On Sat, 03 Oct 2015 16:00:53 -0400, rickman wrote:

On 10/3/2015 11:21 AM, Bernie wrote:
On Sat, 03 Oct 2015 14:12:56 +0100, gareth wrote:

If an antenna was really matched to its feeding objects, then all the
energy that was not radiated (as in short antennae, for example) would
pass back down iinto the feeding objects.

However, in order for there to be a reflection back into the antenna
from the feeding objects,
there has to be a mismatch (fundamental transmission line theory), and
therefore, for the energy fed to antennae to stay there, there has to
be a mismatch at the feeding point, so, therefore, the antenna is NOT
matched to its feeding objects.

You seem a bit confused, Gareth. Are you feeling OK?

Actually this one seems to make sense, then I realized it was a self
contradiction. He just proved that there has to be a mismatch in order
for the unradiated wave to remain in the antenna, but if it remains in
the antenna it must end up radiated... this just made my head explode!

Maybe he is smarter than we think!

Gareth insists that he's unfailingly honest and I have never known him to
admit he's wrong - misunderstood genius?