Cecil Moore wrote:

Here are your words cut and pasted from qrz.com.
"By the way, I swept S12 phase with my network analyzer on a
100uH inductor a few hours ago while working on a phasing
system. The phase shift through that series inductor was about
-60 or -70 degrees on 1 MHz, ...

S12 is a voltage parameter. So did the coil show a "-60 or
-70 degrees" voltage phase shift or not?

It did. Just as I posted here it did.

Where does it say
anything about "current with a small current transformer"
in your posting?

It didn't. As I kept telling you in that thread, I didn't want to talk
to you until you were able to make a post without resorting to personal
attacks. I also told you I was busy with work, and didn't have time to
deal with the same old circular arguments with you.

Last time I looked, a 100uH inductor was
not a small current transformer. I assumed a current
phase shift at first and you jumped on me about that. Now
you say it was a current phase shift after all. If you want
to be quoted correctly, you need to stop fibbing.

Please stop trying to blame your mistakes on me! It's not my fault you
assumed more than you read! I've been telling you all along current at
each end of ANY small inductor has the same phase. I've been telling
you all along I didn't want to talk to you until you learn to behave.

Don't accuse me of lying because you made up a theory and it is dead
wrong! It isn't MY fault you painted yourself in a corner by adjusting
your theories to suit what you thought was said, when it wasn't even
said.

Here's what I think happened in context. You were trying to
prove Kraus wrong with his assertion that a 180 degree
phasing coil can be thought of as 1/2WL of wire wound
into a coil. You failed to realize that your posting was
supporting my other point about phase shifts through coils.

"Here's what I think" is correct Cecil. In your mind Cecil, it's always
all about the other guy failing, being wrong and knowing better, or
being dishonest.

So you accidentally posted results that supported my side
of the argument. Your lumped-circuit model predicts zero
phase shift. My distributed network model predicts considerable
phase shift. Your experiment yielded considerable phase shift
and now you seek to deny it. However, it is there in all
its glory on qrz.com for all to see. So feel free to deny it.

Anyone can read anything. I'd wager you anything you like multiple
people on this list can make a small current transformer, measure
current at each terminal of a compact inductor, and find the phase of
current essentially the same at each end.

It isn't about me Cecil. It isn't about Kraus. It isn't about QRZ. It
isn't about Roy or anyone else. It's all about how a two terminal
inductor acts! That can be proven over and over again, and it will
always come out the same. Neither you nor I can change how things work.

I never misrepresent facts as I understand them to exist. The
fact that you absolutely refuse to engage me in a technical
discussion speaks volumes.

It does indeed. If you stayed away from personal attacks I would
converse with you. I've told you that over and over again. People who
say things on Internet they wouldn't say face to face wear on my
nerves. I find it very difficult to remain civil when reading constant
personal attacks.

If I were wrong, you would simply
engage me and prove me wrong with a technical argument as you
have so many others. But If I am right, I fully understand your
reluctance to engage me in a technical discussion.
You can start the technical discussion by explaining the
EZNEC results on my web page:

1.) We really can't have a good conversation until you stop the
constant personal attacks, and until we agree on a few basics.

2.) You claim Roy measured current that doesn't flow. That area needs
addressed.

3.) You also claim significant current phase shift exists between the
terminals of a compact inductor operated well below self-resonance.

It's very simple to measure current and voltage and the phase
relationships in a two terminal device and prove you are wrong.

Trying to divert the issue to me not following your commands and orders
just won't go far.

The current flowing into one end and out of the other end of a small
lumped inductor operated far below self-resonance is essentially equal
in both phase and amplitude. You say it isn't, I say it is, and I can
prove it beyond any doubt to any open minded person.

I say I can easily build a loading coil that acts the same way. I can
replace 40 or 60 degrees of electrical height with an inductor that has
virtually no phase shift in current between the two terminals, and
virtually the same current level. I can prove that also.

I'm just not sure I can prove anything to someone who thinks a current
transformer measures current that doesn't flow!

73 Tom