On Thu, 11 Sep 2003 09:13:21 +0300, "pez" wrote:

Unfortunately enough
my proof on this subject is
_Wrong_ and rejected.

Obviously,
the relation

-Tan(|t0|) + Sqrt(Tan(|to|)^2 + 1) =
= Sqrt[(1 + Sin(|to|)/(1 - Sin(|to|)]

is *not* an identity
but an equation one,
which has probably
only the zero as solution
in the [-45 , 45] degrees
interval of Zo Argument.

For example,
put to = 45 degrees
to get the result

-1 = 1

But further,
it is not just this.

The whole matter of the validation of
the Principle of Conservation of Energy
_at_any_point_
of a
Uniform Transmission Line with Complex Z0,
has to be put under investigation,
starting,
once again,
from the beginning.

I am terribly sorry for any inconvenience.

Sincerely,

pez
SV7BAX


Hello,

Identity or equation. This is a matter of importance to you alone as
others would have moved right past it without close attention (this
includes me too). The significance of it is not explained which is
more important (part of knowing what to discard from writing). In
other words, if it is a deep layer in the logic, then including it
adds nothing of insight. If it is pivotal, important, then the rest
of the material should be clipped away.

As for "Conservation of Energy" this should be a test at the end, not
a goal. Too many correspondents start out proving this "law" and
offering nothing notable along the way. Stasis offers a sure proof of
the "law" and is very boring. We endure too many static sermons
already ;-)

I have to admit that in my other response (other correspondence) to
your notice of rejection; that I mistook that to be rejection by
others. However, I also offered that the merit of that rejection
marks the critic. You, again, show a very commendable trait that
associates you with consistent logic.

Develop the math for Web publication, and argue it here by reference.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC