# [AMPS] Re:

**Rich Measures
**
measures@vc.net

*Tue, 19 May 98 22:45:23 -0800*

>>>>>* 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?
*
I don't see any such manoeuvre in my text books. Transforming 100 j+0
ohms to 100k j+0 ohms by a single reactance is seemingly a bit of a
stretch.
Rich...
R. L. Measures, 805-386-3734, AG6K, www.vcnet.com/measures
--
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