Talk:Propagation constant

message: can anyone tell me how to find the phase constant?
:It's the imaginary part of Propagation constant (gamma) Zebov 22:43, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Phase constant

message: It is also equal to the square root of Yl* Zl myclob 22:45, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well you might need to define what you mean by Y1 and Z1.  That is true of the transmission line if you mean the distributed series Z and shunt Y per metre but it is not true of circuits in general.  Usually there will be a log, trig or hyperbolic trig function involved depending on exactly how you define everything.  See for instance image impedance#Transfer function. SpinningSpark 14:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: root ZY 

message: I am proposing merging into this article attenuation constant and phase constant.  All three articles are likely to remain stubs as there is little more to say on any of them.  They only stand a chance of being a decent article when taken together.  There is also a very large number of alternative names for these quantities, it would be good if all the redirects where to point to the same place. SpinningSpark 14:11, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger proposal

message: In the “Copper Lines” section,in the clause: there are some decidedly non-linear effects I would like to suggest changing the phrase some decidedly non-linear effects to frequency dependant effects. The reason is that non-linear often means that there is a non-linear interaction of the signals leading to harmonic distortion and intermodulation distortion and I don't think that is what is meant. Constant314 (talk) 02:36, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with that, the meaning is non-constant rather than non-linear. SpinningSpark 08:08, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal wording change in Copper Lines

message: I want to propose that the ‘’Copper lines’’ section be expanded to include a discussion of the propagation constant and characteristic impedance in the three frequency ranges.  That would be high, intermediate and very low frequency including dc.  High frequency is when ωC >> G and ωL >> R.  Intermediate is when ωC >> G and R >> ωL.  Low is when G >> ωC and R >> ωL. Constant314 (talk) 12:53, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You might want to consider instead linking to Primary line constants#Special cases where this is already discussed. SpinningSpark 08:13, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I had not seen that article before. I did not see where it covered the dc case.  There is considerable overlap with "telegrapher's equations" and "propagation constant".  I would propose merging them, but it would be more than I would want to bite off. Constant314 (talk) 13:05, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal to discuss propagation constant in three frequency ranges

message: it says "Losses in the dielectric depend on the loss tangent (tanδ) of the material, which depends inversely on the wavelength of the signal and is directly proportional to the frequency"
So, does the loss tangent depend inversely on the wavelength, which is what I think the language says and is wrong, I think,
or does the Losses in the dielectric depend inversely on the wavelength, which is what the following equation seems to say, and would be true if the loss tangent were more or less independent of frequency?Constant314 (talk) 21:30, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attenuation constant, confusing language 

message: In the alternative names for Attenuation constant, I have placed "attenuation" in front of "coefficient" since I intend to merge Attenuation coefficient into this page. At present Absorption coefficient is merged into Attenuation coefficient, which is wrong. I will unmerge that first. In general, Absorption does not equal Attenuation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abmcdonald (talk • contribs) 10:48, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Following further investigations I no longer plan to merge Attenuation coefficient into this page. A B McDonald (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 15:29, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attenuation constant 

message: In
"It represents the change in phase per metre along the path travelled by the wave at any instant and is equal to real part of the angular wavenumber of the wave."
is the wavenumber a complex number?
:Yes, or it can be.  If we can speak of complex frequency, it follows that wavenumber can also be complex.  See this book. SpinningSpark 12:30, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phase constant 

message: I am not seeing any sources that define wave number as ω/c as claimed in this edit which I have reverted.  I agree that the dispersion formula,
:\ \left ( {\omega \over c} \right )^2 = \beta^2 + k_c^2 
is correct, but sources usually treat as synonymous phase constant β and wave number k, as in this book for instance.  ω/c is the "free space" wave number, or k0, so we could write the dispersion formula as,
:\ k_0^2 = k^2 + k_c^2 
The only source I found after a quick search that does not treat them as synonymous was this book which has wave number synonymous with propagation constant instead of phase constant, but that is still not the same as the claim put in the article. SpinningSpark 22:25, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phase constant and wave number