I don’t like to be negative, but I must
admit that John Ehlers’s article in the
December 2000 S&C, “Phasor Displays,”
as usual, frustrates me. On a
scale of one to 10, I’d grade him, brilliance:
9, clarity of exposition: 1.
For example, a small puzzlement: In
Figure 7, in quadrant II there’s a note,
“point 28.” Isn’t this point 23? There’s
a point 28 near the top of the chart, in
quadrant I. In quadrant I, there’s a note,
“counter clockwise segment.” Isn’t the
swing bar 21, 22, 23…41 a clockwise
It could have been helpful to include
a chart showing typical trend modes and
another showing typical cycle modes.
Keep up the good work — the magazine
Good to hear from you, Art, as always.
Don’t be too hard on Ehlers; I mash up
his input pretty good before it gets to
you. You are correct about point 28
being point 23 (Figure 7); my mistake.
However, you are wrong about the counterclockwise
notation. There is an arrow
pointing to the short segment that is
going counterclockwise instead of clockwise.
And thanks for the idea about
having a chart showing typical trend
modes and another with typical cycle
modes; I’ll ask Ehlers to do something
along this line. Isn’t the display spectacular!?