Gene Fuller wrote:
I have lots of flaws, most of them unrelated to RRAA. But a lack of
understanding of fundamental physical laws is not one of them.

Gene, you proved beyond any doubt, during the rest of your posting,
that you even though may quote the fundamental laws, you are
misunderstanding those fundamental laws. I think Richard Harrison
does understand. If you refuse to listen to me, then please listen
to him.

Current is generally accepted as the flow of charge.

Standing wave current is a net charge flow of zero. Standing wave
current is DIFFERENT from traveling wave current. At any and every
point, the standing wave current is NOT moving. Since it is not
moving, there is NO net charge flow. Please read, understand, and
respond to the following simple example and questionai


Lossless Transmission Line, SWR is infinite
-------------------------------------------------
Ifor-- 1 amp --Iref 1 amp


1. Is there any net flow of charge? ______

2. Is the current at a current maximum point equal to 2 amps? ______

3. Is the current at a current minimum point equal to 0 amps? ______

4. Is there any net flow of charge between the 2 amp point and the
zero amp point? ________

5. If I replace the 1/4WL section of wire with a 90 degree phase
shifting coil, have I changed very much? _________

6. If the current at one end of that coil is 0 amps and the current
at the other end of that coil is 2 amps, is there any net flow of
charge through the coil? ________

When the current is different at the ends of a simple two terminal
device then the charge flow is different as well.

That is definitely NOT true for standing wave current. There
is ZERO net charge flow for standing wave current. And standing wave
current is exactly what you are measuring in a standing wave antenna
like a 75m mobile antenna.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil,

A few questions.

Do you have a reference that explains this "net standing wave current
that does not flow"?

Does this magical current have any other interesting properties besides
the lack of charge flow?

Do ordinary properties such as inductance and capacitance cease to
function when dealing with "net standing wave current"?

Do you really think it is a good idea to base detailed numerical
analysis on these "conceptual constructs" as you call them?

Do you have a convenient listing of your "conceptual contructs" so that
we can avoid these battles in the future?


8-) 8-)

73,
Gene
W4SZ

Gene Fuller wrote:
Do you have a reference that explains this "net standing wave current
that does not flow"?

No, this is one of those topics that is supposed to be "obvious
to the most casual observer" and not worthy of further comment.
Why it is not obvious to you and others is beyond belief. Some-
thing terrible has happened to the educational system since 1957
when I learned all these principles at Texas A&M. I assume that
this is just a part of the "dumbing down" of the educational
system that I keep hearing so much about. Incidentally, these
concepts are obvious to Walter Maxwell.

Does this magical current have any other interesting properties besides
the lack of charge flow?

It's not magical but yes, it's phasor value (if it has one)
doesn't rotate which is prima facie evidence that it doesn't
flow. Any flowing phasor has a rotation of omega (2*pi*f).
The fact that standing waves don't have a rotation is proof
that they don't flow. To tell the truth, standing waves are
a product of the human mind. The forward and reflected waves
couldn't care less about standing waves. Last time I talked
to them, they didn't even know that each other existed except
for the points in the transmission line where their constructive
interference causes the wire to heat up. :-)

Surely you understand that standing waves in a transmission line
don't flow - they just stand there, which is why they are called
"standing waves". Exactly the same principle applies to standing
wave antennas.

Do ordinary properties such as inductance and capacitance cease to
function when dealing with "net standing wave current"?

No, but one has to exercise caution and invoke the superposition
principle to ascertain what is happening. The two traveling waves
have to be analyzed separately and then superposed to obtain valid
results. If you analyze net current without superposition, you are
doing the same thing as superposing powers, which is a known no-no.

Do you really think it is a good idea to base detailed numerical
analysis on these "conceptual constructs" as you call them?

All human thought is based on conceptual constructs. That's what
makes us different from the rest of the animals. If you don't
like "conceptual constructs", then go swim in a zoo pool with
the alligators. :-)

Do you have a convenient listing of your "conceptual contructs" so that
we can avoid these battles in the future?

Only dealing with one at the moment, Gene. The lumped circuit
model falls apart unless you first apply it to the component
currents and then superpose. The distributed network analysis
was developed to avoid that very problem. So the only valid
choices are to either use the lumped circuit analysis on the
component currents and then superpose or use the distributed
network analysis which, in the end, boil down to the same thing.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp