| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#2
June 19th 05, 06:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
"Reg Edwards" wrote in message ... If Rho (or Gamma) is treated as being a magnitude with an angle which, as one moves backwards along the line, may fall in any of the four quadrants, all those futile arguments about whether or not to use Z or Z* fall by the wayside. Just proceed with calculations in the normal, mathematically legitimate manner and you will arrive at the correct results or conclusions. If you disagree with results or conclusions, and there are no mathematical errors, then it is YOU who must be wrong. It's all part of the learning process. And the magnitude of Rho CAN exceed unity. ---- Reg. Amen to that, Reg, Walt, W2DU |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Calculus not needed (was: Reflection Coefficient Smoke Clears a Bit) | Antenna | |||
| Reflection Coefficient Challenge Solved | Antenna | |||
| Reflection Coefficient Smoke Clears a Bit | Antenna | |||
| Derivation of the Reflection Coefficient? | Antenna | |||
| Mother Nature's reflection coefficient... | Antenna | |||
Threaded Mode
