David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 1/28/2011 11:28 AM Mark Cross spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

So what's "special" or magic about 180° that it wouldn't be considered a
completely separate and distinct phase? Why would phase have a "hole" at
180°? (And for any wisenheimers who will say "well, you must consider 0°
to be a separate phase too!" I say nonsense: that's just a phase
"identity" which we can ignore as being identical to the original
phase.)

Repeat the hypothesis a 0º and you will find a hole in there, much the
same as there must be one at 180º.

I don't think so. At 0º, the two waveforms are *identical*, so that's
the degenerate case.

To understand what is "magical" about that you will need to know phasors
and the math related to that. Once you understand the math that support
phasors, you clearly see why 0º and 180º are the same phasor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor

Sorry, I don't use Wikipedia as a source of credible information.

Open your mind.

But even if 0º and 180º are the same phasor, they're still completely
different waveforms, which is the important thing here, isn't it?

No.

--
Mark Cross
If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem.