Ian White GM3SEK wrote:
Those are the reasons for the point I'm always wanting to make about the
Bird: it cannot be called in evidence to "prove" anything about forward
and reflected power, because it is entirely dependent on the theories
under debate.

But that makes you a little like the people who believe that man has
never walked on the moon. No amount of proof is ever sufficient. And
indeed, 1000 years from now, most of what we think we know now will be
obsolete.

So all we can do is operate within the laws of physics as we, the human
race, understand them to exist at the present time. The debate is
underway.

Can photonic wave energy "slosh" around side-to-side at sub-light
speeds?

Can the laws of physics embodied in the wave reflection model and
conservation of energy/momentum principles really be considered to be
"gobblygook" after faithfully serving man during a century of
scientific discovery?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

On 22 Jun 2005 12:02:38 -0700, "Cecil Moore"
wrote:
Can photonic wave energy "slosh" around side-to-side at sub-light
speeds?
How many errors can you count here?
where the number of words = n
n!

Cecil Moore wrote:
Ian White GM3SEK wrote:
Those are the reasons for the point I'm always wanting to make about the
Bird: it cannot be called in evidence to "prove" anything about forward
and reflected power, because it is entirely dependent on the theories
under debate.

But that makes you a little like the people who believe that man has
never walked on the moon. No amount of proof is ever sufficient.

No, it's not even remotely like that.


So all we can do is operate within the laws of physics as we, the human
race, understand them to exist at the present time.

And the laws of scientific logic, for example: sticking to your initial
assumptions; and being very careful to avoid circular arguments.

The debate is
underway.



--
73 from Ian GM3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek

Ian White GM3SEK wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
So all we can do is operate within the laws of physics as we, the human
race, understand them to exist at the present time.

And the laws of scientific logic, for example: sticking to your initial
assumptions; and being very careful to avoid circular arguments.

OK, let's take an example. The source (SGCL) is a signal generator with
a circulator and 50 ohm resistor circulator load. The load is a 291.5
ohm resistor.

100W SGCL---Bird---50 ohm lossless coax---291.5 ohm load

We measure 50 watts delivered to the 291.5 ohm load. We measure 50
watts dissipated in the 50 ohm circulator load resistor. The Bird reads
100 watts forward power and 50 watts reflected power. Modulation proves
that the 50 watts absorbed in the circulator resistor has made a round
trip to the 291.5 ohm load and back. Everything obeys the laws of
physics embodied in the wave reflection model and the conservation of
energy/momentum principles. What else is there to know?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp