist without intrinsic energy!!! If any wave is destroyed, it gives up its energy. There is simply no other place for the energy to go. How does the wave know ahead of time whether it is going to encounter a dissipative load or not? It obviously cannot know ahead of time so all waves with the same V and I in phase carry the same amount of energy. This is a misconception on your part. I don't claim anything has to know anything. That is your claim, and I don't agree. I think it's silly. That the wave has to be smart falls out from your assertions. Your waves appear to exist without intrinsic energy so they have to know ahead of time whether to exist without energy or not. Only a wave existing without energy could be destroyed and not give up any energy in the process. But you need to understand that it is only your theory. It is an unproven, and unsupported theory. I've tried to come up with support for it, but find none. Please reference the cross-posting from sci.physics.electromag. Somebody predicted that those guys would tear me apart. On the contrary, they tend to agree with me. It can be shown that at the first boundary, two reflected waves destructively interfere, producing zero reflected energy. It can also be seen at that boundary that the two waves traveling in the forward direction yield all of the forward energy due to their constructive interference. Those reflected waves not only destructively interfere, they are destroyed so they MUST give up any intrinsic energy in the waves. Nothing else is possible. Yes, you can say the amount cancelled in the reflected direction equals the amount of enhancement in the forward direction. But that doesn't mean energy had to turn around in order to accomplish that. Huh??? "Reflected" to "forward" isn't a turn around? Can I have a hit off whatever you are smokin'? :-) That would only be true if energy were indeed traveling in the reverse direction to begin with. When we realize it's not, there's nothing left to account for Cecil. If reflected energy from a mismatched load is not traveling in the reverse direction, pray tell what direction is it traveling in? I can see you haven't referenced the reflected power flow vector. There's no conservation of energy problem to solve. There certainly is in your scenario. The reflected energy doesn't ever change directions but it somehow joins the forward wave anyway. Can you spell B-A-F-F-L-E-G-A-B? We know reflected energy is traveling rearward from a mismatched load. Your mantras cannot change that fact of physics. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =----- |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Cecil's Math a Blunder? | Antenna | |||
Cecil's Math | Antenna |