Re: Standing-Wave Current vs Traveling-Wave Current
- From: Richard Clark <kb7qhc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:59:24 -0800
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:45:10 -0800, Roger Sparks <rsparks@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Current is the tag....
At the crossing point, we can not measure current,
Hi Roger,
Hence the information as to the source of energy that arrives at its
final destination is completely lost.
Barring this tracking, then, there is no way to prove effects due to
the "crossing point."
So, why does this discussion proceed without hope of any meaningful
proof? Certainly, given more than 400, 500, 1000 postings there must
be some other tagging mechanism that you are unaware of, or has been
withheld from comment. Did we miss that announcement?
73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Standing-Wave Current vs Traveling-Wave Current
- From: Roger Sparks
- Re: Standing-Wave Current vs Traveling-Wave Current
- References:
- Re: Standing-Wave Current vs Traveling-Wave Current
- From: Keith Dysart
- Re: Standing-Wave Current vs Traveling-Wave Current
- From: Roy Lewallen
- Re: Standing-Wave Current vs Traveling-Wave Current
- From: Keith Dysart
- Re: Standing-Wave Current vs Traveling-Wave Current
- From: Roger Sparks
- Re: Standing-Wave Current vs Traveling-Wave Current
- From: Richard Clark
- Re: Standing-Wave Current vs Traveling-Wave Current
- From: Roger Sparks
- Re: Standing-Wave Current vs Traveling-Wave Current
- Prev by Date: Re: Standing-Wave Current vs Traveling-Wave Current
- Next by Date: Re: Standing-Wave Current vs Traveling-Wave Current
- Previous by thread: Re: Standing-Wave Current vs Traveling-Wave Current
- Next by thread: Re: Standing-Wave Current vs Traveling-Wave Current
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading