And that's the whole crux of the problem -- the mistaken assumption that
the "reflected power" can never exceed the "forward power". Once you
accept that erroneous idea as a fact, you're stuck with some very
problematic dilemmas that no amount of fancy pseudo-math and alternate
reflection coefficient equations can extract you from. A very simple
derivation, posted here and never rationally disputed, clearly shows
that the total average power consists of "forward power" (computed from
Vf and If), "reflected power" (computed from Vr and Ir), and another
average power term (from Vf * Ir and Vr * If) whenever Z0 is complex.
The only solid and inflexible rule is that these three always have to
add up to the total average power. Not that the "forward power" always
has to equal or exceed the "reflected power". It's in that false
assumption that the problem lies.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

wrote:

So is kurokawa proposing two completely different rhos?
One for computing voltages and currents and the other for power?

This could work, I supposed, but this discussion started with an
assertion that 'classic' rho was WRONG because it resulted in
more reflected power than incident. My contention is that
'classic' rho is correct and yields the correct voltages regardless
of the results obtained when |rho|^2 is used to predict powers.

If kurokawa wishes to introduce a new rho to solve these problems
in a different manner, that is fine, but he would have reduced
confusion significantly if he had not called it rho.

...Keith