K7ITM wrote:
In general, in real-world ham problems, it is far from given that we
know that the impedance of a line is really uniform. We don't even
know the impedance for certain. There have been any number of
postings here in the past where someone can't figure out what the
impedance of some unknown line is, and I'm sure there are far more
instances of people ASSUMING that RG-8-type line is 50.00 ohms. It
practically never is. (But it also practically never MATTERS for
typical ham applications.) WHY should I believe you know how to
measure the impedance of a line, and that you know how to calibrate a
bridge to that impedance? I'm NOT saying that you DON'T know how,
only that I need convincing. I've seen plenty of evidence of those
who haven't a clue about either around here, so I prefer to start from
the point of view that any reported measurements of "forward and
reverse power" are likely to be flawed.

Well, let me do you one better. It is far from given that
you exist. Please prove that you exist before we go any
farther. (I have rarely heard such a strange argument
against mental exercises as you presented above.)

Seems you would be completely opposed to exercises using
lossless lines, huh? I can hear it now: "It is far from
given that a transmission line can be lossless." Yes, it
is, but textbooks are filled to overflowing with such
examples.

Since you "know" that the meter is calibrated for the impedance of the
line, you must know the impedance of the line. Why didn't you just
give the line impedance?

Then someone could have converted to voltage, wasted a
lot of time, and avoided the new experience of dealing
100% with power. I'm glad you woke up and figured it out.
See how easy that was? BTW, congratulations on being the
only one (so far) to figure it out.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com