Re: Is the Superposition Principle invalid?
- From: Cecil Moore <nospam@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 13:51:32 GMT
Gene Fuller wrote:
I guess I was not quite clear. I don't care if you are talking net energy, gross energy, with or without circulators, or anything else. As long as there are no sources or sinks of energy in the region of interest, the Poynting vector tells you absolutely nothing about energy balance or conservation of energy.
That's not the point at all. The question is pretty
simple. Does the principle of superposition give us
permission to analyze the individual forward and
reflected waves separately and then superpose the
results? If you say "no", then you don't accept the
superposition principle. If you say "yes", then
please stop harping that the only valid way to solve
a problem is your way.
Just forget about ExB (or more commonly, ExH).
Your advice is to forget acquired knowledge and tools
and put one's trust in who? You?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Is the Superposition Principle invalid?
- From: Gene Fuller
- Re: Is the Superposition Principle invalid?
- References:
- Is the Superposition Principle invalid?
- From: Cecil Moore
- Re: Is the Superposition Principle invalid?
- From: Keith Dysart
- Re: Is the Superposition Principle invalid?
- From: Cecil Moore
- Re: Is the Superposition Principle invalid?
- From: Gene Fuller
- Re: Is the Superposition Principle invalid?
- From: Cecil Moore
- Re: Is the Superposition Principle invalid?
- From: Gene Fuller
- Is the Superposition Principle invalid?
- Prev by Date: Re: Is the Superposition Principle invalid?
- Next by Date: Re: How do I break it to the neighbors
- Previous by thread: Re: Is the Superposition Principle invalid?
- Next by thread: Re: Is the Superposition Principle invalid?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|