On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 16:32:22 +0100, Ian White GM3SEK
wrote:

One is that if the meter scale says "power", then there genuinely are
forward and reflected traveling waves of power on the line. In the "93 -
23 = 70W" example, the belief is that there genuinely is a power flow of
93W towards the load, only 70W of which is accepted and 23W is returned.

The other school of thought is that that's not true. The meter may
*read* more "forward power" than is actually being delivered to the
load, but that is a false indication because the instrument is not being
used in the situation for which the power scale was calibrated.
Therefore it is not to be taken at face value - and above all, the
letter "W" on the meter scale does not prove the physical existence of
forward and reflected waves of power.

Hi Ian,

This argument sets up the first school for failure that is already
admitted to. Your statement from the second school that:
*read* more "forward power" than is actually being delivered to the
load, but that is a false indication
is already admitted to explicitly from the first school:
93W towards the load, only 70W of which is accepted and 23W is returned.
in that the 70W NOT 93W is the correct indication.

The "second" school has nothing to offer on the subject. The
"because" that attends their "discovery" of this error is specious
logic.

The fact remains that when you subtract 23W from the 93W you do find
70W in the load. The second school would have us believe none of the
numbers correlate to power, and yet the results bear out just the
opposite every day.

The second school needs to stay after class.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC