RE: [Vo]:What was the implicit power meeter in the Lugano report showing

From: Stefan Israelsson Tampe I looked at the Lugano report, trying to understand the issue with the implicate power meter e.g. why the power loss in the cable does not follow the power measured. Where is this issue being raised? It will likely be impossible to know the

Re: [Vo]:What was the implicit power meeter in the Lugano report showing

Where is this issue being raised? People skeptical brings this up, of cause as you say it's possible to sill be fooled, it needs more data to decide. I just wanted to see if there was an alternate explanation, and if it is sound. P(t) = U(t)I(t) does alternate sign for suitable phase differences.

[Vo]:What was the implicit power meeter in the Lugano report showing

I looked at the Lugano report, trying to understand the issue with the implicate power meter e.g. why the power loss in the cable does not follow the power measured. So, people have tried to explain this with some strange temperature behavior of the resistance. But isn't it more natural to

Re: [Vo]:What was the implicit power meeter in the Lugano report showing

Stefan, you appear to be considering the effects of multiple reflections upon the input power calculations. This type of issue comes up when the frequency is within the RF range, generally far above what is used during this test. Also, with RF engineering you handle the reflections as voltage