Cecil Moore wrote:
Roy Lewallen wrote:

... and the power in the 50 ohm source resistor is 8 watts.


Sorry, Roy, the Thevenin equivalent source model expressly forbids
you from making that assumption. You are going to have to do better
than that. What is the DC power input to the source electronics?

Who said anything about a Thevenin equivalent? The circuit I proposed
isn't intended to be an equivalent of anything. It's a very simple
circuit made with components whose characteristics are well defined and
well known. The source is an AC steady state source (which I naively
assumed was obvious). There is no DC power input to it. There are no
"source electronics" -- there are no electronics at all. All elements in
my example are simple electrical circuit components, as described in any
elementary electrical circuits textbook.

There are 18 watts of "reverse power" in the transmission line, as
calculated by those who embrace this concept. The source resistor
matches the Z0 of the line. The source resistor dissipates 8 watts.
Nothing "forbids" calculation of the dissipation of the resistor -- it's
V^2/R, I^2*R, or V*I, take your choice. Any EE freshman, and I'd like to
think most amateurs, including you, should be able to calculate it. The
total power from the source equals the sum of the dissipation in the two
resistors. The power dissipated by the load is the difference between
the "forward power" and "reverse power", as you can easily see with a
small amount of simple arithmetic. There is nothing "forbidden" about
this simple circuit, except perhaps explanation by means of your theory.

Where's the "reverse power" going?

Any theory that doesn't work in a circuit composed of simple elemental
electrical circuit elements is suspect to say the least. Are you saying
yours doesn't?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL