Cecil Moore wrote:

Given the reflected energy wave from a mismatched load barreling
toward the source at the speed of light, what phenomenon of physics
causes the energy and momentum in that wave to reverse direction?

The only way electronmagnetic energy can reverse direction is for it to
reflect.

Jim Kelley wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
Given the reflected energy wave from a mismatched load barreling
toward the source at the speed of light, what phenomenon of physics
causes the energy and momentum in that wave to reverse direction?

The only way electronmagnetic energy can reverse direction is for it to
reflect.

Exactly! So what does cause the reflection of reflected energy
at the match point? We know it happens and you have given us
no clue as to why it happens. When given a choice of one
explaination provided by me Vs no explaination provided by
you, which should the lurkers choose? Is it better to be
ignorant than to be wrong? Not in my book. I learn something
when I'm wrong. I am not about to settle for ignorance.
--
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:

Given the reflected energy wave from a mismatched load barreling
toward the source at the speed of light, what phenomenon of physics
causes the energy and momentum in that wave to reverse direction?


The only way electronmagnetic energy can reverse direction is for it
to reflect.


Exactly! So what does cause the reflection of reflected energy
at the match point? We know it happens and you have given us
no clue as to why it happens.

I assumed you knew. Reflection is caused when a wave encounters a
change in media of some kind.

When given a choice of one
explaination provided by me Vs no explaination provided by
you, which should the lurkers choose? Is it better to be
ignorant than to be wrong? Not in my book. I learn something
when I'm wrong. I am not about to settle for ignorance.

Even at the cost of making an enormous ass out of yourself in the
process. How noble.

ac6xg

Jim Kelley wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
Exactly! So what does cause the reflection of reflected energy
at the match point? We know it happens and you have given us
no clue as to why it happens.

I assumed you knew. Reflection is caused when a wave encounters a
change in media of some kind.

What I am asserting and you haven't even come close to disproving is
that wave cancellation of RF waves can cause reflections in exactly
the same way as wave cancellation of light waves has been proven
to cause reflections. What is it about the two following two
technical reference quotes that you don't understand? Oh, now
I remember. Your argument is that words don't mean what words
mean. With that argument you can disprove anything.

www.mellesgriot.com/products/optics/oc_2_1.htm

"Clearly, if the wavelength of the incident light and the thickness
of the film are such that a phase difference exists between reflections
of p, then reflected wavefronts interfere destructively, and overall
reflected intensity is a minimum. If the two reflections are of equal
amplitude, then this amplitude (and hence intensity) minimum will be
zero."

"In the absence of absorption or scatter, the principle of conservation
of energy indicates all 'lost' reflected intensity will appear as
enhanced intensity in the transmitted beam. The sum of the reflected and
transmitted beam intensities is always equal to the incident intensity.
This important fact has been confirmed experimentally."

http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/j...ons/index.html

"... when two waves of equal amplitude and wavelength that are 180-
degrees out of phase with each other meet, they are not actually
annihilated. All of the photon energy present in these waves must
somehow be recovered or redistributed in a new direction, according to
the law of energy conservation ... Instead, upon meeting, the photons
are redistributed to regions that permit constructive interference, so
the effect should be considered as a redistribution of light waves and
photon energy rather than the spontaneous construction or destruction
of light."

That's as clear as it can possibly be, Jim. Wave cancellation redistributes
the energy. In a transmission line, if energy is redistributed, it must
necessarily change directions. Would you believe there are only two
directions available in a transmission line? If not, please prove it.
--
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! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 19:10:40 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Jim Kelley wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
Exactly! So what does cause the reflection of reflected energy
at the match point? We know it happens and you have given us
no clue as to why it happens.

I assumed you knew. Reflection is caused when a wave encounters a
change in media of some kind.

What I am asserting and you haven't even come close to disproving is
that wave cancellation of RF waves can cause reflections in exactly
the same way as wave cancellation of light waves has been proven
to cause reflections.

Hi Jim,

THIS above is your legacy that I forecast not more than 30 hours ago.
Message-ID:

Four years to this point resolved nothing; four years more, having
allowed decimals to slip, will offer nothing new. You've been
pencil-whipped with 1 place precision math "proving" absolutes that
these theories turn on.

Now for a reflective question:
I'd like to know what it is that you are doing?
A trip to Canada would have gotten you further. ;-)
It was a nice day for it too.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 04:25:56 -0400, "Fred W4JLE"
wrote:

Good lord Richard, did you check the reference? It was a friggen joke!

Hi Fred,

You deserve a joke in return that is probably more entertaining than
mine I suspect.

From this week's Army Times is a comic strip by Mort Walker's "Beetle
Bailey." Beetle and Zero are ambling along talking:

Beetle - What if you could see into the future and saw your life was
miserable?

Zero - I'd keep on plugging away.

Beetle - Really? Why?

Zero - Hey, the future could be wrong!

This strip probably won't appear in the civilian funnys until next
week however, Mort always gives the Army Times his work first.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Cecil, W5DXP wrote:
"What phenomenon of physics causes the energy and momentum in that wave
to reverse direction?"

Suppose you have a 50-ohm coax that has a 25-ohm resistor across its
load end. The incident wave traveling on the coax has too much voltage
and too little current to supply the 25-ohm load.

As the load forces the incident voltage lower, energy is conserved by
transfer of energy from the E-field to the H-field. Voltage generated in
this energy transfer between fields is reversed in phase from that in
the incident wave. Though current is increased in the too low load
resistance, its phase is unchanged from that in the incident wave.

The reversed-phase voltage caused by the roo-low load resistance
launches the reflected wave.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Richard Harrison wrote:
Cecil, W5DXP wrote:
"What phenomenon of physics causes the energy and momentum in that wave
to reverse direction?"

Suppose you have a 50-ohm coax that has a 25-ohm resistor across its
load end. The incident wave traveling on the coax has too much voltage
and too little current to supply the 25-ohm load.

What I was talking about is a little more complicated than
that. Assume rho^2 = 0.5 at an impedance discontinuity at
a match point. The rearward-traveling reflected wave sees
the impedance discontinuity at the match point and 1/2 of
the energy is reflected back toward the load according to
the rules of reflection. What reflects the other half of
the energy?

The 50 ohm coax on the source side of the match point refuses
to accept *any* voltage or current. 100% of the reflected
energy is re-reflected at the match point.
--
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! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Cecil, W5DXP wrote:
"What reflects the other half of the energy?"

The previous example I gave was a 25-ohm resistor-load on a 50-ohm line.
Change the load to 100 ohms. Now the load cannot accept all the current
carried by the incident wave. Lenz`s law says the falling current
generates a rising voltage in an attempt to maintain the current. The
load-generated voltage is in the same phase as the incident voltage so
their sum is greater. Increased voltage across the load reverses phase
and direction of the line-current at the too-high load resistance. Thus,
direction of the reflection is opposite that of the incident wave.

If the load is too small or too large for Zo, some of the incident
energy is reflected by the load. The two processes are analogous. When
the load value is too small, there is a reversal in the phase of the
voltage without change in the phase of the current (1955 Terman page
92). When the load value is too large, there is a reversal in the phase
of the current without change in the phase of the voltage (1955 Terman
page 89).

Those are the necessary and sufficient conditions to reverse the
direction of some of the energy in an incident wave on a transmission
line. For a complete reversal, a short or an open is required.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI

Thanks Richard, as the proud father of an army aviator, Kiowa Warriors, I
already get the Army Times.

My son is a W3, soon to be W4. He will return to Iraq for a second tour next
month. He has been in Bosnia and Afganistan as well.



"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 04:25:56 -0400, "Fred W4JLE"
wrote:

Good lord Richard, did you check the reference? It was a friggen joke!

Hi Fred,

You deserve a joke in return that is probably more entertaining than
mine I suspect.

From this week's Army Times is a comic strip by Mort Walker's "Beetle
Bailey." Beetle and Zero are ambling along talking: