PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2017-06-27, 07:58:45
News: Registration with the OUR forum is now by invitation only.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20
Author Topic: Some "New" Observations  (Read 107864 times)

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 308
@PhysicsProf

I think your question can be better asked this way.

If you could make the sun disappear with the flick of a finger, so from one second it's there and the next second it's gone without leaving the slightest trace, what happens to the planets? Will they all veer off their orbits immediately and hence show that there is something much faster then light? I personally say yes the planets and everything else in the solar system would stray of their orbits and get lost in space.

wattsup

Well considering that the Planets and the Sun "orbit" the Galactic center I would say that the planets would continue to orbit the Galactic center just that they would not be influenced by the Sun and would find a new "path" as chaotic as it may be.

..
   

Jr. Member
**

Posts: 76
Don't assume that a field that can move flowing charge is a magnetic field - and don't assume that moving charges are electrons.

Novel charge carriers may produce electrostatic (capacitive) and magnetic (inductive) effects but they will not behave in any rational manner across a semiconductor junction... in fact you are likely to cause inexplicable failures in digital equipment even at a distance you think is safe- I know this from first hand experience.

Novel charge carriers will produce novel fields in addition to classical fields when they move. Novel fields may extend into other dimensions -- study the mapping of dimensions.

Our experience with valves is good -- deflecting charges around a vacuum is more reliable than using mosfets and you can still get low ns HV pulses if you want.

Not sure why I am offering this ...holiday madness I suppose... and my account got trashed and all the history has been lost :(

While I'm posting -- did anyone else ever work out the mathematical foundation for the ratios of frequencies SM quoted? ... and realize the implications? .. if you did then please contact me privately.

Very interesting information's. The tubes are the best for this kind of experiments (where HV , inductors,and high frequency used), that's sure.

What caught my eye, you asked about " the ratios of frequencies ", not the ratio between the circumference and the frequencies.

I think the 35705hz input frequency is accelerated in the output coil part of the system, maybe in each 1/4 wave cycle to a higher frequency, which is phi times the first.


---------------------------
"A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." Antoine de Saint-Exupery
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1754
Everyman decries immorality


Buy me a beer
Iron catastrophe

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_catastrophe

The iron catastrophe was a postulated major event early in the history of Earth. The original accretion of the Earth's material into a spherical mass is thought to have resulted in a relatively uniform composition. While residual heat from the collision of the material that formed the Earth was significant, heating from radioactive materials in this mass gradually increased the temperature until a critical condition was reached. As material became molten enough to allow movement, the denser iron and nickel, evenly distributed throughout the mass, began to migrate to the center of the planet to form the core. The gravitational potential energy released by the sinking of the dense NiFe globules, along with any cooler denser solid material is thought to have been a runaway process, increasing the temperature of the protoplanet above the melting point of most components, resulting in the rapid formation of a molten iron core covered by a deep global silicate magma. This event, an important process of planetary differentiation, occurred at about 500 million years into the formation of the planet.[1]

Earth's Inconstant Magnetic Field


http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2003/29dec_magneticfield/

At the heart of our planet lies a solid iron ball, about as hot as the surface of the sun. Researchers call it "the inner core." It's really a world within a world. The inner core is 70% as wide as the moon. It spins at its own rate, as much as 0.2° of longitude per year faster than the Earth above it, and it has its own ocean: a very deep layer of liquid iron known as "the outer core."

see captionRight: a schematic diagram of Earth's interior. The outer core is the source of the geomagnetic field.

Earth's magnetic field comes from this ocean of iron, which is an electrically conducting fluid in constant motion. Sitting atop the hot inner core, the liquid outer core seethes and roils like water in a pan on a hot stove. The outer core also has "hurricanes"--whirlpools powered by the Coriolis forces of Earth's rotation. These complex motions generate our planet's magnetism through a process called the dynamo effect.

Using the equations of magnetohydrodynamics, a branch of physics dealing with conducting fluids and magnetic fields, Glatzmaier and colleague Paul Roberts have created a supercomputer model of Earth's interior. Their software heats the inner core, stirs the metallic ocean above it, then calculates the resulting magnetic field. They run their code for hundreds of thousands of simulated years and watch what happens.

What they see mimics the real Earth: The magnetic field waxes and wanes, poles drift and, occasionally, flip. Change is normal, they've learned. And no wonder. The source of the field, the outer core, is itself seething, swirling, turbulent. "It's chaotic down there," notes Glatzmaier. The changes we detect on our planet's surface are a sign of that inner chaos.

They've also learned what happens during a magnetic flip. Reversals take a few thousand years to complete, and during that time--contrary to popular belief--the magnetic field does not vanish. "It just gets more complicated," says Glatzmaier. Magnetic lines of force near Earth's surface become twisted and tangled, and magnetic poles pop up in unaccustomed places. A south magnetic pole might emerge over Africa, for instance, or a north pole over Tahiti. Weird. But it's still a planetary magnetic field, and it still protects us from space radiation and solar storms.

Finally, a Solid Look at Earth's Core

http://www.livescience.com/6980-finally-solid-earth-core.html

Scientists have long thought Earth's core is solid. Now they have some solid evidence.

The core is thought to be a two-part construction. The inner core is solid iron, and that's surrounding by a molten core, theory holds. Around the core is the mantle, and near the planet's surface is a thin crust -- the part that breaks now and then and creates earthquakes.

The core was discovered in 1936 by monitoring the internal rumbles of earthquakes, which send seismic waves rippling through the planet. The waves, which are much like sound waves, are bent when they pass through layers of differing densities, just as light is bent as it enters water. By noting a wave's travel time, much can be inferred about the Earth's insides.

Yet for more than 60 years, the solidity of the core has remained in the realm of theory.

A study announced today involved complex monitoring of seismic waves passing through the planet. The technique is not new, but this is the first time it's been employed so effectively to probe the heart of our world.

First, some jargon:

    P is what scientists call the wave
    K stands for the outer core
    J is the inner core


Path of a PKJKP wave.
? Science

So a wave that rolls through it all is called PKJKP.

An earthquake sends seismic waves in all directions. The surface waves are sometimes frighteningly obvious. Seismic waves passing through the mantle and traversing much of the planet's interior are routinely studied when they reach another continent. But no PKJKP wave has ever been reliably detected until now.

Aimin Cao of the University of California-Berkeley and colleagues studied archived data from about 20 large earthquakes, all monitored by an array of German seismic detectors back in the 1980s and '90s.

The trick to detecting a PKJKP wave is in noting the changes it goes through as it rattles from one side of the planet to the other. What starts out as a compression wave changes to what scientists call a shear wave (explanations and animations of these are here).

"A PKJKP traverses the inner core as a shear wave, so this is the direct evidence that the inner core is solid," Cao told LiveScience, "because only in the solid material the shear wave can exist. In the liquid material, say water, only the compressional wave can travel through."

The arrival time and slowness of the waves agree with theoretical predictions of PKJKP waves, which indicates a solid core. The results were published today online by the journal Science.

Clausius–Clapeyron relation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clausius%E2%80%93Clapeyron_relation

"Clapeyron equation" and "Clapeyron's equation" redirect here. For a state equation, see ideal gas law.

The Clausius–Clapeyron relation, named after Rudolf Clausius[1] and Benoît Paul Émile Clapeyron,[2] is a way of characterizing a discontinuous phase transition between two phases of matter of a single constituent. On a pressure–temperature (P–T) diagram, the line separating the two phases is known as the coexistence curve. The Clausius–Clapeyron relation gives the slope of the tangents to this curve. Mathematically,

    \frac{\mathrm{d}P}{\mathrm{d}T} = \frac{L}{T\,\Delta v}=\frac{\Delta s}{\Delta v},

where \mathrm{d}P/\mathrm{d}T is the slope of the tangent to the coexistence curve at any point, L is the specific latent heat, T is the temperature, \Delta v is the specific volume change of the phase transition, and \Delta s is the specific entropy change of the phase transition.

Newton's law of universal gravitation


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_law_of_universal_gravitation

Newton's law of universal gravitation states that any two bodies in the Universe attract each other with a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.[note 1] This is a general physical law derived from empirical observations by what Isaac Newton called induction.[1] It is a part of classical mechanics and was formulated in Newton's work Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica ("the Principia"), first published on 5 July 1687. (When Newton's book was presented in 1686 to the Royal Society, Robert Hooke made a claim that Newton had obtained the inverse square law from him; see the History section below.)

In modern language, the law states: Every point mass attracts every single other point mass by a force pointing along the line intersecting both points. The force is proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.[2] The first test of Newton's theory of gravitation between masses in the laboratory was the Cavendish experiment conducted by the British scientist Henry Cavendish in 1798.[3] It took place 111 years after the publication of Newton's Principia and 71 years after his death.

Newton's law of gravitation resembles Coulomb's law of electrical forces, which is used to calculate the magnitude of electrical force arising between two charged bodies. Both are inverse-square laws, where force is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the bodies. Coulomb's law has the product of two charges in place of the product of the masses, and the electrostatic constant in place of the gravitational constant.

Newton's law has since been superseded by Einstein's theory of general relativity, but it continues to be used as an excellent approximation of the effects of gravity in most applications. Relativity is required only when there is a need for extreme precision, or when dealing with very strong gravitational fields, such as those found near extremely massive and dense objects, or at very close distances (such as Mercury's orbit around the sun).


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 308
So the very central part of the Iron core of the Earth is the hottest but it is solid while the cooler outer part is molten ? How is it so ? The hotter inner part should be more molten than the cooler outer part. Unless the sheer "pressure" can cause Iron to be solid at higher temperatures at the inner core, while the outer core remains molten at lower temperatures. If that is the theory then I could see some logic in that even though I am not a physicist.

Regardless of how complicated things may be, they still need to make some sense when looked at in a simplistic, holistic and logical way. 
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1754
Everyman decries immorality


Buy me a beer
Quite so..

Look at the top right corner of the diagram (supercritical fluid); we have a pseudo gas, a pseudo liquid or a pseudo solid.. all of which are plasma matter based and property dependent on pressure temperature boundary delta  O0

http://www.livescience.com/6980-finally-solid-earth-core.html

The core was discovered in 1936 by monitoring the internal rumbles of earthquakes, which send seismic waves rippling through the planet. The waves, which are much like sound waves, are bent when they pass through layers of differing densities, just as light is bent as it enters water. By noting a wave's travel time, much can be inferred about the Earth's insides.

Define the boundary plane(s), specifically.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2106
@PhysicsProf

I think your question can be better asked this way.

If you could make the sun disappear with the flick of a finger, so from one second it's there and the next second it's gone without leaving the slightest trace, what happens to the planets? Will they all veer off their orbits immediately and hence show that there is something much faster then light? I personally say yes the planets and everything else in the solar system would stray of their orbits and get lost in space.

wattsup

The key point is whether the planets would veer off their orbits IMMEDIATELY, or after a delay -- 8 minutes delay for the earth ( the time required for the fastest possible signal (assuming light-speed is maximum for anything) -- to reach the earth.

I think the G-field from the sun would still be there at the earth the MOMENT the sun disappeared (a cleaver thought experiment - thanks) - but 8 minutes later, the absence of the G-field from the ABSENT sun would indeed be felt, and THEN the earth would veer off its elliptical orbit. 

At that same 8-minute mark, the sun's light would appear on the earth to be GONE, at the same instant as the G-field from the sun disappeared.  (imo)

   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2106
In my professional career I had the use of a time domain spectrometer that had a resolution better than 50pS.  So I could measure effects over small distances (like a few cm).  Although designed for finding discontinuities in 50 ohm transmission lines, it could also be used for measuring magnetic and electric field propagation speeds.  I can verify that magnetic and electric near-fields do travel at the speed of light (that is the fields themselves, not necessarily the transport of power which travels slower in near-field coupling situations.  I guess modern TDR's have an even better resolution, my TDR was 1964 vintage!  So the sudden presence of electrons on the plate of a capacitor create an influence that travels at the speed of light (or less in a dielectric).  Does that answer the question concerning the sudden appearance of an electron?

...
Smudge

Yes it does!  as expected, electric fields (or at least, near-fields) do travel at the speed of light.  Thanks!

Now, I would very much like to learn more about the "time domain spectrometer that had a resolution better than 50pS" -- and  HOW it could be "  used for measuring magnetic and electric field propagation speeds."  Is there anything written up on this?  I'd love to learn more...
Thanks again.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 749
Yes it does!  as expected, electric fields (or at least, near-fields) do travel at the speed of light.  Thanks!

Now, I would very much like to learn more about the "time domain spectrometer that had a resolution better than 50pS" -- and  HOW it could be "  used for measuring magnetic and electric field propagation speeds."  Is there anything written up on this?  I'd love to learn more...
Thanks again.

HP still make TDR's and this link gives you the background to TDR measurements.
http://materias.fi.uba.ar/6209/download/HP-AN1304.pdf

The TDR is simply a step generator plus a sampling scope.  If the output connection (that would normally be to the transmission line under test) connects simply to a pair of electrodes, the waveform you get is easily deduced from first principles since you just have a 50 ohm source connected to a capacitor.  Now place a conductive object near those electrodes and the capacity takes on a slightly different value.  The TDR system can't see that changed value until the electric wavefront has reached the object and been reflected back, so the otherwise exponential curve on the scope now has a kink in it.  The position of that kink tells you the distance to the object (classical radar ranging) and the shape of the waveform after the kink gives you some indication of the shape and extent of the object.  I am sure that in this digital age someone could write a clever algorithm that analyses the shape of the curve to give more information than that perceived by the eyeball.

The same goes for a magnetic field, the TDR output is connected to a single turn coil.  A ferrous or conductive object placed near the coil creates the waveform kink.   Clearly the field propagation and reflection characteristics are different from normal far-field radar, so interpreting the seen reflection is more complex, but it is there and readily observable.  If you have access to a pulse generator with a sub nS rise time and a sampling scope you can easily perform your own experiments.

Of course this system has limitations.  The field drops off rapidly with range (which the clever algorithm would take account of) so it only has limited range capability before the signal gets down to noise.  And the waveform you get depends very much on the coil size or electrode configuration.

With my old TDR you could remove the T that connected step generator and oscilloscope to the transmission line under test, and then have separate transmit and receive "antenna" (coil or electrodes).  Ideal for just measuring propagation delay between separated antenna.

Transmitting a surface wave along the outside of a length of coax was achieved by having the center conductor connected to a conical electrode that folded back over the coax.  This sent the step wavefront as an EM wave back along the outside surface that effectively formed the inner conductor of a coax line with its outer at infinity.  The TDR saw this as a line of different impedance to 50 ohms which is simply a flat trace at a different vertical deflection.  Any discontinuity on that line showed up in the usual way.

Smudge
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3052
It's turtles all the way down
Looks like Steven D. Mark now works for NASA, unless it is a different person, but the references to the Journal of Acoustical Society is correct, and association with David Doleshal.

Maybe they are different persons that the stupid Microsoft database thought was the same person.


http://academic.research.microsoft.com/Author/55153239/steven-d-mark


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   

Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 1852
Looks like Steven D. Mark now works for NASA, unless it is a different person, but the references to the Journal of Acoustical Society is correct, and association with David Doleshal.

Maybe they are different persons that the stupid Microsoft database thought was the same person.


http://academic.research.microsoft.com/Author/55153239/steven-d-mark

Don't trust the DB associations being automatically made by that system. According to the same system, of my publications in the journals "Metaphilosophy" and "Philosophy of Science" I have been cited only once. I assure you that I've been cited more than once.

BTW... What is Metaphilosophy?   

Never mind. If it is on the web and generated by a M$ product it must be true.


---------------------------
"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality." - Einstein

"What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning." - Werner Heisenberg
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3052
It's turtles all the way down
Don't trust the DB associations being automatically made by that system. According to the same system, of my publications in the journals "Metaphilosophy" and "Philosophy of Science" I have been cited only once. I assure you that I've been cited more than once.

BTW... What is Metaphilosophy?   

Never mind. If it is on the web and generated by a M$ product it must be true.

I agree it is a different person
.
I do have a paperweight ton of back issues of the Journal of the Acoustical Society of America in my garage, will have to dig out SM's contribution to that journal and see if it is different than the patents......just for fun.


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3052
It's turtles all the way down
There is a patent posted by user PIX at OU.com that seems to be a very good fit for the TPU.

http://overunity.com/17172/a-simple-question-about-tpu-replication-attempts/msg502032/#msg502032



When I first skimmed the patent, I thought well, close, but no cigar, SM did not use gas tubes.

 On a more thorough read, I can see that this is a very good find and good fit for the TPU as it shows that the travelling wave can effect (drag) the electrons in a solid metallic conductor or semiconductor (the collector) so a gas tube is not necessarily needed.

It can even drag electrons in free air see figure 7

There are many other statements in the patent that make it a very good TPU fit if it works as claimed.

Thanks to user "PIX"

Patent also attached here. Give it a good read.

Comments appreciated

Regards
ION


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 749
There is a patent posted by user PIX at OU.com that seems to be a very good fit for the TPU.

http://overunity.com/17172/a-simple-question-about-tpu-replication-attempts/msg502032/#msg502032

Interesting.  I think you are right to say that gas tubes are not necessary, ferromagnetic conductors can have their conduction electrons pumped in this way to create DC.  I think the Russian Sergy Alexeew device does exactly that.  He covers his toroidal coil with Al foil to get the distributed capacitance and that is mentioned in the patent.  Here is my paper on that device.  Also another one that does a similar thing.

Smudge 
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1555
There is a patent posted by user PIX at OU.com that seems to be a very good fit for the TPU.

http://overunity.com/17172/a-simple-question-about-tpu-replication-attempts/msg502032/#msg502032



When I first skimmed the patent, I thought well, close, but no cigar, SM did not use gas tubes.

 On a more thorough read, I can see that this is a very good find and good fit for the TPU as it shows that the travelling wave can effect (drag) the electrons in a solid metallic conductor or semiconductor (the collector) so a gas tube is not necessarily needed.

It can even drag electrons in free air see figure 7

There are many other statements in the patent that make it a very good TPU fit if it works as claimed.

Thanks to user "PIX"

Patent also attached here. Give it a good read.

Comments appreciated

Regards
ION

That reminds me of the Meyer system where the gas is hydrogen and oxygen, HHO. I have seen this first hand  along with all the rest, more than one if I recall, did have some pictures that I took.

Regards

Mike 8)


---------------------------
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860

As a general rule, the most successful person in life is the person that has the best information.
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3052
It's turtles all the way down
Attached is an additional related patent that was referenced in the citations.

It is a good read full of interesting ideas and applications.



---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 246
What if explanation is simpler the we think ? What if the rotation of Earth is caused by external electric current flowing into the Earth core and melting iron core ? Basically what if Earth is just a metallic ball and electro-magnet with iron core = Faraday dynamo ?
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3052
It's turtles all the way down
What if explanation is simpler the we think ? What if the rotation of Earth is caused by external electric current flowing into the Earth core and melting iron core ? Basically what if Earth is just a metallic ball and electro-magnet with iron core = Faraday dynamo ?

Forest.

I have no idea, but have always wondered about the consistent spin of the earth over the last two hundred years losing only a few milliseconds.

See here: http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1097.0

Could you somehow tie this idea into how it applies to building a working TPU. How could a person standing on the surface of  the dynamo you have proposed utilize it to produce electrical current in a portable device?

How would you test the idea as proof of principle?


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3052
It's turtles all the way down
For those who missed it the patent of interest is on post #386, US3085189

Here is a spreadsheet of some coil data extracted from the Thonemann et al patent.

Also some screenshots of the actual coil calculator used.

Let me know if there are any errors.

It should be easy to build and test this device to see if it stands up to some of the claims in the patent.

Lets keep this discussion of the patent on topic until Peterae can move it all to a new thread.

Thanks also to Smudge for his supportive documents.

Here are some of my thoughts reposted from OU.com

Quote
To be clear the patent presented by PIX  US3085189 Thonemann et al is very much in line with TPU research.

 It presents an explanation to some of the factors that  have been elusive regarding the SM TPU.

The biggest find within the patent in my opinion is the direct conversion of RF Current (alternating current)  into a Direct Current by propelling electrons in one direction in a elemental noble gas or mixture of gases or an electron "gas" in the metal lattice of a conductor or a semiconductor. (the collector)

And this is the very first claim of the patent!. How this is done without discrete semiconductor rectifiers eluded me and others for a very long time. If the patent is real and works as claimed, it is to me at least, a huge revelation.

It is my belief that any serious researcher of TPU devices of SM must address this first major issue.

The other issues fall into place once this is properly addressed. The very slight gyroscopic effect, the slight stiction when pushed can possibly be explained when copious numbers of electrons are accelerated to wave velocity in a circular shaped device.

Also looking at the graphs, there is a current multiplication of at least one order of magnitude.

Two methods are presented for producing the traveling wave and resultant DC current derived from RF input current, one utilizing a transmission line and the other a polyphase drive system.

So, to be sure, the patent US3085189 generously provided by PIX is very relevant to the topic of the thread.

I recommend that the capacitors be matched as closely as possible and that care is exercised in the coil construction.



---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1531


Buy me a cigar
Dear ION.

Chet spoke to me via Skype yesterday evening about this patent.

I assume a Fluorescent tube could be used in one of the configurations? Being a fish keeper we have a UV steriliser in operation, I wondered if one of those might be better than the phosphor coated lighting tubes?

Just thinking out loud...... :)

Cheers Graham.


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3052
It's turtles all the way down
Dear ION.

Chet spoke to me via Skype yesterday evening about this patent.

I assume a Fluorescent tube could be used in one of the configurations? Being a fish keeper we have a UV steriliser in operation, I wondered if one of those might be better than the phosphor coated lighting tubes?

Just thinking out loud...... :)

Cheers Graham.

Dear Graham

Yes, that would be fine as it is probably a mercury vapor lamp. I also have one of those clear tubes. Use care to shield your eyes from the UV rays.  Only thing I'm not sure about is the gas pressure in those tubes.  According to the patent, the frequency is not critical, but gas pressure has a big effect on DC current output (Fig3).


I would advise anyone interested in this build to do the coil winding on a good stiff former such that other devices can also be slid into the tube, such as copper or iron wire "collector" or partially conductive materials, or just totally open and accelerating free electrons in the air as in Fig7

Note also that the effect is supposedly reversible i.e. running a strong DC current from a wire passed through the coil interior will excite the transmission line to a higher amplitude of oscillation. (Sec 1, Par 40-45)

When winding, bring out a small twist every 12 turns as a terminal to attach the capacitors used for loading the line.

I'm still looking into wire gauge but used 0.4mm (26 AWG) for the calculations. It may be possible to fit heavier wire.

Interestingly, in researching traveling wave tubes, I found the term "collector" refers to the electron beam target in such tubes.

Regards
ION

P.S. Caveat Emptor: Regarding this patent, until proven otherwise my signature at the bottom of the post still applies. We shall see.


« Last Edit: 2017-03-23, 16:35:32 by ION »


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1130
Hi ION,

i was looking at the patent and understand from your and Grahams comments that your are primarily looking at the Fig. 5 configuration,  Right?

It says:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
‘FIG. 5 shows a sealed glass tube 9,5 cm. diameter and 60 cm. long, containing mercury vapour at about 10-3 mm. Hg pressure and provided at each end with
heavy section sealed-in electrodes one of which is an electron emitting cathode.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This 9,5 cm diameter is rather thick is it not as normal Fluorescent lamps are thinner (the , in this 9,5 means the European indication for a decimal point i think).
Also the pressure (10-3 mm Hg = 0.001mm Hg) ) seems higher as in a normal Fluorescent lamp as according to the below wiki they are at 0.8 Pa  (which is 0.006mm Hg
according to the webside below the wiki).

==========================================================================================================
http://Https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorescent_lamp

A Fluorescent lamp tube is filled with a gas containing low pressure mercury vapor and argon, xenon, neon, or krypton.
The pressure inside the lamp is around 0.3% of atmospheric pressure.[23]

[23] Kulshreshtha, Alok K. (2009). Basic Electrical Engineering: Principles and Applications.
India: Tata McGraw-Hill Education. p. 801. ISBN 0-07-014100-2.
The partial pressure of the mercury vapor alone is about 0.8 Pa (8 millionths of atmospheric pressure), in a T12 40-watt lamp. See Kane and Sell, 2001, page 185
================================================================================================

http://Http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/pressure-units-converter-d_569.html
10-3mm Hg = 0.13Pa
0.8Pa = 0.006mm Hg

=================================================================================================

Anyway, if the pressure and diameter are no real show stoppers, i am interested to give it a try.
I understand your advice is to use a (transparent?) stiff former so we can change the Fluorescent lamps for anything else (copper or iron wire "collector" or partially conductive materials).
Transparent because we would like to see the lamp light up, right?



Regards Itsu
« Last Edit: 2017-03-23, 21:22:15 by Itsu »
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1531


Buy me a cigar
Hi Itsu.

Indeed, 95 mm is nearly 4" in diameter!  The older fluorescent tubes were 25 mm 1" in diameter.

Would the higher negative pressure in the patent specification slow the progress of the electrons ? 

More musing.   ;)

Cheers Graham.


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3052
It's turtles all the way down
Guys, the bold 9 is the reference designator pointing to the tube.

The tube is 5 cm or 50 mm diameter as shown in my spreadsheet for the coil data.

See the attached drawing fig 5, upper left with the reference designator 9 pointing to the tube.

All bold numbers in U.S. patents are designators to components of a drawing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In section 1 paragraph 45 it is stated that a fixed conductor can be used (in place of the tube) and a current that flows unidirectionally (a DC current) in the fixed conductor will generate a frequency in the transmission line.

So, the device is reversible in it's operation, it can produce DC current in a conductor from an oscillator input to the transmission line or it can produce a high frequency in the transmission line from a DC current that is flowing in the tube or in a conductor where the tube could have been located.

Thus we do not need to have a gas tube to test the viability of the patent.

The device, if it works as advertised represents a fundamentally novel method of AC (RF) to DC conversion and vice versa. (section 1 paragraph 55 to 60).

Grum and Itsu, you have both been down quite a number of dead ends and I don't want to cheer lead another possible dead end. I just personally find this patent extremely interesting as it stands on its own and incidentally in it's possible ties to the TPU. I do intend to test it myself very soon. Please do not feel obligated to build this.
 
Hope this helps.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Itsu said:
Quote
I understand your advice is to use a (transparent?) stiff former so we can change the Fluorescent lamps for anything else (copper or iron wire "collector" or partially conductive materials).
Transparent because we would like to see the lamp light up, right?

Dear Itsu
I don't recall saying that it should be transparent, but do recall saying be careful if you use a tube and it is visible as the UV light is harmful. I said I have a clear germicidal mercury vapor tube like Grahams. Perhaps that was the source of the confusion. Also, I don't think the pressure and diameter, if a tube is used, is that big a deal, as we are just looking for proof of a concept.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attached is updated chart with mm and inches
« Last Edit: 2017-03-24, 02:17:59 by ION »


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 867
Hello!

Do we have any idea about the power level and frequency range required of the oscillator in these patents? I skimmed the patents but that patent-lingo makes my eyeballs cross and sweat comes out of my forehead, so usually I just skip to the Claims and drawings/explanations.



---------------------------
"The easiest person to fool is yourself" -- Richard Feynman
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1130

ION,

thanks for the explaination, i did found it strange they used the comma.
But i have a general problem with reading patents, not only because of the language (English here), but also the style.

I was mentioning the transparent former as that would be the only way to see any light coming from the lamp.

Anyway, perhaps if you have a crude setup you can show it so that i better can visualize it.

Regards Itsu   
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2017-06-27, 07:58:45