[AMPS] Re:

[Jon Ogden]

>>>>> 2) Never met Ian, but the gut feeling grows that anyone who challenges 
>him 
>>>>>in the area of network analysis or any fundamental EE stuff has a real 
>good 
>>>>>chance of losing. Very respectable stuff, Ian - I appreciate it.
>>>
>>>However, adding a bit of X to make one's calculations come out more 
>>>favourably, undoubtedly gives one a leg up.
>>
>>The 200 nH is inductance for the anode lines to the blocking cap were a 
>>guess by Ian.  So the inductance is less.  It still doesn't change the 
>>mathematical principles.  Also, as we have discussed recently, the job of 
>>the resistor is not to abosrb oscillations, but supress them.  So wether 
>>the 100 Ohms is transformed to 1K or 100K by inductances makes no 
>>difference.  The math still holds.
>>
>I don't think it will hold up on a Z-analyzer.

So Rich, are you saying that textbooks are incorrect?  As I thought more 
about this, I realized that purely reactive networks do indeed make one 
load look like another.  For example, we make a 3500 Ohm impedance of a 
tube look like 50 Ohms to our antenna.  We make an antenna of some 
impedance look like 50 Ohms with an LC matching network.  Same principle 
applies here.  I really would like to see your results on a Z analyzer 
because if you can prove it wrong, you've just thrown a good part of the 
current RF theory out the window.

73,

Jon
KE9NA


-------------------------------------
Jon Ogden
KE9NA

http://www.qsl.net/ke9na


"A life lived in fear is a life half lived."


--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Submissions:              amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-amps@contesting.com
Search:                   http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm