Richard Clark wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
A power company engineer would be confused

You know some pretty stupid engineers ...

Typical of you to call someone stupid when they simply
come from a different field and have different conventions
from your personal sacred cow definitions.

Which one is the vector?

P^ = E^ x H^ (where '^' denotes vectors) The vector
product (cross product) of two vectors is also a vector.
If E^ and H^ are vectors and their vector product is
power, then that power is a vector with magnitude and
direction. (I appologize if that fact bothers physicists.)

Does your power company deliver your 60Hz via laser?

The wavelength of 60Hz power is about 3000 miles but
it obeys Maxwell's equations just like all other
electromagnetic energy from DC to gamma rays.
--
73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 11:05:24 -0500, Marcel scrubbing vigorously in the
air:

Typical of you to call someone stupid when they simply
come from a different field

It stands to reason when that engineer changes the questions to suit
the only answers he knows.

Only a stupid engineer would use the cross product to figure out 60Hz
transmission line delivery. Really, I too have a library, thick
volumes including very detailed specifics of 60Hz power, and they
seemed to have built an entire industry without worrying about
direction vectors. Luckily they didn't employ flip-flop designers to
build linear systems.

Ask him what is in his
transmission lines and he will say power, some of it reactive.

The topic of reactive LOADS (not lines) is discussed at great length
and nowhere is it stated that transmission lines have power IN THEM.
However, your impoverished representation of the power industry
knowledge serves only your lame theories.

Which one is the vector?

P^ = E^ x H^

The very first formula from the Standard Handbook for Electrical
Engineers, Section 11, Power Transmission, Electrical Calculations:
I = P / E (1)
no vector notation used or needed.

(I appologize if that fact bothers physicists.)
Your guilt has been duly noted.

Standard Handbook for Electrical Engineers, Section 11, Power
Transmission, Electrical Calculations, Para 13, Transmission Line
calculations:
"Analytical solutions of problems involving vector quantities may
be made by resolving each vector into two components - R and jX"
no vector notation used or needed, and certainly direction and power
are wholly missing. This is entirely congruent with my statement.

Standard Handbook for Electrical Engineers, Section 11, Power
Transmission, Para. 33, Charts and Diagrams:
Figures 19 & 20, Perrine-Baum diagrams.
no direction vectors whatever.

Standard Handbook for Electrical Engineers, Section 11, Power
Transmission, Para. 36, Charts and Diagrams:
Figures 22, Mershon diagrams.
no direction vectors whatever.

Standard Handbook for Electrical Engineers, Section 11, Power
Transmission, Para. 44, General Features of Design:
no direction vectors whatever.

Standard Handbook for Electrical Engineers, Section 11, Power
Transmission, Para. 69, System Disturbances:
no direction vectors whatever.

The wavelength of 60Hz power is about 3000 miles

Standard Handbook for Electrical Engineers, Section 11, Power
Transmission, Para. 73, A Line whose length is a quarter wave:
L = 183000 / 4f
no direction vectors whatever.

FINALLY! The only explicit direction vector (but still no math vector
actually used):

Standard Handbook for Electrical Engineers, Section 11, Power
Transmission, Para. 102, Calculation of Horizontal Stress; Para. 106,
Example of stress-sag calculation; Para. 111 The Thomas chart for sag;
Para. 129, Flexible Towers ...

Well, that's just about the end of it (this tome is only 2000 pages
long and undoubtedly missed your cross product somewhere among all
this useless information).

On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 13:07:29 -0700, Richard Clark
wrote:
yet another tantalizing, unanswerable question: What wavelength is Glare?

Dear Readers,

In this vein, and from contemporary reports from the NY Times comes:
"It's the old story of the C.E.O. who asks the chief marketing
officer, 'What happens if I take 10 percent out of the marketing
budget?' and the C.M.O. replies, 'I don't know,' so the C.E.O.
says: 'O.K., I'll take 20 percent.' "
...
"Marketers are tracking all kinds of data and they still can't
answer basic questions" about advertising accountability..."

This, of course, returns us to the sage advice offered by me
previously:
"Visually compare glare reductions before you buy anything."
especially when the salesman in boots tells you that you cannot see
reflections TEN TIMES BRIGHTER THAN THE SUN.

Salesman: "Any totally cancelled Glare that you will see is Black."

Turning lemons into lemonade:
"Glare that is TEN TIMES BLACKER THAN THE SUN!"
Let's just hope it doesn't turn up in toothpaste. ;-)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Cecil Moore wrote:

For engineers, the direction of the arrow for the Power
Flow Vector in joules/sec is generally accepted to be the
same as the direction of the joules.

I am an engineer, Cecil. I just happen to work in the field of physics.
I could be wrong, but I don't think a Bird wattmeter measures or
displays Power Flow Vector.

From the IEEE Dictionary: "power-flow vector - Vector-
characterizing energy propagation caused by a wave and
giving magnitude and direction of power per unit-area
propagating in the wave."


Please note the "*DIRECTION OF POWER* ... *PROPAGATING*
in the wave", a direct contradiction to your above assertion.

The power measured at the source somehow finds its way to the
load in spite of not having any direction (according to you. :-)

Well, it's true for me and probably for most other people who have a
grasp of the subject. It's actually energy which does the moving.
Power is just the rate at which energy finds its way there.

It's like this. Let's say you're riding your Harley through town at 50
MPH and somebody pulls out of a side street right in front of you. Does
the speed of your motorcycle collide with the car, or does your
motorcycle collide with it?

73, ac6xg

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 11:22:52 -0700, Jim Kelley
wrote:

Does
the speed of your motorcycle collide with the car, or does your
motorcycle collide with it?

Hi Jim,

Classic Insurance claim form entry:
"I was just driving down the road when, suddenly,
this tree appeared in front of me and hit me."

I think we have the same class of claimant in the process here.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:
Only a stupid engineer would use the cross product to figure out 60Hz
transmission line delivery.

Uhhhhh Richard, engineers who understand Poynting Vectors
are not stupid. Do you understand Poynting Vectors? 60 Hz
transmission lines have an E-field and an H-field. Those
fields are vectors. The cross product of those fields is
the power-flow vector. (I hope your upper lip survives that
fact of engineering physics.) Every power engineer that I have
ever known is capable of discussing "power flow" without batting
an eye. However, being a member of MENSA allows me to understand
both sides of the argument. :-) Are you a member of MENSA?

However, your impoverished representation of the power industry
knowledge serves only your lame theories.

It appears that what is impoverished is your understanding of
the power industry (and many other industries).

P^ = E^ x H^

The very first formula from the Standard Handbook for Electrical

The very first formula in my "Electronics Equations Handbook"
is R = pl/a. The importance of being first escapes me. Are we
to accept the first and reject the rest?

Engineers, Section 11, Power Transmission, Electrical Calculations:
I = P / E (1)
no vector notation used or needed.

Mr. Poynting is rolling his eyes at you. :-) I have heard that
same argument before. "I understand Ohm's Law! Everything else
is gobbledegook!" (Never mind that the poster cannot even spell
"gobbledygook" correctly.)

This is entirely congruent with my statement.

Which is more important? - congruence or relevance?
(a rhetorical question - no answer required)

no direction vectors whatever.

You left out: there's no direction vectors in "Alice In
Wonderland". (No doubt your favorite technical reference.)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Richard Clark wrote:

Richard Clark wrote:
yet another tantalizing, unanswerable question: What wavelength is Glare?

Dear Readers,

Richard, I am really worried about you arguing with your own
postings. The wavelength of glare from a single-frequency
coherent laser is obviously the same as the wavelength of the
laser's primary output beam. What else could it possibly be?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 14:00:51 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Uhhhhh Richard ... Are you a member of MENSA?

Classic bookends.

The very first formula in my "Electronics Equations Handbook"
is R = pl/a. The importance of being first escapes me.

:-)

You left out: there's no direction vectors in "Alice In Wonderland"

From my references for Power Distribution Engineers abstracted to your
need of vectors in a fantasy.

Even when you can't answer your own topic, it is still amusing,
nonetheless.

Jim Kelley wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
For engineers, the direction of the arrow for the Power
Flow Vector in joules/sec is generally accepted to be the
same as the direction of the joules.

I am an engineer, Cecil. I just happen to work in the field of physics.
I could be wrong, but I don't think a Bird wattmeter measures or
displays Power Flow Vector.

On the contrary, Jim, it measures and displays the Power Flow
Vector as explained in Ramo & Whinnery. The arrow on the slug
indicates the direction of the Power Flow Vector. The reading
of the meter indicates the magnitude of the Power Flow Vector.
The Bird is indirectly measuring [(E^for) x (H^for)] as forward
power and [(E^ref) x (H^ref)] as reflected power.

Well, it's true for me and probably for most other people who have a
grasp of the subject. It's actually energy which does the moving. Power
is just the rate at which energy finds its way there.

But everyone except you and a handful of others recognize the
fact that RF joules/sec and RF joules are virtually interchangeable
since EM energy cannot be stored in any condition other than as
EM energy traveling at the speed of light and real time cannot be
stopped or slowed down or speeded up (under normal circumstances).
Your statement that "there is no before and after" is a clue
to your misconceptions. If there truly was no before and after,
the modulation of our RF signals would never make it to the antenna.

It's like this. Let's say you're riding your Harley through town at 50
MPH ...

"I couldn't possibly be going 50 MPH - I only left home ten
minutes ago." :-) Believe it or not, that's exactly your argument.

Are you going to deny that the cross product of E^ x H^ is a
vector? You will have 1000 buried mathematicians rolling their
eyes in their graves (according to Richard C).
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Cecil Moore wrote:

Jim Kelley wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:

For engineers, the direction of the arrow for the Power
Flow Vector in joules/sec is generally accepted to be the
same as the direction of the joules.


I am an engineer, Cecil. I just happen to work in the field of
physics. I could be wrong, but I don't think a Bird wattmeter measures
or displays Power Flow Vector.


On the contrary, Jim, it measures and displays the Power Flow
Vector as explained in Ramo & Whinnery. The arrow on the slug
indicates the direction of the Power Flow Vector. The reading
of the meter indicates the magnitude of the Power Flow Vector.
The Bird is indirectly measuring [(E^for) x (H^for)] as forward
power and [(E^ref) x (H^ref)] as reflected power.

Even though it doesn't actually measure any of those things, or the density.

Well, it's true for me and probably for most other people who have a
grasp of the subject. It's actually energy which does the moving.
Power is just the rate at which energy finds its way there.


But everyone except you and a handful of others recognize the
fact that RF joules/sec and RF joules are virtually interchangeable
since EM energy cannot be stored in any condition other than as
EM energy traveling at the speed of light and real time cannot be
stopped or slowed down or speeded up (under normal circumstances).
Your statement that "there is no before and after" is a clue
to your misconceptions. If there truly was no before and after,
the modulation of our RF signals would never make it to the antenna.

Yes. Everybody except me knows that Joules = Joules/sec. Must be
because there's no such thing as time. Right Cecil? ;-)

It's like this. Let's say you're riding your Harley through town at
50 MPH ...


"I couldn't possibly be going 50 MPH - I only left home ten
minutes ago." :-) Believe it or not, that's exactly your argument.

'Not' would be correct.

Are you going to deny that the cross product of E^ x H^ is a
vector? You will have 1000 buried mathematicians rolling their
eyes in their graves (according to Richard C).

I think I'll stick with just saying that power, as a scaler quantity
does not have direction and cannot be negative. I have no argument with
you about vector quantities - as much as you'd like folks to believe
that I do. Thanks but no thanks, bubba.

73, ac6xg