Reg Edwards wrote:
Cecil and others, even authors of books, have said -
- - - - |rho|^2 cannot be greater than 1.0 - - - -

Would you change your minds if I describe a
reflection-coefficient bridge, which anybody can
construct, which accurately measures values of | rho |
up to its greatest possible value in transmission lines
of 2.414 There's no catch!

Note that I didn't say |rho| couldn't be greater than one.
I said |rho|^2, the power reflection coefficient, cannot
be greater than 1.0 for a passive load, i.e. you cannot
get more power out of a passive load than you put into it.
It follows that the conservation of energy principle will
not allow the square of rho to be the power reflection
coefficient if rho is greater than 1.0.

For some reason Dr Slick has remained silent to my
acceptance of his challenge to find such an instrument.
Perhaps he's gone away to think about it.

There is an answer here. I suspect you can answer it by
answering the following question about s-parameters.
Consider the following example:

Source--50 ohm feedline--+--1/2WL 150 ohm feedline--50 ohm load

s11 is 0.5 but rho, on the 50 ohm feedline, is zero.

|s11|^2 is defined in the HP AN 95-1 Ap note as the ratio of
the "Power reflected from the network input" to the "Power
incident on the network input" Assuming we have 100 watts of
power incident on the network input, the power reflected from
the network input would have to be 25 watts. But the actual
reflected power on the 50 ohm feedline measures to be zero
watts. Hint: |s12|^2 must also be taken into account.
--
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 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Dear Cec,

Your arithmetic is abominable. ;o) Dr Slick's
vanishing-act was a better tactic.

Your only avenue of escape is to prove the | rho |
meter gives incorrect meter readings.

That's likely to be difficult.

The meter is based on precisely the same simple
principle as your common-or-garden SWR+Fwd Power+Refl
Power meter. In fact, its scale, instead of | rho |,
can be simultaneousy calibrated in terms of SWR from 1
to infinity. And 1 million professional housewives
supported by trusted ARRL handbooks can't be wrong.

By the way, does that Texas vinyard you mentioned have
a website? ;o)

---
Yours, Reg, G4FGQ

Reg Edwards wrote:
Your only avenue of escape is to prove the | rho |
meter gives incorrect meter readings.

Nope, your only avenue of escape is to prove that a passive
load can reflect more than the incident power. :-)

By the way, does that Texas vinyard you mentioned have
a website? ;o)

I don't know but I will check. Heck, I might even try a
bottle to see if it's worth sending to you.
--
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 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

"Reg Edwards" wrote in message ...
Dear Cec,

Your arithmetic is abominable. ;o) Dr Slick's
vanishing-act was a better tactic.

Your only avenue of escape is to prove the | rho |
meter gives incorrect meter readings.



ok, Reg, i look forward with great interest on your
imaginary passive circuit which can reflect more power than
what you feed it (incident power).

I can't wait to hook it up to see more reflected power than
incident on my DAIWA meter, that would be very interesting.


Slick

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 15:33:56 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:

a vast assemblage of text snipped.

Hi Cecil,

So, do you want the bridge description
Or
Not?

This question was even simpler than that of two resistors and the hank
of wire. I can look forward to the amusement of how long a side
thread this may develop into.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:

wrote:

a vast assemblage of text snipped.

Hi Cecil,

So, do you want the bridge description
Or
Not?

Since you snipped my posting, I have no idea what it was all about.
--
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 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 18:50:08 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:
Since you snipped my posting, I have no idea what it was all about.

Hi Cecil,

I didn't this time, and I doubt you are any further ahead. Perhaps
you suffer from the Motorola syndrome of confusion. ;-)

So, is your response to the offer of the bridge description
Yes?
or
No?

(Consult google to fill the short attention span problems.)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

So, do you want the bridge description or not?

Richard Clark, KB7QHC

============================

Rich, pleased to receive a message from you succinct
enough to read. ;o)

But it looks like there's at least two contestants who
have now vanished from the thread.

Keep stirring it up.

On Thu, 4 Sep 2003 00:38:54 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards"
wrote:

So, do you want the bridge description or not?

Richard Clark, KB7QHC

============================

Rich, pleased to receive a message from you succinct
enough to read. ;o)

But it looks like there's at least two contestants who
have now vanished from the thread.

Keep stirring it up.


How do you mix an ingredient of one?

That query alone will bring in at least a dozen recipes. ;-)