Jim Kelley wrote:
I just showed you how characteristic impedances are used to calculate
the reflection coefficient at '+'. But you can wish it into the
cornfield if you like, Anthony. :-)

Absolutely no chance that you are simply wrong?

(150-50)/(150+50) is NOT rho.

Is it the reflection coefficient for a 50 ohm to 150 ohm impedance
discontinuity?

It is the 's11' reflection coefficient for that impedance discontinuity.
It is NOT the 'rho' at '+' unless the signals are orthogonal to each
other at '+'. Chances are they are not orthogonal.

I was mistaken to call that quantity "rho" in my article.
That quantity that I called "rho" is actually 's11' and I need to
update my article.

Since S-parameters were never even mentioned in your article, updating
it seems an understatement.

In my article, I called (Z1-Z0)/(Z1+Z0) the RHO(fv) and said it was
equal to S11. I should just have called it 'S11'. And I just checked
my web page. S11 is definitely mentioned in my article.
--
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! =-----