OK, how did it magnify? what did it magnify? where in his patents is this 3rd or extra coil at? how did it transmit and by what natural medium? was it overunity? was it called a magnifying transmitter for no good reason? did Tesla work on this technology for a year in colorado springs with no success? (so why the 194 foot tower on long island?) soo many questions. Don ;)
There is no magnification, just a concentration of the field between the emitter and the receiver, that makes the two resonant circuits acting as a single one thanks to their capacitive and/or inductive coupling, nevertheless with a damping proportional to the ratio of the wavelength to the distance and with losses in the environment.
This is a conventional technology with poor results for energy transmission in space, except at a very short distance. Tesla failed with it, and this is explainable.
I believe Tesla himself called it a 'magnifying transmitter' as in his tests he appeared to have more power available at the receiver than was input to the transmitter. In fact I'm sure of this as I've either read a paper by Telsa on it, or read a transcription of one of his lectures. Tesla thought that the system was coupling to the aether and so basically tapping into cosmic energy.
Konstantin Meyl seems to have done quite a bit of work in this area and is worth looking up. He did used to provide a kit, which supposedly replicated Tesla's magnifying transmitter, transmitting so-called scalar waves. In fact it may even have been Tesla that first started using the term 'scalar waves'.
Anyway, it seems to be a rather grey area, as supposedly scalar waves do not lose energy over distance like EM wave, and is not inhibited by a Faraday cage. But as Exn pointed out, in practice it only seems to work over a short distance and so does suggest simple capacitive coupling. It may however just be that getting everything just right is hard to achieve.
I'm actually researching this area at the moment, with views to replicating the Meyl apparatus and doing some of my own experiments. I'm actually quite surprised that no one has ever posted on Meyl or started a dedicated Meyl thread.
Tesla himself called it a 'magnifying transmitter' but Tesla failed. And what was magnified? Where are the measurement protocol and data? It is easy to magnify the power but never the energy (until now). Tesla was a brilliant inventor and experimenter but a poor theorician. He was wrong vs Maxwell with his longitudinal waves.
The experiments from Konstantin Meyl are very basic experiments that every ham radio operator played with, one time or another. They are perfectly explained with Maxwell equations by the near fields conditions, there is no need of "scalar waves". Konstantin Meyl misinterprets obvious results. He also pretends that neutrinos are absorbed by the earth, provoking an expansion of the planet, and deduces that the solar eclipses increase the probability of earth quakes, against any experimental evidence. He is not a credible person. It's a shame that such inconsistant gibberish from pseudo-scientists are spread by ignorants who don't understand what is going on, but want justify absurd dogmas of free energy by pleasant magic words as "scalar waves", without formalism and in front of a contrary theoretical and experimental obviousness. >:(
I'm not arguing with you Exn, in fact I tend to agree with everything you have said, I was simply providing dag with a more definitive answer to his initial questions.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2011.09.15, 08:00:03
It's a shame that such inconsistant gibberish from pseudo-scientists are spread by ignorants who don't understand what is going on, >:(
Too right Exn, nowhere is it more rampant than in my main area of interest: Electrolysis and the dissociation of the water molecule. Everybody and there dog on both forums and on youtube would have you believe that they are getting over-Faraday amounts of gas from simple electrolysers... yet it appears that none of them understand or even grasp the basics of Faraday's Laws of Electrolysis! How ridiculous is that! C.C
Quote from: Farrah Day on 2011.09.15, 12:34:25
I'm not arguing with you Exn, in fact I tend to agree with everything you have said, I was simply providing dag with a more definitive answer to his initial questions.
From what I read from you elsewhere, I guessed that we have similar views. But English is not my mother tongue, so it is sometimes difficult for me to detect irony or to distinguish between questions that are asked to simply know the answers, and questions used as indirect objections to others.
Quote
Too right Exn, nowhere is it more rampant than in my main area of interest: Electrolysis and the dissociation of the water molecule. Everybody and there dog on both forums and on youtube would have you believe that they are getting over-Faraday amounts of gas from simple electrolysers... yet it appears that none of them understand or even grasp the basics of Faraday's Laws of Electrolysis! How ridiculous is that! C.C
I share your opinion, Farrah. Many people don't know the laws of physics, don't lead proper measurements, and misinterpret the observations. Moreover the worst of them think their ignorance is for us an advantage, because their mind wouldn't be formatted by the academism :). They think that they think outside the box, when they repeat the errors of the past whithout even having the sagacity of the pioneers to solve them.
I'm pleased to see that there are more critical minds on overunityresearch.com than on many other forums dedicated to free energy. It's positive. Doubt is what let us ask questions and from questions come new ideas and possibly solutions, while with faith one stands still. When the skeptics will be convinced, we can say that free energy is real.
hello everyone! thanks for your ideas, can we please keep this thread for discussion purposes only and not for debating ones academic credentials; arguing or bashing each other as much as possible. that would be non-productive, thank you. we need to remember that tesla was also an academian who knew many others in his day like lord kelvin, hertz and yes even einstein. after all how many of US can say we designed the first ac power system still being used today after 115 yrs. along with the brushless polyphase motors. i believe some refered to him as DR. TESLA on occasion. is everybody familier with nikola tesla's colorado springs notes 1899-1900 and the deposition where he speaks of his work in new york and his magnifing transmitter? these are MUST READ to comprehend tesla's point of view. his is the point of view we should be descussing. these writings are all over the internet; no reason one cannot read them if they want to. @ exniloest thank you for your responce over on the other tesla thread; i probably should have started this one first. i agree with you on the energy responce about the 50hp x3600=180,000hp @ 1 sec.; although tesla states in his deposition that he could discharge his capactors at a rate up to 18,000 times per sec through the primary circuit if needed; could this change the output power delivery? this energy was stored (95% of this energy was conserved and or accumalated) in the secondary resonant circuit and not dissapated all at once. it was not transmitted through space, according to tesla. the metalic ball was a loading or charging capacitor for energy storage; it was not an antenna for transmitting; but was part of the resonant circuit. :) Don
Quote from: dag57 on 2011.09.14, 04:40:18
OK, how did it magnify? what did it magnify? where in his patents is this 3rd or extra coil at? how did it transmit and by what natural medium? ...
Elements of Tesla's notes and information were lost in past decades and his knowledge did with him. However, I did run across this in my searches:
#7,960,867
"Methods and systems for wireless energy and data transmission"http://www.google.com/patents?id=TQLnAQAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false
This may or may not be along the lines of Tesla's work, but we do have it to look at now.
I'll download a copy of the patent when I have more time on another computer. This place is closing.
--Lee
thanks Lee , i will look over this asap, looks like someone repatented tesla's work. very interesting. did not know that could be done. :-\ Don
I've attached a copy here
[pdf]http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1101.0;attach=6113[/pdf]
@dag57 and Peter...
Very good. I can't upload anything to the 'Net, so thanks. dag57 had a point. Wait. Here's something legally: It's been over 75 years since Tesla patented his inventions. They're in the public domain now. Still, I think is it a gray area in terms of patent law.
I'll have to finish copying the patent to read it and also look at the sub-patent reference patents.
Reedit:
The patent reference list to the one I uploaded has this one, the Plasma Globe, as an ornamental lamp:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=roIsAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract#v=onepage&q&f=false
Also,
This one is associated with the same one as the power transceiver above:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=PK7bAQAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false
It's a resonant transformer as well.
--Lee
Quote from: dag57 on 2011.09.16, 05:31:59
thanks Lee , i will look over this asap, looks like someone repatented tesla's work. very interesting. did not know that could be done. :-\ Don
Yep, you bet.
Because I'm becoming more interested in this possible OU concept, I stumbled onto this diagram in the Google Images search page, with link I included:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2300.900
(Reply #905, pg. 61)
I copied the diagram and see a rather moderate resemblance to a TV flyback transformer having diodes and coil turns in series to give a high voltage output to a CRT picture tube. It does look like Tesla influenced this theoretical design to some extent, as well as a multi-ring TPU. A few of the Russian experimenters at http://www.001-lab.com were considering this type of setup as worth exploring with their own circuit diagrammed designs.
In the descriptive text of patent #7,960,867; Column 8, Pg. 23, starting at Line 30, the inventors maintain that either side of the transceiving sets of hardware can be used as a transmitter or receiver of data or energy---which should be considered an improvement as a data transceiving system over a similarly wired Tesla coil magnifying transmitter.
--Lee
Quote from: dag57 on 2011.09.15, 17:54:09
...the metalic ball was a loading or charging capacitor for energy storage; it was not an antenna for transmitting; but was part of the resonant circuit. :) Don
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/7909-open-source-project-tesla-jackson-wireless-transmission-4.html
(Reply #112, pg. 4; about 3/4 the way down the page)
Outside influences can change the circuit's functioning characteristics as described by the one who posted. It appears to me that the Tesla coil and Magnifying Transmitter are interacting with the atmosphere as that medium relates, being sort of a dielectric between the Earth and the lower ionosphere in a kind of an ongoing capacitive reaction while the circuit runs.
--Lee
By way of introduction let me say I have only been looking at alternative energy for a little over a year and a half. I have no formal training in electronic or electrical engineering but have designed and built some low power digital circuits for my own use.
Having been sidetracked into many of the various projects that have yet to yield usable power of any quantity I went back to the source - Nikola Tesla. There are two major problems in dealing with Dr. Tesla's work. One is comprehending how little was known in the late 19th century that we take for granted today. The other is the enormous volume of work he produced.
The keys to his devices are spread out amoung many patents, lectures, and magazine articles over a long period of time - decades, in fact. As with all fundamental development, progress is gradual and one idea leads to another, it is made workable and in doing so other ideas occur. So too was Dr. Tesla's work.
The details of his Magnifying Transmitter project are spread out through many patents. The basic patent, US 1,119,732 is the familiar tower with a torus shaped top from which the Wardencliffe project was developed. That patent references two other patents that were filed earlier and which hold key details: US 645,576 and US 649,621. These two patents are referenced by several of his other patents, another of which holds other key information - Canadian patent 0142352. All of these patents need to be read and pondered in their entirety.
I have been wondering of late if the 'magnifying' and 'transmitter' parts could be separated so have done a more thoughtful examination of the patents. What I found is disappointing but, never the less, enlightening.
A few things to realise up front: the magnifying transmitter and the radiant enrgy concepts are two different things - they are not related although they could be used together; Dr. Tesla was thinking on planetary scales, not in the sense of planetary distribution, although he did that too, but in the sense that the entire planet, taken as a whole, was but one of the components of his circuits. It's not that his systems will work on a planetary scale but that his systems require the use of the whole globe to work at all.
This latter is why today's Tesla coils are little more than entertainments. They do not use the entire globe as a component of the circuit. Nor can they in today's infrastructure.
-------------------------
Wireless Transmission of Power Through the Atmosphere
This method would transmit millions of watts of power by conductance at fifteen or twenty million volts established by ionizing the air between balloons held at thirty thousand feet or lower to support the elevated terminals. The balloons' altitude was to be maintained by reservoirs of hydrogen or helium gas pumped to the balloons. The lower the elevation of the balloons, the higher the required voltage would be. He states many times in interviews, articles, and patents that the power distribution is accomplished by conductance. So how do you achieve conductance at thirty thousand feet? High voltage, high frequency impulses through the rarified atmosphere which is also very cold at that altitude which reduces resistance. If this sounds too fantastic, read the patents US 645,576 and US 649,621.
-------------------------------
Wireless Transmission of Power Through the Crust of the Earth
Dr. Tesla used resonant, parametric oscillation to amplify the natural electrical currents of the earth, now called Telluric currents, to produce roughly 300:1 energy gain where the energy induced was required to travel to the opposite side of the planet and return, at which time the amplifying pulse would be emitted again to enhance the returned pulse. The point here is that the entire globe must be pulsed such that a return pulse can be amplified. Dr. Tesla states he accomplished this with a "few hundred horsepower". If we take "a few hundred" to mean three hundred, the output power was around 224kW. The process most likely does not scale downward.
In a section subtitled "Signaling at 1,000,000 miles!" Dr. Tesla states: "...succeeded in producing a machine which, to explain its operation in plain language, resembled a pump in its action, drawing electricity from the earth and driving it back into the same at an enormous rate." [Collier's Weekly ,Talking With Planets, February 9, 1901
In a section subtitled "Experiments in Colorado" he states: "The rates of electrical movement involved in strong induction apparatus had measured but a few hundred horse-power, and I produced electrical movements of rates of one hundred and ten thousand horsepower." [Collier's Weekly ,Talking With Planets, February 9, 1901
The most essential requirement is, however, that irrespective of frequency the wave or wave-train should continue for a certain interval of time, which I have estimated to be not less than one-twelfth or probably 0.08484 of a second and which is taken in passing to and returning from the region diametrically opposite the pole over the earth's surface with a mean velocity of about four hundred and seventy-one thousand two hundred and forty kilometers per second. [U.S. PATENT 787,412]
---------------------------------
So we can see from this that the magnifying and transmitting parts cannot be separated. The entire globe must be used to accomplish the magnification of the Telluric currents and it is not scalable downwards.
More important to us today is that these methods are impossible to implement. If they had been established in his day the world may have evolved around his concepts but that did no happen and the prospect that we may today transmit exawatts of power conductively through either the atmosphere or the crust of the earth is nil. The one thing that Dr. Tesla had that no longer exists is a world unsullied by the global infrastructure that has been built in the last one hundred years or so. While his systems could be used by the entire planet, they are also required the use of the entire planet as a part of his system. Attempting to implement his methods today would require scrapping the last hundred years of development and starting over. The two systems, Dr. Tesla's and today's infrastructure, cannot coexist.
---------------------------------
Considering the power levels that Dr. Tesla proposed to transmit, these methods are "green" in no way. Environmentalism did not exist in his day, but consider the impact on the atmospheric chemistry if transmitted through the air and the impact on wildlife in the air, on the land, and in the ocean if millions or billions of watts of power are transmitted by conductance around the globe. At those scales these methods could, and probably would, impact the magnetic field that protects us from the solar wind. Also consider that the world of today consumes exawatt hours of electricity every year and how little of that is used for transportation.
---------------------------------
The use of radiant energy, on the other hand, still is feasible but will very limited. I contend that radiant energy collection is best accomplished at high altitudes above sea level at the ground surface but that one requirement then also requires the distribution of the power and Dr. Tesla was thinking of using the above system for distribution. Keep in mind that Dr. Tesla was always working towards distribution of industrial quantities of power. While radiant energy may be of use on an inidivual basis today, it will require that the individual live and work at a high altitude for radiant energy to be of use.
Radiant energy is not, however, the topic of this thread so I will leave it at that for the time being. I have more details on the magnifying transmitter but this post is getting long so reply here if you want clarifications on this post.
Interesting write-up. Thanks.
@thx1138
I would agree that was an excellent write-up and I think you have a pretty good idea of what Tesla had in mind. It was not hertz type 'waves", Tesla wanted to charge the whole of the planets surface as one conductor separated by an insulating blanket of air from the upper atmosphere which was charged to the opposite polarity. At which point the concept of time comes into play because the planet is so large and it takes time for the charged state to travel from the emitter/tower to a focal point on the other side of the planet and reflect back. It is not common knowledge but I have measured how these wave like disturbances travel on conductors and when the charge density increases at the termination of a open conductor it does reflect back even at very low voltages.
Now imagine the Earth as a metal sphere with a central emitter (the tower) and a rapid change in voltage at the base starts propagating outward then reflects back from the far side where a singular node is produced... you don't want to be on this node.. Ever. Really it is no different than placing an inductor at the center between two very large metal spheres or at the center between two very large plates. The change in charge density starts at the emitter and terminates at the farthest side of the conductors where a node is formed then it reflects back not unlike an LC circuit. If you use an electrometer array you can actually time the rate of conductance along a conductor open on one end.
At which point we understand there was a singular point in time or history when our world could have become a very different place. The technology is sound and the implications large, at every point where a natural resource was abundant we would place an emitter and each emitter it timed to every other by the phase differential which is no different that our current AC distribution system. Every emitter becomes a node in an energy network, each reinforcing the other, and all acting together to maintain the network. Then at any point on the planet a detector could be utilized to extract this change in energy density as a wave like disturbance such as our home or planes, trains, automobiles or boats. There would be no refueling anything and no need for distribution systems or internal combustion engines as everything would be electric and pollution free. Can you imagine what our world would be like today?, I don't think we can even imagine how different a world such as this would be as the energy is literally "everywhere" and abundant.
The major downside is we are now living between two very large capacitor plates with a potential changing in magnitude on a scale we can hardly imagine. As you say, Tesla was smart but the changes to the environment on a global scale seem hard to fathom. However we should consider the changes taking place right now, rising CO2 levels, 90+% of fish stocks are gone, 90+% of all fresh water is polluted, our oceans are full of plastic, our landfills are overflowing, energy demand is rising as supply is falling, the population is growing as rapidly as the forest are disappearing through deforestation. To be honest I'm really not sure that we could do any worse, I mean really, however deep down I know we could if industry had there way. In any case there was that singular point in time when our world could have been a very different place than the one we know now and it's neat to consider how things could have changed if Tesla had his way.
Regards
AC
In my opinion, the magnifying transmitter is just a big plasma globe. lol The reason it is magnified because of its size. How would one tap into the energy of this thing? I guess just put one terminal to the ground and the other to the air. You can also do that with power line, but power line contain energy in the wire while Tesla coil is... everywhere. Now even if it produces OU, would you want a Tesla coil running day and night in your neighborhood, your country, the whole world? You should know how disturbing this is. I guess Tesla wanted to do it only to prove OU to the world.
Quote from: thx1138 on 2012.10.07, 12:34:13
-------------------------------
Wireless Transmission of Power Through the Crust of the Earth
Dr. Tesla used resonant, parametric oscillation to amplify the natural electrical currents of the earth, now called Telluric currents, to produce roughly 300:1 energy gain where the energy induced was required to travel to the opposite side of the planet and return, at which time the amplifying pulse would be emitted again to enhance the returned pulse. The point here is that the entire globe must be pulsed such that a return pulse can be amplified. Dr. Tesla states he accomplished this with a "few hundred horsepower". If we take "a few hundred" to mean three hundred, the output power was around 224kW. The process most likely does not scale downward.
Hi @thx1138, Can you tell us where this figure comes from ? Are you sure you don't mean 300:1 "power gain". Big difference I think.
Cheers
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.10.08, 00:08:57
Hi @thx1138, Can you tell us where this figure comes from ? Are you sure you don't mean 300:1 "power gain". Big difference I think.
The units cited were in horsepower so I used the word "power": In a section subtitled "Experiments in Colorado" he states: "The rates of electrical movement involved in strong induction apparatus had measured but a few hundred horse-power, and I produced electrical movements of rates of one hundred and ten thousand horsepower." [Collier's Weekly ,Talking With Planets, February 9, 1901
As the post stated, the number assumes "a few hundred horsepower" means 300 horsepower.
Quote from: allcanadian on 2012.10.07, 19:53:43
As you say, Tesla was smart but the changes to the environment on a global scale seem hard to fathom.
Yes they are hard to fathom but we can work from what we do know. Today the world consumes 20,279,640 GWh/yr of electricity [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_energy_consumption] and we know that Dr. Tesla was speaking of true conduction. He said that several times in articles and patents. We know that ionization can cause chemical changes in the atmosphere that produce nitric acid and ozone. So imagine that much power being pumped conductively through the atmosphere and the chemical changes that would occur. And keep in mind that our electricity consumption would be much greater than that if we weren't using the other energy sources we are using today.
Quote from: allcanadian on 2012.10.07, 19:53:43To be honest I'm really not sure that we could do any worse...
Sure we can: destroy the magnetic field or significantly decrease it and our atmosphere will burn away; alter gravity and the earth and/or the moon could change their orbits, the latter possibly crashing into the former or at least having a major impact on tides which also might alter the rotation of the earth..
I also speculate that that amount of power pumped through the atmosphere and/or crust conductively would have an affect on the magnetic field although I don't know what they affect would be. The magnetosphere is one of the key players in making the earth habitable because it shields us from the solar wind. Mars has a negligible magnetic field so its atmosphere nor crust is protected from the solar wind. Changing how the solar wind impacts the environment on earth would definitely impact the weather also.
But the point is we just don't know that it would be any less detrimental than methods used today nor can it be proven unless we discover another planet with which to experiment.
That's because we avoid important questions. Really if magnetic field of Earth or gravity or rotation of it is once set in the past and it's in stable balance then we should not tap this power. However , and this is more probable if all those are manifestations of incoming power , we only need to understand the process and I'm sure it is safe to tap this energy but it must be done UNIFORMLY all over the world. By by THE POWER GRID !
@thx1138
QuoteBut the point is we just don't know that it would be any less detrimental than methods used today nor can it be proven unless we discover another planet with which to experiment.
You may find it interesting that I have replicated many of Tesla's patents many years ago and performed experiments concerning the very thing you are talking about. Take conduction for example, I mean no offense to anyone but most have absolutely no idea what Tesla was actually refering to in reality when he spoke of conduction. For instance I wanted to measure the rate and area of conduction in materials of specific geometries and found there is really no instrument available. So I built a coherer which worked marginaly well, then an electrometer which worked better then went on to build extremely sensitive solid state detectors and detector arrays which could tell whether anyone in my house was walking across the carpet.
I found that if a person touches one end of an insulated wire up to 100 feet long the whole of the wire near instantly retains the same polarity as that person which in 99.99% of cases is a positive charge. Our bodies naturally have a positive charge on it's surface however if I hold one end of my 100 foot wire and touch the other end of the wire to the negative terminal of a 12v battery then the wire and the whole of my body now has a negative charge on it's surface. I measure the surface charge of my body as very positive near electronic devices however if I simply remove my shoes the level drops by a large degree and if I touch the earth or an earthed conductor the whole surface of my body retains the exact same state of charge as the ground which is negative. I could easily write a book on the number of experiments I performed in this field of research however I think you may be getting an idea of what I am suggesting.
For the most part what Tesla was referring to is already happening on a smaller scale and I would estimate from my experiments that our body would experience polarity reversals at minimum thousands if not tens of thousands of times per day. I am not speaking of milli-volts but thousands if not tens of thousands of volts changing constantly and most everyone is completely oblivious to this fact. Keep in mind I am speaking solely of conduction and the other half of the equation is induction which will cause a charge seperation in all objects insulators or not to varied degrees. If you want to understand what Tesla was refering to build an electrostatic charge detector and you will see a world you never knew existed. There is nothing .... I say nothing static about the world we live in and it has always been dynamic as Tesla suggested.
The next device I am building will utilize a relatively new technology called a zero-threshold FET , (http://www.powerpulse.net/story.php?storyID=13368) and I had tested a similar technology many years ago. I called it a zero threshold detector and it was a true zero theshold detector as far as my instruments were concerned however the threshold was prone to instability which increases as the zero barrier is approached. Note this line in the article .... floating-gate charge technology, lol, priceless as this is exactly what I was doing and this is what every expert will tell you never to do. ALD is going to make billions by scavenging energy from any signals above zero or ambient to power our portable devices by doing something every single expert has told you never to do under any circumstances, as I said priceless.
AC
Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter consists of a big LC circuit connected to the ground, with a high terminal capacity, and using high voltage and low frequencies in order that a standing wave can be established around the earth, meaning that an even number of half-wavelengths, from 1 to some ones, is on the order of the earth circumference.
Therefore a receiver of the same kind as the transmitter and resonant at the same frequency, would always be in the field of the transmitter, and could intercept anywhere a part of the energy of the standing wave.
- We see that "Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter" magnifies nothing. Energy is needed to create the field. If the field is depleted by an energy receiver, energy must be provided by the transmitter to maintain the field.
- As the frequency must be low and the range of the circuit dimensions is well below the wave length, there is no generation of EM waves, therefore there is no propagation around the earth. There would be only an electric field of the same kind as this one between the plates of a capacitor, the second plate of this capacitor being the terminal capacity of the receiver, and the complete circuit being looped through the earth.
- It follows that we face an ordinary electric field, whose the field lines tend to loop from the terminal capacity to the earth according to the principle of least action, i.e. following the shortest way. The main field is located in the immediate vicinity of the transmitter between the terminal capacity and the ground, fading very quickly with the distance.
- Even if the receiver is resonant and thus favors the coupling with the transmitter, the electric field fades quickly with the distance, meaning that a receiver at a long distance would receive only a weak part of the field
- The main field between looped to the ground, currents in the ground would also add supplementary losses. And if the receiver, which is capacitively coupled with the transmitter, consumes current, there will be again losses in the earth resistance that loops the circuit.
I consider Tesla as a great inventor and a high skilled engineer, but not as a competent theorician. Its limits has appeared when he tried to apply to a real setup his theorized idea of "longitudinal waves" that have never been demonstrated and have always been confused with near fields. A near field doesn't propagate, it remains linked to the field source, it is not autonomous unlike the EM waves but it creates all phenomena that we observe with resonant coupled circuits. Maxwell was right against Tesla and Maxwell has shown the pertinence of his model which is incompatible with longitudinal waves in the vacuum. That is why Tesla failed with its "magnifying" transmitter, and that is why all those who have resumed his idea (and who had not even the Tesla's competences) failed also.
Until concrete proof of the contrary, the Tesla's magnifying transmitter is a dead end. The practical applications can concern only short distance and low power up to tens of watts, like wireless cell phone chargers that the industry already build according to Maxwell equations, using the more practical magnetic field instead of the electric field. For this kind of setups to be efficient, the dimensions of the circuits must be the broadest possible, while being kept short in comparison with the wavelength otherwise EM waves are radiated. For a transmission at some tens Km, this would mean towers of tens of km with tremendous coils and terminal capacities. Not only around the earth but only at some km, we are far from this technology. Moreover it's not even thinkable due the ambient fear of any fields from the general public, and particularly at a moment where there are real indications that strong low frequency fields are harmful for the health.
Quote from: exnihiloest
Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter consists of a big LC circuit
connected to the ground...
...
We see that "Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter" magnifies
nothing...
Perhaps Tesla was speaking of the Magnification Factor
or "Q" (Quality) of his circuitry?
Claimed proof of "scalar longitudinal electrodynamic waves":
Monstein and Wesley: Observation of scalar longitudinal electrodynamic waves
http://www.astro.ethz.ch/people/pdf_files/cmonstei/7210.pdf
(You can find several comments regarding the results presented in this paper.)
Tesla has an equation in his Colorado Springs Notes that he said provides the "magnification factor". I'll look it up when I get home.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2012.10.08, 23:15:41
Claimed proof of "scalar longitudinal electrodynamic waves":
Monstein and Wesley: Observation of scalar longitudinal electrodynamic waves
http://www.astro.ethz.ch/people/pdf_files/cmonstei/7210.pdf
(You can find several comments regarding the results presented in this paper.)
...
I knew the Monstein's paper, because it is a rare paper about "longitudinal waves" (in air or vacuum) having crossed the frontier of the pseudo-sciences, and as a ham radio operator having also used the 432 Mhz band, I was very interested in this paper.
I can say that the experimental setup is far from having eliminated the likely "pollution" of the experiment by classical EM waves. The environment is not controlled, the signal is weak, there are reflections from the surrounding whose the parameters are not known. For me Monstein detected ordinary EM waves. That is why his experiment has been rejected (http://iopscience.iop.org/0295-5075/66/1/153) and that no academic followed him.
As for all antenna tests, a serious experiment needs at least an anechoic chamber.
Quote from: Dumped on 2012.10.08, 19:21:39
Perhaps Tesla was speaking of the Magnification Factor or "Q" (Quality) of his circuitry?
Possible explanation, but only a misinterpretation of the Q factor could lead to the idea of "magnification". The Q factor determines only the quality of the resonance, i.e. the higher the Q, the longer the possible duration of oscillations due to less losses. But even an (not physical) infinite Q, meaning no dampling of the oscillation, is not "magnification".
Tesla says the "magnification factor" depends on pL/R
Not sure what "p" is.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2012.10.09, 12:32:55
Tesla says the "magnification factor" depends on pL/R
Not sure what "p" is.
Possibly frequency in radians per second.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2012.10.09, 12:32:55
Tesla says the "magnification factor" depends on pL/R
Not sure what "p" is.
A post I made a long time ago:
Quote from: Grumpy on 2010.11.14, 15:45:09
Your system is not driving anything that has a mechanism for gain.
You might try changing one of the secondaries to a tertiary magnifier coil and locate it so it is not inductively coupled to the other two coils. Now you will have a two-coil Tesla transformer driving a magnifier coil. Ground on leg of the secondary and the other leg of the secondary goes to the tertiary coil and the other and of the tertiary coil has the large surface area top load. You can bring the ground and top terminal together for plasma between them.
Tesla also stated in the CS Notes that you can drive two tertiary coils with a standard transformer, with a ferrous core, and achieve any potential desired. Tesla states that the rise is pressure is due to the factor pL/R. p is the spark rate per second, L is inductance, R is resistance of magnifier coil. He also explains that high self capacity absorbs the energy and ruins the magnification.
Hm... So Tesla indeed spoke about the Q factor. However, his statement of achieving any potential desired is not entirely accurate in my thinking. The core eventually reach saturation and put a limit to the voltage.
About the capacitance ruin the Q factor can easily be seen in the equation. We know frequency is inverse proportional to the square root of LC. Increasing capacitance would lower the Q factor.
Q= pL/R = fL/R = (L/R)(1/sqrt(LC))
I don't know why he did not use pulse motor. He can also achieve any voltage desire with a pulse motor without worry about saturation, but it probably fly itself apart above a few hundred thousands RPM. lol Oh well, pro and con.
I don't think they are the same thing.
From the definition:
Q= 2*π*[Energy stored]/[Energy dissipated per cycle] = 2*π*f* [Energy stored]/[Energy dissipated]
The energy in a coil is 1/2*L*I2. The dissipated energy is R*I2.
So:
Q=π*f * L/R. Thus in Tesla's equation, p= π*f (f the frequency).
This is the Q factor of a RL circuit (R reduces to the resistance of the coil if there is not another one).
For a series RLC circuit, Q = 1/R * √(L/C)
What I think he trying to magnify is the voltage. He found a way to keep rising voltage which supposedly restricted by CEMF or Lenz.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.10.10, 08:33:32
From the definition:
Q= 2*π*[Energy stored]/[Energy dissipated per cycle] = 2*π*f* [Energy stored]/[Energy dissipated]
The energy in a coil is 1/2*L*I2. The dissipated energy is R*I2.
So:
Q=π*f * L/R. Thus in Tesla's equation, p= π*f (f the frequency).
This is the Q factor of a RL circuit (R reduces to the resistance of the coil if there is not another one).
For a series RLC circuit, Q = 1/R * √(L/C)
Agreed.
Did Tesla calculate a Q value that led him to believe that his transmitter was "magnifying" the energy supplied to it?
Something like: Q < 2π (i.e. more power out than supplied)
Power. :D
Here is the words from Tesla, In my opinion he is saying he uses resonance to get a very big resonant rise and the curved surface antenna capacitance minimizes radiations
so that he could "build" up a very high voltage and oscillating current, before beginning any transmissions. That is the magnification. Magnification need not have anything to do with
a physical increase in anything. A magnifying glass does not make more light hit it's lens, it simply concentrates the light that does into a smaller area for greater effect. A magnifying glass does not make free energy or light.
Just like a Magnifying Transmitter does not describe a transmitter that make's or capture's extra energy.
I don't see any claims by Tesla that he gained "extra Energy". I think all the perceived claims are just that mistaken perceptions.
Please see the underlined section in the first quote by Tesla. I invite anyone to show me reference where Tesla claimed to get extra energy from his Transmitters.
This particular quote just says that the energies Tesla utilized were 1000 times greater than the energies utilized in the present antenna's, "present" meaning back then, at the trial, after Tesla had stopped.
He then go's on to talk about why or how he utilized the greater energies then as compared to the energies utilized at "present" meaning back then.
http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/nt_on_ac.htm
QuoteCounsel
Mr. Tesla, at that point, what did you mean by electro-magnetic momentum?
Tesla
I mean that you have to have in the circuit, inertia. You have to have a large self-inductance in order that you may accomplish two things: First, a comparatively low frequency, which will reduce the radiation of the electromagnetic waves to a comparatively small value, and second, a great resonant effect. That is not possible in an antenna, for instance, of large capacity and small self-inductance. A large capacity and small self-inductance is the poorest kind of circuit which can be constructed; it gives a very small resonant effect. That was the reason why in my experiments in Colorado the energies were 1,000 times greater than in the present antennae.
Counsel
You say the energy was 1,000 times greater. Do you mean that the voltage was increased, or the current, or both?
Tesla
Yes [both]. To be more explicit, I take a very large self-inductance and a comparatively small capacity, which I have constructed in a certain way so that the electricity cannot leak out. I thus obtain a low frequency; but, as you know, the electromagnetic radiation is proportionate to the square root of the capacity divided by the self-induction. I do not permit the energy to go out; I accumulate in that circuit a tremendous energy. When the high potential is attained, if I want to give off electromagnetic waves, I do so, but I prefer to reduce those waves in quantity and pass a current into the earth, because electromagnetic wave energy is not recoverable while that [earth] current is entirely recoverable, being the energy stored in an elastic system.
Counsel
What elastic system do you refer to?
Tesla
I mean this: If you pass a current into a circuit with large self-induction, and no radiation takes place, and you have a low resistance, there is no possibility of this energy getting out into space; therefore, the impressed impulses accumulate.
Cheers
P.S. If people are going to persist in claiming that Tesla claimed to get extra energy from his Magnifying Transmitter then I will persist in asking for references to the claims by Tesla.
And I mean references that can truly be attributed to him not just third party or hearsay claims. I have honestly seen no such claims.
I have spent quite some time researching on this subject but there is always the chance I missed the "claim of extra energy".
2nd P.S. This is the quote as above and it tells more, he is also saying in there that the great resonant rise is a result of how he constructed the circuit.
In my opinion the amount of resonant rise is the magnification factor basically. There would be more to it but that is the "meat" of it in my opinion.
QuoteTesla
I mean that you have to have in the circuit, inertia. You have to have a large self-inductance in order that you may accomplish two things: First, a comparatively low frequency, which will reduce the radiation of the electromagnetic waves to a comparatively small value, and second, a great resonant effect. That is not possible in an antenna, for instance, of large capacity and small self-inductance. A large capacity and small self-inductance is the poorest kind of circuit which can be constructed; it gives a very small resonant effect. That was the reason why in my experiments in Colorado the energies were 1,000 times greater than in the present antennae.
..
He wanted LARGE POWER, and he clearly explained it works like explosives. The assumption was to put energy in slow rate into capacitors from regular power station (hydrostation), then to discharge disruptively into magnifying transmitter when the power was enlarged by high Q and frequency raised. After some time it was released as ACTIVITY PULSE of HUGE POWER into ground or upper conducting air strata to form standing wave around globe. Then any receiver can tap this power in small amount but at required level of activity (so up to the max power). The key what he never explained was somewhere else ..... that part he was keen on discussing was about commercial project and supposed to work like ordinary electric station except with minimizing looses (when power station was not loaded it was using only very small power like iddling transformer for example, because of recovery of 95% of energy from standing waves).
The key was elsewhere but Tesla was not eager to describe it (because it would break his financial's supporters commercial power plant plans) and he even once stated this very clearly ....
Now return back and read it again , this is the essence but my English could place a little fog on it so please ask if something is not clear...
Farmhand, you make some very pertinent points.
Resonance does "magnify" both voltage and current
as the electrical energy circulates between the two
reactances, but it is a reactive "power" since voltage
and current are displaced in phase by 90 degrees and
not a "real" power.
There is a realizable gain in signal strength due to
resonance as is demonstrated by the simple passive
crystal radio. The efficiency of the antenna in collecting
radiated energy is increased by resonance.
Tesla's coil is a resonant 1/4 wave circuit which is not
an efficient radiator. The physical length of the coil
(not the length of the conductor itself) is far less
than 1/4 wavelength and is thus a very poor radiator.
The coil does, however, produce a very intense inductive
field in close proximity.
In the Colorado Springs experiments there were occasional
surges in power which reflected back to the generator plant
and did damage to the generators on at least one event.
This spike in power which was noted from time to time no
doubt was caused by atmospheric charge.
Quote from: forest
The key was elsewhere but Tesla was not eager to describe it
(because it would break his financial's supporters commercial
power plant plans) and he even once stated this very clearly ....
Tesla was known to have utilized hyperbole rather often to
bolster his ability to acquire funding and to enhance his
influence.
Tesla had to fulfill his financial supporters plans.
"Tesla Describes his Efforts in Various Fields of Work" in the November 30, 1898 Electrical Review:
"As to the idea of rendering the energy of the sun available for industrial purposes, it fascinated me early but I must admit it was only long after I discovered the rotating magnetic field that it took a firm hold upon my mind. In assailing the problem I found two possible ways of solving it. Either power was to be developed on the spot by converting the energy of the sun's radiations or the energy of vast reservoirs was to be transmitted economically to any distance. Though there were other possible sources of economical power, only the two solutions mentioned offer the ideal feature of power being obtained without any consumption of material. After long thought I finally arrived at two solutions, but on the first of these, namely, that referring to the development of power in any locality from the sun's radiations, I can not dwell at present."
Quote from: Grumpy on 2012.10.10, 13:50:29
...
Did Tesla calculate a Q value that led him to believe that his transmitter was "magnifying" the energy supplied to it?
...
From the definition of Q with the energy, we see that an infinite Q means an absence of losses:
[Energy dissipated per cycle] -> 0
=>
[Energy stored]/[Energy dissipated per cycle] -> ∞
=>
Q -> ∞
A high Q simply means the ability to store energy for a "long" time relative to the signal period, due to weak losses. Energy is added in the system by small quantities at each period, and so we can store more energy and longer if it dissipates slowly.
We might perhaps say that the process is a magnification (neither a multiplication nor a creation), if we keep in mind that in any case, [Energy stored] is this one put into the system step by step and that [Energy stored] = input energy.
I think Q factor is only one of the things. To me if you have a Q factor of 1 in RLC ciruit, it means the energy you put in will dissipate and nothing stored up. Having a Q factor of 100 means 1 watt of input could theoretically result in 100 watts of reactive power.
Let's have a circuit with Q factor of 1000: 1 watts input results in 1kW reactive, but people may have 1 watts input and result in 10 watts reactive or 500 watts input result in 600 watts reactive. This is inefficiency and the other thing I refer to besides having good Q factor. I think the technique lies in timing and pulse width. Same with pulse motor. And if reactive power can be converted to real power, then COP is ... the Q factor.
Quote from: GibbsHelmholtz on 2012.10.11, 12:57:47
I think Q factor is only one of the things. To me if you have a Q factor of 1 in RLC ciruit, it means the energy you put in will dissipate and nothing stored up. Having a Q factor of 100 means 1 watt of input could theoretically result in 100 watts of reactive power.
Let's have a circuit with Q factor of 1000: 1 watts input results in 1kW reactive, but people may have 1 watts input and result in 10 watts reactive or 500 watts input result in 600 watts reactive. This is inefficiency and the other thing I refer to besides having good Q factor. I think the technique lies in timing and pulse width. Same with pulse motor. And if reactive power can be converted to real power, then COP is ... the Q factor.
Exactly. As I told you the thing Tesla was never willing to explain in details is the receiver which run in gain. One impulse from transmitter of known max power (instant power not continous) will let receiver to operate at that power level for many times longer period then the impulse itself or basically mostly infinite time. That was the secret. Without this you have just a power station and many receivers using up to the total power transmitted from station and no more. Read again comment from Tesla I posted previously and you will surely find that I'm right. he just couldn't said it to the press.
Quote from: forest on 2012.10.11, 15:19:10
Exactly. As I told you the thing Tesla was never willing to explain in details is the receiver which run in gain. One impulse from transmitter of known max power (instant power not continous) will let receiver to operate at that power level for many times longer period then the impulse itself or basically mostly infinite time. That was the secret. Without this you have just a power station and many receivers using up to the total power transmitted from station and no more. Read again comment from Tesla I posted previously and you will surely find that I'm right. he just couldn't said it to the press.
Thanks forest,
I think I do understand your thought well. But Tesla did give a patent on how this receiver apparatus...utilizing radiant energy. lol I also gave the math on why it does not use up the reactive power. Basically the current induced to the receiver is so low that it does not load the transmitter. What we extract is just the high voltage being induced. I think this can also be done with regular inductive coupled coil except turn one coil perpendicular. I guess the rapid change in H field would induce a large voltage with little current(still thinking on this one). One would need a capacitor with small capacitance value to maximize the energy capture in this fashion.
Basically this receiver should work in close loop with the bit of starting energy and recovering some looses provided from impulses from transmitter. many implementations are possible. For example two coupled resonant circuits when the second one add energy in phase to the first one, the load is resistive or just quenched by a spark gap or newer devices for example so the oscillations never dies.
Quote from: forest on 2012.10.12, 11:02:49
Basically this receiver should work in close loop with the bit of starting energy and recovering some looses provided from impulses from transmitter. many implementations are possible. For example two coupled resonant circuits when the second one add energy in phase to the first one, the load is resistive or just quenched by a spark gap or newer devices for example so the oscillations never dies.
These are a bit above my head, but I'll try to catch up. lol
I still don't see any quotes or references to Tesla claiming greater than 100 % efficiency with the transmitters.
The radiant energy receivers for the utilization of radiant energy are a different concept entirely.
I don't think a claim to greater than 100% efficiency of the transmitters will be found because I don't think one was made.
If a claim like that was made by Tesla then I have not seen it.
Cheers
P.S. I can show quotes where Tesla states the approximate efficiency of at least one setup, and it's less than 100%.
Powers above the supply power are normal in many regular devices, power is not energy.
..
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.10.13, 03:27:23
I still don't see any quotes or references to Tesla claiming greater than 100 % efficiency with the transmitters.
The radiant energy receivers for the utilization of radiant energy are a different concept entirely.
I don't think a claim to greater than 100% efficiency of the transmitters will be found because I don't think one was made.
If a claim like that was made by Tesla then I have not seen it.
Cheers
P.S. I can show quotes where Tesla states the approximate efficiency of at least one setup, and it's less than 100%.
Powers above the supply power are normal in many regular devices, power is not energy.
..
Correct. He claimed magnification in activity which means instant power but he also stated he used it . How? he never precisely said
The secret is in receivers. All information is not clear public , was supressed or simply Tesla was not eager to say about it.
Quote from: GibbsHelmholtz on 2012.10.11, 12:57:47
I think Q factor is only one of the things. To me if you have a Q factor of 1 in RLC ciruit, it means the energy you put in will dissipate and nothing stored up. Having a Q factor of 100 means 1 watt of input could theoretically result in 100 watts of reactive power.
Let's have a circuit with Q factor of 1000: 1 watts input results in 1kW reactive...
This has no meaning if you don't mention the time. There is no reason to reinterpret the definition of Q which is very clear and without any ambiguity.
The Q is a question of energy, not of power. The power depends on the way you put and extract energy, it's not an intrinsic parameter of a resonant circuit, nor it is essential. If you put 1W during 1000 seconds, you can recover 1KW during 1 s, provided that the losses are low due to a high Q.
Nothing new here.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.10.10, 08:33:32
From the definition:
Q= 2*π*[Energy stored]/[Energy dissipated per cycle] = 2*π*f* [Energy stored]/[Energy dissipated]
...
Q is dimensionless. It is a ratio and required that either energy/energy or power/power to be dimensionless. The second part of the equation above is power/power. When you multiply the top and bottom with frequency f, the energy dissipated per cycle becomes energy dissipated per second, hence power loss in watts. The top part just means the stored energy constantly change from maximum to zero proportional to the frequency. When energy change from max to zero in a certain time, it's power. Since it does not used up, it's reactive. Overall, the top means reactive power.
Quote from: GibbsHelmholtz on 2012.10.12, 00:14:31
But Tesla did give a patent on how this receiver apparatus...utilizing radiant energy.
Dr. Tesla's radiant energy work and the magnifying transmitter are two separate things. The radiant energy work is a method of
collecting energy from, first the sun, and later cosmic rays. The magnifying transmitter was about distributing power regardless of the source. Note the difference between the receiver antenna in the transmission patents and the elevated plate in the radiant enrgy patents.
He said several times that the transmission was via conducance, not inductance. I think the idea that we was accumulating power (from whatever source) and then pumping it back into the system at a higher rate is definitely correct.
Quote from: Collier's Weekly, Talking With Planets 02/09/1901...succeeded in producing a machine which, to explain its operation in plain language, resembled a pump in its action, drawing electricity from the earth and driving it back into the same at an enormous rate
I think his resonance was not between the transmitter and the receiver but between the transmitter and the telluric currents in the earth which was accomplished in such a way as to set up the standing waves. The receiver then tapped into the standing waves.
I think the telluric currents result from lightning strikes that make it all the way to the ground and/or electricity produced by the magnetic field generated at the core of the planet. There has been reported 50 to 200 lightning strikes somewhere on the planet every second but I haven't seen anything that says what part of those actually each the ground. The earth is thought to have a solid iron core and around it flows liquid iron/nickel that is thought to be kept liquid by the friction heat of the gravity found there combined with the friction heat of the rotation. This flow of liquid metal also has whirls induced into it by the coriiolis effect from the planet rotating.
If you think about it, his statement quoted above is very similar to what a lightning strike does. The charge accumualtes over time and then disruptively discharges into the ground.
So while most people today think of inductively coupling with the Schumann resonance in the atmosphere, I think Dr. Tesla was enhancing the earth resonance in the solid part of the earth. This may also account of the difference between the Schumann frequency of 7.83 Hz and Dr. Tesla's frequency stated in one of his patents that works out to 11.73 Hz. This could also account for any gain if there truly is any.
Also note that Dr. Tesla's work on transmitting power through the atmosphere as stated in his U.S. Patent 645,576 would have been accomplished between balloons at 30,000 feet. He even notes in the patent that the means to maintain the balloons at that height would have to be engineered at some later date. He had nothing like this at either Wardencliffe or in Colorado Springs.
I think we must consider the telluric current scenario the most probable. After all, he did accomplish the wireless transmission of power in his Colorado Springs experiments.
thx1138
All correct, however one thing is missing. Tesla magnifying transmitter was transmitting radiant energy, here is a connection between those two and I can prove it easily ! O0
Radiant energy is radio waves . Hertz waves never existed, radio waves are sound like waves in ether , they look like transverse waves when trapped by apparatus exactly like wind is trapped by trees. The only problem is the way Tesla differentiated Hertz radiation and his radio waves which is what we have to use today (there is no other possibility as he stated - those are the radio waves of today). I suspect that radio waves could be conducted by wire or radiated in space and here is the main problem : we were convinced they can only be radiated from antenna.
The Magnifying Transmitter was not a device designed for producing radiant energy.
But it could do so, it depends on how it was/is used.
http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/nt_on_ac.htm#040
QuoteCounsel
Now, if you were giving that a name, what principle would you say was involved by which the radiation loss, where there is no receiver, becomes a gain or a conservation where there is a receiver?
Tesla
There is no radiation in this case. You see, the apparatus which I devised was an apparatus enabling one to produce tremendous differences of potential and currents in an antenna circuit. These requirements must be fulfilled, whether you transmit by currents of conduction, or whether you transmit by electromagnetic waves. You want high potential currents, you want a great amount of vibratory energy; but you can graduate this vibratory energy. By proper design and choice of wave lengths, you can arrange it so that you get, for instance, 5 percent in these electromagnetic waves and 95 percent in the current that goes through the earth. That is what I am doing. Or, you can get, as these radio men, 95 percent in the energy of electromagnetic waves and only 5 percent in the energy of the current. Then you are wondering why you do not get good results. I know why I do not get good results in that way. The apparatus is suitable for one or the other method. I am not producing radiation in my system; I am suppressing electromagnetic waves. But, on the other hand, my apparatus can be used effectively with electromagnetic waves. The apparatus has nothing to do with this new method except that it is the only means to practice it. So that in my system, you should free yourself of the idea that there is radiation, that energy is radiated. It is not radiated; it is conserved.
Now on the Magnification matter. The transformer in the video is using roughly 60 Watts input from a 12 volt battery.
But when we consider the peak power of a discharge, or the current in the primary or the voltage on the top terminal
we see magnification I think in all of those area's. A magnification of the power the current and the voltage but not the energy. No free energy.
The resistance in the secondary is about 1.5 Ohms probably the same in the extra coil (same wire) the primary resistance is almost nothing,
the primary inductance is only about 3 uH, the resonant frequency is about 760 kHz the way it is. To get to 180 kHz with thinner wire
would be easy enough but then the resistances get higher (longer primary needed). I think to get to below 100 kHz would take a lot of 1 mm wire.
This setup is power restricted for now and the input frequency is very low because of it, so no real resonant rise. I'll do some tests as I go along to see how much voltage I can produce with
this coil which has only 166 secondary/extra coil turns. If I can engineer a rotary spark gap I'll be much better off I think.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wWOzvT8Aak
Cheers
Quote from: forest on 2012.10.17, 17:03:09
...
Tesla magnifying transmitter was transmitting radiant energy, here is a connection between those two and I can prove it easily ! O0
Energy is not radiated but shared and exchanged between the transmitter and the coupled receiver, thanks to the electric and magnetic fields in which it is located.
Quote
Radiant energy is radio waves . Hertz waves never existed, radio waves are sound like waves in ether
...
"Hertz waves" are defined by science and exist as defined, the Hertz experiment is the proof. Maybe Hertz waves are also "ether waves" but your speech remains vain if you don't provide an experiment allowing to show the difference.
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.10.18, 04:53:19
...
But when we consider the peak power of a discharge, or the current in the primary or the voltage on the top terminal we see magnification I think in all of those area's. A magnification of the power the current and the voltage but not the energy. No free energy.
...
O0
I've been thinking the Tesla coil may operates in a similar condition as ferroresonance. I've read a few site about ferroR but non seems to explain what is happening. A few interesting conditions is it can be stable for a wide range of C and absence of losses. It also happens related to saturation. I can only think that the looses are hysteresis and coil resistance. Hysteresis can also associates with saturation. Pretty much at saturation, hysteresis is reduced. This is why I think Tesla used air coil with least capacitance possible: to minimize hysteresis and resistance losses. If it operates on a frequency for a wide range of C, it can only means the frequency is not dependance on C. The core must have operates on its own frequency.
My "understanding" of Tesla's Magnifier is that the "magnification" occurs between the transmitter coils, and not between the transmitter and reciever, which are just coupled together.
I will not trying to convict anybody because after years of investigating I have still a mess of ideas inside my head and I wonder why is all that so complicated by so many theories. Tesla said : there is only one wave , longitudinal wave in ether like sound in air. Transverse wave , Hertz wave is radiation .
Seems that the key is in word "radiation" and how Tesla comprehended it.
Anyway, I wanted to add a bit of confusion or maybe clarity to the "radiant energy" Tesla patent . That was mentioned , it's not related to magnifying transmitter directly, but what I found is a direct connection. Tesla had thrown the output of his transmitter into the same category as the disturbance from natural sources.
Of course you have the right to disagree, but anyway ....
This is the radiant energy patent : http://www.google.com/patents?id=YitoAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=2#v=onepage&q&f=false
and here is the British Tesla patent : http://www.keelynet.com/tesla/B0011293.pdf
compare texts and look carefully on Fig 2 in radiant energy patent , and also on Fig 4 in British patent. Then let me know what you think.....maybe it's all much simpler then we think and it's all radio waves radiated into space when their frequency is not matched with Earth dimensions or conducted around in form of stationary waves ?
One ring to rule them alll. Look at Earth - isn't it a big conductor with magnetic field around ? Disturbance of natural media, what it could be ? Modulation of magnetic field lines ? C.C
If I take a bucket I can use it to catch and hold rain or I could use it to catch and hold water shot directly from the end of a hose.
The radiant energy receivers can be used as sensitive devices to collect feeble vibrations. The British patent is for the art of utilizing
of effects and such transmitted through the natural media. Meaning radiation and/or ground waves.
As Tesla said the equipment is not limited to one use. ie. I can use a rifle to shoot or I can use it for a club.
Also if a Transformer disturbing the ground like a Tesla transmitter is not designed for the whole planet,
meaning if the frequency is too high ect. so that the disturbances fade out and don't return then it is like radiation but not Hertz radiation i don't think.
If energy is sent out in all directions and does not return it is radiation if it is sent out through the ground in an expanding circles and is lost it is as good as radiation
but not really radiation in that it doesn't go in all directions, if energy is sent out and is reflected back it is contained in a system and so is not radiation.
It depends on what the system encompasses.
eg. If a full sized Magnifying transmitter was running and transmitting to it's receiver somewhere else on the planet, then a sensitive device could also be used at a distance to detect
the 5% radiation, or a similar device could be used to collect the energy from the ground disturbance, all kinds of things can be done.
The main thing is that Tesla stressed time and again, "The energy is not radiated, it is conserved". How can people claiming to be in favor of Tesla just ignore that.
Ground disturbances are not Hertz waves, radiation goes in all directions, ground waves spread through the Earth they don't go up.
Cheers
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.10.18, 21:50:23
If I take a bucket I can use it to catch and hold rain or I could use it to catch and hold water shot directly from the end of a hose.
The radiant energy receivers can be used as sensitive devices to collect feeble vibrations. The British patent is for the art of utilizing
of effects and such transmitted through the natural media. Meaning radiation and/or ground waves.
As Tesla said the equipment is not limited to one use. ie. I can use a rifle to shoot or I can use it for a club.
Also if a Transformer disturbing the ground like a Tesla transmitter is not designed for the whole planet,
meaning if the frequency is too high ect. so that the disturbances fade out and don't return then it is like radiation but not Hertz radiation i don't think.
If energy is sent out in all directions and does not return it is radiation if it is sent out through the ground in an expanding circles and is lost it is as good as radiation
but not really radiation in that it doesn't go in all directions, if energy is sent out and is reflected back it is contained in a system and so is not radiation.
It depends on what the system encompasses.
eg. If a full sized Magnifying transmitter was running and transmitting to it's receiver somewhere else on the planet, then a sensitive device could also be used at a distance to detect
the 5% radiation, or a similar device could be used to collect the energy from the ground disturbance, all kinds of things can be done.
The main thing is that Tesla stressed time and again, "The energy is not radiated, it is conserved". How can people claiming to be in favor of Tesla just ignore that.
Ground disturbances are not Hertz waves, radiation goes in all directions, ground waves spread through the Earth they don't go up.
Cheers
Energy is conserved , yes this is very true. The same conservation is inside resonant circuit. So the overall picture would be : Tesla is sending impulse around Earth which is energy conserved due to stationary waves , recovered almost 95 % of it if there is no receiver. The next step is receiver. Simple receiver could be used like radio set to get accurate clock value or information from radio station or to allow communication. Resonant receivers can be used to power appliances because at resonance energy is conserved and looses compensated by the input form Tesla magnifying transmitter. Load in such receivers is a part of resonance.
What is still missing is then why Tesla worked next 25 years to complete functional cosmic rays tapping device ? Why he stated in radiant energy patent that Earth is a vast container of negative electricity (there was very few power stations in 1900 in the whole world so excuse that they were pumping electrons into soils is a mistake)
Quote from: forest on 2012.10.19, 06:19:28
Energy is conserved , yes this is very true. The same conservation is inside resonant circuit. So the overall picture would be : Tesla is sending impulse around Earth which is energy conserved due to stationary waves , recovered almost 95 % of it if there is no receiver. The next step is receiver. Simple receiver could be used like radio set to get accurate clock value or information from radio station or to allow communication. Resonant receivers can be used to power appliances because at resonance energy is conserved and looses compensated by the input form Tesla magnifying transmitter. Load in such receivers is a part of resonance.
What is still missing is then why Tesla worked next 25 years to complete functional cosmic rays tapping device ? Why he stated in radiant energy patent that Earth is a vast container of negative electricity (there was very few power stations in 1900 in the whole world so excuse that they were pumping electrons into soils is a mistake)
there is a big transmitter that works from the Beginning
http://www.spaceweather.com/glossary/inspire.html
http://theinspireproject.org/default.asp?contentID=4
Quote from: forest on 2012.10.19, 06:19:28
...
Tesla is sending impulse around Earth
...
What do you mean by "impulse"? Firstly, waves around the earth imply that an even number of wavelengths fits the earth circumference. These waves must thus be at the Schuman's frequencies which are very low and consequently their period duration is much more than possible pulses duration, except if you consider pulses on the order of several seconds. Secondly, a resonant circuit with a high Q implies a very narrow frequency band, incompatible with impulses which have a spread spectrum. Impulses could only appear in electric discharges, so not around the earth.
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.10.18, 04:53:19
http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/nt_on_ac.htm#040
I've read his conversation with the counsel. The site also pointed at many other writings and finally, I found some Colorado Spring notes on the web. lol I don't know what was the problem before but this is my own opinion after reading.
Hertz and radiation:At first it seems like he didn't believe in Hertz wave. He set experiments where one end of the antenna drove into the earth as his argument. To me that is like transmission with one wire (earth), so maybe that's the problem. Later he classify Hertz wave as electromagnetic waves. However, his view was that it travels longitudinal instead of transverse. He also think the ether is gaseous and not rigid like Hertz and Maxwell. Overall, I think he acknowledged the existence of EM radiation, with some differences.
His stand on self-acting engines:I think he thinks it's possible. He even try to make a heat engine from a heat pump. In a way, he does believes in perpetual motion.
CS notes & Tesla coil:This is a complicated coil according to his notes. I still have difficulty trying to figure what he trying to say. I think his coil is not ordinary. It has stray inductance, stray capacitance (he call it distributed C), coil inductance, coil capacitance... and they all link to each other. lol He wants the length of the wire to match the wavelength while the inductance of the circuit also has to match the frequency. Furthermore, the coil capacitance is a function of stray capacitance C=KC1, and you have to get K from experiment . It's obvious to me that there is regular LC resonance as well as transmission line standing wave. Overall, I didn't catch the simple theory of why he wants it that way. I'm not sure if others understood either. I'm thinking there must be an easier model to understand distributed circuit in his coil.
Hertz experiment and Tesla "magnifying" transmitter are very different setups.
In Hertz experiment, the radiating part which constitutes also the resonant circuit is short: it's a 2 mtrs dipole with terminal capacities and the spark gap is at the center. Therefore the resonant frequency is very high. Hertz used a reflector at 12 mtr from the transmitter to produce standing waves, and shown by this way that 1) the wavelength was around 4 mtr, i.e. a frequency of 75 Mhz, and 2) it was really a propagation because the wave must go back and forth to build the standing wave: Hertz waves really radiate.
Tesla used very low frequencies. At these frequencies, he couldn't observe standing wave due to the wavelength which is by many orders longer than any distance at which he could receive a signal.
Unlike the Hertz experiment, a coil probe or capacity probe anywhere around a Tesla resonant circuit will show the same phase whatever the distance from the circuit because this distance is always short in comparison with the wavelength. In Tesla's experiments, the receiver is simply in the very "near field" from the transmitter (i.e. << quarter-wavelength). None propagation can be observed, but only the electric or magnetic field that couple with the resonant receiver. And when we try to move far away from the transmitter, i.e. at distance of several wavelengths, the signal can't be received because it fades very quickly. The reason is that an antenna whose the length is short in comparison with the wavelength, radiates EM waves very poorly. This fact is confirmed by the observation that a resonant circuit with a high Q like those of Tesla is maintaining the oscillations for a long time, many periods, after the power source of oscillations is disconnected. This means that the energy is kept in the circuit and doesn't radiate under any kind of waves.
@Exn
QuoteTesla used very low frequencies
You have it backwards, it was low frequency however people are using the false premise that this was the carrier frequency and it was not, it was the modulation while the carrier frequency was extremely high. Higher than any half-wit such as Hertz could possibly imagine which is why few really had a clue what Tesla was doing.
Quote from: allcanadian on 2012.10.19, 22:23:03
@Exn
You have it backwards, it was low frequency however people are using the false premise that this was the carrier frequency and it was not, it was the modulation while the carrier frequency was extremely high. Higher than any half-wit such as Hertz could possibly imagine which is why few really had a clue what Tesla was doing.
Do you have a reference to verify that ?
When I refer to the "Magnifying Transmitter" I refer to the improved transmitter, the last one he designed and patented.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=m7R9AAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false
And from this patent. Page 3 Lines 27 through 63
http://www.google.com/patents?id=oSo_AAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false
Here's some to the contrary.
http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/nt_on_ac.htm#043
QuoteI designed a plant [Wardenclyffe, referring to Fig. 83] years ago with a large capacity and put it before certain architects. They figured that the antenna would cost $450,000 and I had to modify my plans. As you see, you are limited by cost as to the size of the antenna; that is, you are limited as to the capacity and, furthermore, you have selected the frequency. In order to lower the frequency so that there would be no wasteful radiation of energy, you have to employ a large inductance. You have to employ a capacity as large as permissible, and you must use a large inductance in order that you may reach the low frequency which is economical.
QuoteWhat low frequency is it that is economical?
Tesla
In a patent which appeared in April 1905, the application of which was filed on May 15, 1900, I have enunciated the law of propagation, which I have explained, and have stated that the frequencies should not be more than 30,000 or 35,000 cycles at most, in order to operate economically.
If pressed I can find quotes where Tesla states the frequencies he used at Colorado
were between 45 kHz or so and 100 kHz or a bit more. It wouldn't be possible to operate
such large coils at resonance at higher frequencies. He could alter the frequencies in different
ways but there were/are limits.
Cheers
@Farmhand
QuoteDo you have a reference to verify that ?
None you would like, however when I built and tested these circuits the primary frequency could be very low however the spectrum each impulse covered was massive. Consider a bell, it does not matter at what frequency you strike it because this has no bearing on the natural resonant frequency of the bell itself. In which case the striker of the bell is modulating the natural resonant frequency of the bell.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.10.19, 17:37:26
Hertz experiment and Tesla "magnifying" transmitter are very different setups.
In Hertz experiment, the radiating part which constitutes also the resonant circuit is short: it's a 2 mtrs dipole with terminal capacities and the spark gap is at the center. Therefore the resonant frequency is very high. Hertz used a reflector at 12 mtr from the transmitter to produce standing waves, and shown by this way that 1) the wavelength was around 4 mtr, i.e. a frequency of 75 Mhz, and 2) it was really a propagation because the wave must go back and forth to build the standing wave: Hertz waves really radiate.
Tesla used very low frequencies. At these frequencies, he couldn't observe standing wave due to the wavelength which is by many orders longer than any distance at which he could receive a signal.
Unlike the Hertz experiment, a coil probe or capacity probe anywhere around a Tesla resonant circuit will show the same phase whatever the distance from the circuit because this distance is always short in comparison with the wavelength. In Tesla's experiments, the receiver is simply in the very "near field" from the transmitter (i.e. << quarter-wavelength). None propagation can be observed, but only the electric or magnetic field that couple with the resonant receiver. And when we try to move far away from the transmitter, i.e. at distance of several wavelengths, the signal can't be received because it fades very quickly. The reason is that an antenna whose the length is short in comparison with the wavelength, radiates EM waves very poorly. This fact is confirmed by the observation that a resonant circuit with a high Q like those of Tesla is maintaining the oscillations for a long time, many periods, after the power source of oscillations is disconnected. This means that the energy is kept in the circuit and doesn't radiate under any kind of waves.
Please bear with me ex. I agree with you a lot, but... EDIT: Yes I see, what you are saying is absolutely correct when we deal with
the shorter 1/4 wave lengths (frequencies) not in resonance with the planet. If the planet is resonating then the effect can be had in differing magnitudes anywhere
the ground can be connected to with a receiver. If too high a frequency is used then the disturbance fades out most definitely,
Tesla describes this in the book The Inventions Researches and Writings of Nikola Tesla. A very early realization/observation.
I'm not clear on what constitutes a "near" field, what constitutes "near field" effects ?
Because if a Tesla transmitter was placed on one side of the planet and a receiver was
placed on the other I can't see how their electric and magnetic fields are shared.
Shared fields to me implies that the receiver is in the inductive influence of the transmitter,
I don't think it would be.
First imagine there is no ground disturbance and the setup is off, the transmitter and receiver elevated capacitances are sitting in
their respective electric fields, they could be at a different potential with respect to the Earth, eg. with the transmitter, it's terminal could be
at 1000 volts while the receiver is at 100 volts or the other way when the system is at rest (atmospheric potential - electric field).
Then when the system is run the ground is disturbed so an alternating potential is created because of the alternating potential of the
ground, the top terminal is referenced to it's electric field and acts like a neutral ground while the ground disturbance creates the potential difference to drive the current
through the ground/receiver. I doubt very much that the receiver if disconnected from the ground would have current induced in it by the transmitter on the opposite side of the planet
so I doubt also that it is in an inductive relationship.
I think to even get 1/4 WL resonance there must be a forward and reflected wave-interference to produce a standing 1/4 wave resonance ?.
I don't think near field effects scale up, I think they are an effect of the voltage/frequency maybe or some kind of relative relationship.
Cheers
P.S. The Earth is resonating at multiples of 50/60 Hz all the time I think. There is energy to collect but the ground is disturbed
by the electricity company and the receiver would be expensive to build, as well as it could be considered stealing and the amount of energy to collect
may not be much either.
Quote from: allcanadian on 2012.10.20, 04:51:33
@Farmhand
None you would like, however when I built and tested these circuits the primary frequency could be very low however the spectrum each impulse covered was massive.
...
Non sense. Either your are using a low frequency that is a pure sine and its spectrum is just a line at this frequency, or you are using "pulses", even at a low frequency, and of course the spectrum is wide due to the sharp rise and fall times. But pulses are not compatible with high Q resonant circuits which act as very narrow pass-band filters (pulses can be produced from a spark gap or other means, with high Q circuits, but in this case the production of EM waves is due to the spark and to the near conductors acting as antenna, and not by the resonant circuit).
The spectrum directly follows from the temporal shape of the signal. The temporal and spectral domains are equivalent and straightforwardly linked through Fourier transforms and inverse transforms.
Ok here are a couple of rough video's, I'm not making any claims other than it is doing what it is doing.
My question is does anyone think it would be worth while to set this up better with less gaps better tune and more fluro's.
With less gaps the arc frequency will be higher and so better light and less flicker.
Fluro's
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUdcrhqgiIs
Small Air discharge
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ydVK4OUqAc
The fluro's are both 36 Watt items (not that that means anything in particular), and the input is about 7 to 8 amps from a 12 volt battery
but the voltage drop on the primary circuit is significant, I measure only less than 12 volts on the battery when it is running.
I do realize of course that this is not how they are meant to be used but it does give an indication of the power at the terminal
and what it can do.
A strange thing I noticed is that after running it for a while like that with the fluros, the supply transformer was making a throbbing sound
like a strumming of the normal low frequency humm, like -- mmm..mmm..mmm..mmm..mmm..mmm. Then after a short while it stopped. I don't
think it can be heard clearly in the video but I did mention it.
I think it would be impossible to actually measure the output when taken from the top terminal. Maybe I can measure something from the bottom somehow.
Cheers
P.S. If anyone has any suggestions as to something interesting to do with the HV let me know.
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.10.20, 05:29:22
...
I'm not clear on what constitutes a "near" field, what constitutes "near field" effects ?
Hi Fh,
"Near field" is a condition defined in electromagnetism as the area at short distance from the field source. "Short distance" means "short relative to the wavelength", in practice less than a tenth of the wavelength.
Even if the source field is a radiating antenna, as a radio antenna, the propagating plane waves is not yet built in the near field area. This means that B and E are not linked as in EM waves, neither in direction, nor in phase, nor in amplitude. Their topology can be very complex. We are in the same situation as if the source field was simply a not radiating LC circuit whose the electric and magnetic fields depend only on the shape, location and orientation of the circuit components.
In the near field, a receiver is linked to the transmitter. This means that they share the same fields. If the receiver is resonant, its resonance will modify the resonance of the transmitter. If you connect your receiver to a load, you will see that energy is drawn from the transmitter. The receiver must be consider as being directly coupled to the transmitter, magnetically and/or capacitively.
In the far field, a receiver doesn't influence the transmitter, because the energy is already carried away from the transmitter by the radiated wave. The energy is autonomous, disconnected from the transmitter. In the far field, the receiver is not linked to the transmitter, it just takes locally the energy of the propagating wave.
In Tesla's experiments, we are always in the near field. Receiver and transmitter are coupled. We can't speak of propagating waves.
Quote
Because if a Tesla transmitter was placed on one side of the planet and a receiver was placed on the other I can't see how their electric and magnetic fields are shared.
Shared fields to me implies that the receiver is in the inductive influence of the transmitter,
I agree
Quote
I don't think it would be.
...
It would be. Imagine a CLC circuit, i.e. a coil with two terminal capacities, one at each end. This is a resonant LC circuit which works perfectly (you just have to power the central coil by another coupled coil of much less turns). Now replace one of the terminal capacity by the ground: you have the same circuit. The ground acts only like a terminal capacity which simplifies the circuit. Same thing for the receiver. Therefore the relative potential between the local "ground capacity" of the transmitter and this one of the receiver, plays no role. Both could be isolated metallic terminal capacities like these at the other end of the coils, and the circuits would work in the same way.
The problem of the Tesla's idea is not in the principle. Yes a transmitter with a resonant circuit could establish a standing field (not wave) around the earth. Yes a receiver anywhere on earth could be coupled to the transmitter and recover energy from the transmitter. The problem is in the efficiency. The coupling between transmitter and receiver can be strong, only if the dimensions of their components are not negligible in comparison with the distance between them, otherwise the field lines loop much too close from the transmitter, far from the receiver, and the coupling with the receiver fails. The Tesla's idea fails in practice, because we can't erect towers with coils and terminal capacities having dimensions of some % of the earth circumference, which would be the indispensable condition for an efficient coupling of the transmitter with a receiver anywhere on earth.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.10.20, 10:44:40
The problem of the Tesla's idea is not in the principle. Yes a transmitter with a resonant circuit could establish a standing field (not wave) around the earth. Yes a receiver anywhere on earth could be coupled to the transmitter and recover energy from the transmitter. The problem is in the efficiency. The coupling between transmitter and receiver can be strong, only if the dimensions of their components are not negligible in comparison with the distance between them, otherwise the field lines loop much too close from the transmitter, far from the receiver, and the coupling with the receiver fails. The Tesla's idea fails in practice, because we can't erect towers with coils and terminal capacities having dimensions of some % of the earth circumference, which would be the indispensable condition for an efficient coupling of the transmitter with a receiver anywhere on earth.
I find it difficult to believe that Tesla would have overlooked something like that. He went through a lot of trouble constructing his devices and was meticulous in his designs and methods.
I think it is more likely that we don't know exactly how he intended his system to be implemented.
Quote from: poynt99 on 2012.10.20, 12:09:40
I find it difficult to believe that Tesla would have overlooked something like that. He went through a lot of trouble constructing his devices and was meticulous in his designs and methods.
...
The reason is simple: he was misleading by his magic idea of longitudinal waves.
But his longitudinal waves has never been experimentally demonstrated. Either they are explained by near field conditions (Tesla's and Meyl's experiments), or they are confused with EM waves (Monstein's experiment). Tesla experimented his circuits at short distance. For working around the earth acording to classical electromagnetism, the dimensions of the circuits must be scaled proportionally. It's not realistic.
And if we invoke the so-called "longitudinal waves", we have no more reasons to suppose it would work, because these waves are not needed to explain the Tesla's experiments, they are not characterized, they are just empty words, without physical properties supporting any possibility of energy transfer.
Tesla was a great and respectable inventor but not a great physicist, unlike Maxwell who was not a great inventor but a great physicist having well modelized the electromagnetism. His genius has been proved by his prediction of transverse EM waves before they have been experimentally demonstrated, what is really a remarkable exploit.
Yes I also find it difficult to believe that he wouldn't have known these things given the later experiments he did at Wardenclyff.
He describes the action of the receiver here.
QuoteCounsel
To illustrate my question, take for instance the energy used at Sayville and the reception of that at Nauen. I want to know whether it is your idea that the reception there is due to the earth currents that you have described or to the radiated energy.
Tesla
It is far more due to the earth currents than to the radiated energy. I believe, indeed, that the radiated energy alone could not possibly produce the effect across the Atlantic. It is simply because they are incidentally sending a current through the globe -- which they think is their current -- that the receiver is affected. The current produces variations of potential at the earth's surface in Germany; these fluctuations of potential energize the circuit, and by resonance they increase the potential there and operate the receiver. But I do not mean that it is absolutely impossible to use my apparatus and operate with electromagnetic waves across the Atlantic or Pacific. I only say that according to calculations, for instance, which I have made of the Sayville plant, the radiated energy is very small and cannot be operative. I have also calculated the distribution of the charge on the antenna. I am told that the Sayville antenna is without abrupt changes of capacity. It is impossible. There are changes even in a cylindrical antenna; but particularly in that form at Sayville -- there are very abrupt changes.
And just before he says this.
QuoteThe mode of propagation can be expressed by a very simple mathematical law, which is, the current at any point flows with a velocity proportionate to the cosecant of the angle which a radius from that point includes with the axis of symmetry of wave propagation. At the transmitter, the cosecant is infinite; therefore, the velocity is infinite. At a distance of 6,000 miles, the cosecant is unity; therefore, the velocity is equal to that of light. This law I have expressed in a patent by the statement that the projections of all zones on the axis of symmetry are of the same length, which means, in other words, as is known from rules of trigonometry, that the areas of all the zones must also be equal. It says that although the waves travel with different velocities from point to point, nevertheless each half wave always includes the same area. This is a simple law, not unlike the one which has been expressed by Kepler with reference to the areas swept over by the radii vectors.
I hope that I have been clear in this exposition – in bringing to your attention that what I show here is the system of the day, and is my system -- only the radio engineers use my apparatus to produce too much of this electromagnetic energy here, instead of concentrating all their attention on designing an apparatus which will impress a current upon the earth and not waste the power of the plant in an uneconomical process.
Cheers
@Exn
QuoteNon sense. Either your are using a low frequency that is a pure sine and its spectrum is just a line at this frequency, or you are using "pulses", even at a low frequency, and of course the spectrum is wide due to the sharp rise and fall times. But pulses are not compatible with high Q resonant circuits which act as very narrow pass-band filters (pulses can be produced from a spark gap or other means, with high Q circuits, but in this case the production of EM waves is due to the spark and to the near conductors acting as antenna, and not by the resonant circuit).
The spectrum directly follows from the temporal shape of the signal. The temporal and spectral domains are equivalent and straightforwardly linked through Fourier transforms and inverse transforms.
The first question I would ask is have you ever actually built any of these circuits or are you simply guessing based on something you have read in a textbook, I would guess the latter. Have you built the circuits, have you rigged the quenched gaps, have you wound the coils and oriented them to specs, have you built the oil bath capacitors, have you ever sent a 100kv microsecond discharge into a 10" SS sphere?. You see I think it is wonderful that you like to speculate based on what you have read in your textbooks but as you may know, or not, reality can be very much different from what we read.
For instance did you know the top load undergoes constriction, there is a load SSSSST noise when recorded and played back in at a slower rate and physical material is ejected at high velocity from it which appears as a residue covering the area?. Did you know that if the impulse is tuned to the natural resonant frequency of the top load, no not electrical silly ... mechanical, then not only is the signal distorted but it modifies the near field. Have you actually ever measured the near field and in fact the potential at the machine with an electrometer array so that you could actually determine the true potential as well as the velocity as we now have a time function. No offense but using fancy terms does not really impress me much and it tells me nothing of what you actually understand based on reality and not your textbooks. As well if you had any idea of what you were talking about you would know the spark gap goes not actually have to fire and can operate in the preglow discharge region prior to VAD, hmm imagine that no sparks.
AC
@ac
The first question I would ask is have you ever actually carefully built and measure the circuits you are talking about, including the 100kv microsecond discharge into a 10" SS sphere, with what apparatus and according to what protocol? If so, show us the quantified results and describe the anomalies that you have observed.
If that was only Tesla...then we could argue he was mistaken. However he build his magnifier based on experimental results of many pioneers before. There are patents clearly stating about impressing charge imbalance into earth ground and recovering that in receiver many miles far from transmitter.
My uneducated guess is that Tesla just pulled charge from ground and then "impressed" it back to ground with force generating sound like wave in Earth core , electrified one. Another theory is that he did this in magnetosphere but again by using very fast moving charge - discharge from his elevated capacitance to ground. More or less the same way as lightning is doing disturbance.
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.10.20, 12:38:48
Quote
...
It is far more due to the earth currents than to the radiated energy. I believe, indeed, that the radiated energy alone could not possibly produce the effect across the Atlantic.
...
At the transmitter, the cosecant is infinite; therefore, the velocity is infinite. At a distance of 6,000 miles, the cosecant is unity; therefore, the velocity is equal to that of light.
...
@Farmhand
All is said. He "believed". He believed in longitudinal waves and he believed that these waves could propagate at a variable speed exceeding the speed of light.
But for me the exprimental evidence takes precedence over the theory.
He didn't experimentally demonstrate the reality of this wave, and while he failed with his "magnifying transmitter", radio stations were installed all over the world, according to the transverse waves from Maxwell's theory. Tesla must not be deified, he is a human, even a genius can be wrong some time to time.
@Forest
If a patent was a proof that a device works and that a possible underlying theory supporting it, is relevant, we would have already hundreds of real "free energy" machines, and Newton's, Maxwell's, Einstein's... theories would lie in a trash for decades. :)
@Exn
QuoteThe first question I would ask is have you ever actually carefully built and measure the circuits you are talking about, including the 100kv microsecond discharge into a 10" SS sphere, with what apparatus and according to what protocol? If so, show us the quantified results and describe the anomalies that you have observed.
Whoa slow down there big fella this ain't rocket science, First I was using a DIY VandeGraaff generator rated at around 100Kv, 10" sphere with a 10cm discharge approximates to 110Kv ignoring RH as well as a Tesla coil 3' in height 3" secondary 1/4" copper tube primary.. the usual stuff. I used the VDG to fire circuits through various gaps, queched gaps, self-quenching gaps, evacuated tubes, I used the VDG to fire the tesla coil I did about everything you could possibly imagine in every combination you could possibly imagine and observed the effects. The results are all in my head which we will call experience and I think it was well worth the time spent, in fact it was more fun than is probably legal. On the issue of protocols and anomalies let's not go there shall we because we know where it ends don't we?, let's just say there are no anomalies in my little world there are only things we have yet to understand and put in the proper context. As well the effects I noted are not anomalies, constriction, noise, oscillations in the conductors and the fields etc... are expected and easily explained by conventional theory.
The issue here is that I have observed many things which I found very odd simply because the setup was something designed to produce an action in which I did not know the outcome which sounds a bit like science doesn't it?, for instance what happens when you produce a VAD which is massively self-restricting?, a toroidal PM field and a generated field quenching the gap? well the discharge has little pre-ionization and the discharge time to a conductor isolated or not becomes very small .. no anomalies required. I hate to be the bearer of bad news but I think your looking for something which does not exist, your looking for some claim of magic which I do not believe exists. Nature is what it is regardless of what we believe and it will do what it is supposed to regarless of any laws we have created ... that is my theory. So if we do see something unusual, something completely bizzare we could not possibly explain then this is normal and expected but we just don't know it yet ... simple.
This may sound odd but, I can't recall Tesla talking about any longitudinal "wave" I don't see any references to it.
I might be missing the references to it. So I'll ask. Can anyone show me a reference to where Tesla describes this longitudinal "wave".
I 've never really taken any notice, I just put that down to more dubious claims people say Tesla made that he probably didn't make.
To me it seems Tesla is saying that the currents through the Earth are the same as currents in a wire more or less, just that
the Earth does not radiate and wires aren't huge spheres.
So references please. Is there any reference to Tesla referring to this "longitudinal wave".
Cheers
OK i found this statement. Which clearly states that the currents passed into the Earth are stored there as electromagnetic momentum, an "LC tank", is the way i look at it.
QuoteCounsel
That is what I want you to explain. I must be mistaken, because my conception does not fit in with your statements.
Tesla
All right, I will explain that.
In my first efforts, of course I simply contemplated to disturb effectively the earth, sufficiently to operate instruments. Well, you know you must first learn how to walk before you can fly. As I perfected my apparatus, I saw clearly that I can recover, of that energy which goes in all directions, a large amount, for the simple reason that in the system I have devised, once that current got into the earth it had no chance of escaping, because my frequency was low; hence, the electro-magnetic radiation was low. The potential, the electric potential, is like temperature. We might as well call potential electric temperature. The earth is a vast body. The potential differences in the earth are small, radiation is very small. Therefore, if I pass my current into the earth, the energy of the current is stored there as electromagnetic momentum of the vibrations and is not consumed until I put a receiver at a distance, when it will begin to draw the energy and it will go to that point and nowhere else.
I found some math from a coiler's page. http://www.richieburnett.co.uk/operation.html
The terrific voltage gain of the Tesla Coil comes from the fact that the energy in the large primary tank capacitor is transferred to the comparatively small stray capacitance of the secondary circuit. The energy stored in the primary capacitor is measured in Joules and is found from the following formula:
Ep = 0.5 Cp Vp²
If, for example, the primary capacitor is 47nF and it is charged to 20kV then the stored energy can be calculated.
Ep = 0.5 x 47n x (20000)² = 9.4 Joules
If we assume there are no losses in the transfer of energy to the secondary winding, the theory of conservation of energy states that this energy will be transferred to the secondary capacitance Cs. Cs is typically around 25pF. If it contains 9.4 Joules of energy when the energy transfer is complete, we can calculate the voltage:
Es = 0.5 x 25p x Vs² = 9.4
Vs² = 9.4 / (0.5 x 25p)
Vs = 867 kV
The theoretical voltage gain of the Tesla Coil is actually equal to the square root of the Capacitance ratio.
Gain = sqrt (Cp / Cs)
The voltage gain can also be calculated in terms of the inductances...
For the Tesla Coil to work, the resonant Frequencies of the Primary circuit and the Secondary circuit must be identical. I.e. Fp must equal Fs.
Fp = 1 / 2 pi sqrt (LpCp) = Fs = 1 / 2 pi sqrt (LsCs)
Therefore: LpCp = LsCs
The ratio of the inductances is the inverse of the ratio of the capacitances, and therefore the voltage gain is as follows:
Gain = sqrt (Ls / Lp)
Step up transformer would have N/n = sqrt (Ls/Lp). This means a Tesla coil is a normal transformer? This can't be right.
Quote from: allcanadian
...
Nature is what it is regardless of what we believe and
it will do what it is supposed to regarless of any laws
we have created ... that is my theory. So if we do see
something unusual, something completely bizarre we
could not possibly explain then this is normal and
expected but we just don't know it yet ... simple.
Quote from: Amit Goswami - Physicist
Ultimately, it boils down to what you, the observer,
want to see.
Hi Gibbs, Well it is in some ways yes, except mainly for the way it is used. A sparking Tesla coil as Richie describes has no real load.
I think he's talking of a single bang and with no load or leaks the energy is added to by successive bangs until the terminal breaks out (great resonant rise)
It's all waste, most have loose coupling. But power can be taken from them in different ways. No matter the q of the circuit or the possible resonant rise,
if all the energy is taken from the secondary circuit as it is added by the primary and the input frequency is less than full frequency there will be no continuous
wave, it will be damped I think is the term. Tesla coils can be a good source of HV. They can receive radio broadcasts too.
Tesla explains in the Colorado Springs Notes that transmitting energy using the Earth is possible with simply a high rate of transformation, meaning normal HV transformers.
And he says for power transmissions it must prevail. But one transformer can do both, to a degree, depending on how it is used.
(http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd168/Toey1/CSN.jpg)
I'm not so sure it would work so well with a steel cored HV transformer, but air it should.
Cheers
P.S. In fact tonight I think I'll setup a big terminal of some kind connected to the active of my supply transformer and tune it to resonance at a few kHz and see what I can see
on the scope connected to a ground connected coil of some kind, the experiment can be done with a pair of ignition coils I guess. Just need the terminal capacitances and resonance.
My supply transformer will only have about 360 volts at resonance.
...
Quote from: allcanadian on 2012.10.20, 19:40:28
@Exn
Whoa slow down there big fella this ain't rocket science, First I was using a DIY VandeGraaff generator rated at around 100Kv, 10" sphere with a 10cm discharge approximates to 110Kv ignoring RH as well as a Tesla coil 3' in height 3" secondary 1/4" copper tube primary.. the usual stuff. I used the VDG to fire circuits through various gaps, queched gaps, self-quenching gaps, evacuated tubes, I used the VDG to fire the tesla coil I did about everything you could possibly imagine in every combination you could possibly imagine and observed the effects. The results are all in my head which we will call experience and I think it was well worth the time spent, in fact it was more fun than is probably legal. On the issue of protocols and anomalies let's not go there shall we because we know where it ends don't we?, let's just say there are no anomalies in my little world there are only things we have yet to understand and put in the proper context. As well the effects I noted are not anomalies, constriction, noise, oscillations in the conductors and the fields etc... are expected and easily explained by conventional theory.
"Results" must be quantified. Physics without measurement is not science. Nevertheless it's not necessary here, as you acknowledge that there are not anomalies, so you observed what every one else, including scientists, have observed from Ampère's time.
Quote
...
I hate to be the bearer of bad news but I think your looking for something which does not exist, your looking for some claim of magic which I do not believe exists. Nature is what it is regardless of what we believe and it will do what it is supposed to regarless of any laws we have created ... that is my theory. So if we do see something unusual, something completely bizzare we could not possibly explain then this is normal and expected but we just don't know it yet ... simple.
I agree. But to see "something unusual", you must be aware of what is usual, and even it is unusual, for example due to an unusual experimental setup, you must be aware if it is possible according to physical laws, or not. In both cases, you must know what is already known by those who made the physics science. All the anomalies at my knowledge and that are alleged here and there, are due to ignorance, to misinterpretations, and even to oversimplifications neglecting the causes of the so-called anomalous effects! The longitudinal waves in vacuum are of this kind. For instance, Meyl is the archetype of the guy who takes the (numerous) holes of his knowledge for "unusual" effects while their causes are perfectly explainable with the current theories. As already said, the less one knows, the more one may imagine.
A mysterious effect is generally mysterious for the experimenter only. Instead of invoking anomalous or mysterious effects, the first step must be modestly the question: how does science explain this point? If it can't, then the point becomes interesting.
@fh
We know that energy transmission at a distance, between coupled circuits, is perfectly possible. It is even commercially available for weak powers and short distances. The principle is scalable for higher powers and longer distances: for that, the dimensions of the circuits, the voltages and the currents must be scaled proportionnally to the distance and the needed power. We see that the limits are rapidly attained well before a possible coupling around the earth: the voltages should exceed the disruptive conditions in air, the size of the coils and terminal capacitors and their height, would exceed the mechanical strength of the towers and so on. Moreover the efficiency of the process is weak.
Once again, even if we could transmit wireless energy at some kms with tremendous means, which is not yet done and is doubtful, under no circumstances it would be the sign of a possibility to do the same thing around the earth. It's not the same scale. And even if it was possible, which is not, it wouldn't be free energy but transmission of energy, and would pose severe ecological problems of electric and magnetic fields pollution. It's a dead end.
Well I'm not talking wireless as in no conductor.
Tesla states the currents he passes into the Earth are stored there as electromagnetic momentum.
We should be considering this based on the full sized arrangement operated at less than 35 kHz.
Forget the radiation if the Earth is disturbed enough to cause a continuous variance of potential at the receiver
and the receiver is tuned to that frequency it will cause currents in the receiver because of the constantly varying (EDIT Correction)
potential between the ground and the terminal.
The commercially available stuff is not ground connected and high frequency.
I think your wrong. I disagree. Where are the results from experiments with transmitters with non radiating terminals run at millions of volts
and below 35 kHz to show the effect is weak. I think they are done by the military and ELF transmissions are used by them I think.
On the free energy, I will say again that I have not and do not claim the transmitters to be free energy devices.
I don't understand why you would comment on that to me. I did not start this thread. I am in fact trying to convey
that I don't think it does Tesla any justice when people claim the transmitters are free energy devices and that Tesla
claimed them to be free energy devices. When I see no evidence he did.
As for the longitudinal stuff I have some doubts on that too.
But here is a question. What are the waves we see in a tank circuit. Are they Hertz waves ?
Anyway I'm not claiming Tesla claimed the transmitters are free energy devices nor am I claiming they are free energy devices.
All the usable disturbance in the ground is created by mankind. No free energy there I don't think. Unless free means just no pay.
..
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.10.21, 06:10:21
Hi Gibbs, Well it is in some ways yes, except mainly for the way it is used. A sparking Tesla coil as Richie describes has no real load.
I think he's talking of a single bang and with no load or leaks the energy is added to by successive bangs until the terminal breaks out (great resonant rise)
It's all waste, most have loose coupling. But power can be taken from them in different ways. No matter the q of the circuit or the possible resonant rise,
if all the energy is taken from the secondary circuit as it is added by the primary and the input frequency is less than full frequency there will be no continuous
wave, it will be damped I think is the term. Tesla coils can be a good source of HV. They can receive radio broadcasts too.
Tesla explains in the Colorado Springs Notes that transmitting energy using the Earth is possible with simply a high rate of transformation, meaning normal HV transformers.
And he says for power transmissions it must prevail. But one transformer can do both, to a degree, depending on how it is used.
(http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd168/Toey1/CSN.jpg)
I'm not so sure it would work so well with a steel cored HV transformer, but air it should.
Cheers
P.S. In fact tonight I think I'll setup a big terminal of some kind connected to the active of my supply transformer and tune it to resonance at a few kHz and see what I can see
on the scope connected to a ground connected coil of some kind, the experiment can be done with a pair of ignition coils I guess. Just need the terminal capacitances and resonance.
My supply transformer will only have about 360 volts at resonance.
...
Hi Farmhand,
Yes, I can see the art of storing and transferring energy. You are right we can use a normal high permeability transformer and pump it up to million of volts. Stick one end to the ground and the other end high up in the air, if we could reach an ion layer where air is conducting, that is a plus since we can use it as another sending/return wire.
I think Tesla coil is much easier to make today. We can determine the secondary frequency by ping it and record the decay frequency using a scope instead of doing all the calculation like he did. I can see the problem with energy being sent back to the primary after resonant rise on this method though. I also doubt he knows about capacitive coupling and radiant energy at the time being. lol
@Exn
QuoteIt's not the same scale. And even if it was possible, which is not, it wouldn't be free energy but transmission of energy, and would pose severe ecological problems of electric and magnetic fields pollution. It's a dead end.
On this point we can agree, in another time with proper resources and development possibly but it's time has long since passed. There is no way in hell we could fire up one of these machines in this day and age and even on a small scale it wouldn't be long before someone would be knocking at our door.
However fundamentally the concept has points which could be applied, for instance I am using an inductive discharge boost/buck transmission scheme to power a water pump in a well I drilled for the horses some 250' away from my barn. 120/220v AC systems have major restrictions due to the regulations however low voltage has almost none, my pulsed DC system ... well none of them seem smart enough to know what in the hell to think. It's not AC, it's not really DC, it's low frequency and it produces a voltage rise on long high resistance runs but not all of the time, lol, which seems to have everyone confused for the moment.
In any case it is a super easy and very cheap solution to an old problem concerning long conductor runs and the losses associated with them. I am using a single #20 AWG conductor on the 250' run to charge a 12v battery and this goes to a PLC controlling the pump water flow based on the tank level and the OAT (outside ambient temperature) so the tank cannot freeze. Technology at work is a wonderful thing.
Well I don't see anyone proposing to build one, I'm not/didn't. Nothing less than the full sized apparatus would even have a hope of working.
They are not meant to be in a persons backyard, they are meant to be at an industrial location to transmit large amounts of energy to another location closer to need
but still it could be out of town. What I said about considering this as a full sized apparatus, is just for the sake of theorizing.
Nothing short of the full sized setup would have a hope of working efficiently even 80 years ago.
GIbbs, To say Tesla didn't know about radiant energy is laughable, he has a radiant energy patent.
Putting the terminals up high is not necessary with the last patented transmitter, it is an improvement on the atmospheric power transmission device
which did require it's terminal at great height, the improved transmitter does not require great height, in fact I think it interacts with the ground and needs to.
I'm just pointing out some misconceptions. Referring to the improved transmitter.
It's not a radiant energy collector.
It's not a free energy machine.
It's not a device for creating Hertz waves.
It's device for the transmission of energy by ground currents.
It's meant to work at frequencies below 35 kHz for power transmission.
When tuned to resonance there is no broadband interference.
It produces a continuous sine wave.
When speaking of what Tesla has said or intended in a thread references should be given to back up what is said
otherwise anyone can say Tesla said anything they wanted him to have said or meant. At least references should be
available if asked for. If a person is not prepared to provide references when asked then they have no right to ask for references themselves.
Why did I build a small model coil, ? Because I felt like it and I can, did I do it to try to make efficient transmissions. Hahahaha, no.
Cheers.
Quote from: Farmhand
It's device for the transmission of energy by ground currents.
There are a a couple of methods which have been tried to
transmit both audio waves and radio waves through the
ground to distant locations. None have yet met with much
success as a means of power delivery although weak signals
can be detected for considerable distances.
Could it be that Tesla was wrong? Many do tend to place
him on a pedestal but in truth he was wrong about certain
of his theories.
But why try to transmit audio or radio waves ? Did they try to do it by way of the method described by Tesla and with the
huge voltages and low frequency, passing currents into the Earth, because even he said without meeting all the criteria it won't work.
There is every chance with all the devices connected to the ground now it would not be applicable or practical. But the point is with all the talk of radio
waves and capacative coupling to a coil on the other side of the planet. It seems people either don't get or don't want to get it.
I think people are debunking it on false premise. There is of course chance Tesla was wrong, but as he said he was working to previous observations.
The subject is much confused by many, and I see that as an insult to his work and legacy. I think many of the theories people put forward about how they think
the system was meant to work don't hold with Tesla's theory. They talk of interference as if the thing was spark making machine. The truth is when tuned to
resonance there would be little to no interference to other frequencies because if there was all radio now would interfere with everything.
Anyway it has no real place on an OU forum, unless someone can show one exhibiting OU.
Ex. would agree with that I think.
Cheers
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.10.21, 15:24:41
Well I'm not talking wireless as in no conductor.
Tesla states the currents he passes into the Earth are stored there as electromagnetic momentum.
The fact that there are (obscure) theories about earth currents, is irrelevant: even if there are earth currents, there are also tremendous electric and magnetic fields, and this point alone suffices to speak of pollution by electromagnetic fields.
Quote
The commercially available stuff is not ground connected and high frequency.
I think your wrong. I disagree.
There are commercially available stuff either in the low frequency domain as well as in high frequencies. While circuits are resonant,
grounded or not grounded doesn't modify the fields.Quote
Where are the results from experiments with transmitters with non radiating terminals run at millions of volts and below 35 kHz to show the effect is weak.
I would like that the Tesla's followers clarify their speech. If they pretend that energy transfer is possible around the earth according to standing waves, 35 Khz is not the right frequency.
If they use 35 Khz, they must be aware that this frequency is not less dangerous than 50 or 60Hz, whose the magnetic effects are harmful to health when the field is strong, for instance under power lines.
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.10.21, 21:34:34
...
It's device for the transmission of energy by ground currents.
...
This is an oversimplification.
There is a current going back and forth in the coil, from the terminal capacity to the earth and vice versa at each alternation. At the foot of the coil when it is connected to the ground, of course there is an earth current in the same way there is also a current charging/discharging the terminal capacity. It's the same current which is on the order of the charge of the terminal capacity divided by the transfer time, i.e. a half-period of the signal. So the earth current is limited to an earth volume of the same order than the capacity, which is enough to balance the current going back and forth. The earth current is rapidly fading away from the connection point. It's an advantage, otherwise the energy would be entirely dissipated in the ground resistance if the current had to propagate through the earth up to the receiver.
There is another way to see the system, which confirms this analysis. The terminal capacity constitutes a capacitor whose the other "plate" is the earth. The electric field lines in the dielectric, which is air, follow the shortest path of the capacitor and loop from the terminal capacity towards the earth at the closer location from the connection point. Only a near resonant receiver can redirect the field lines and recover a part of the displacement currents.
Quote from: Dumped on 2012.10.21, 23:18:32
There are a a couple of methods which have been tried to
transmit both audio waves and radio waves through the
ground to distant locations. None have yet met with much
success as a means of power delivery although weak signals
can be detected for considerable distances.
...
The reason is that a current must loop. We must always inject current between two poles, for example between a big capacity above the ground, and the ground.
When charges move, they influence in their environment other charges that move also. There is a global redistribution of charges that tends to cancel the electric field. At high frequencies, this current reduces to a vibration of charges and atomic dipoles about their rest position. In vacuum (or air), the displacement current is due to the influence of the field onto the electrons/positrons pairs of the ZPF. In any case, the wire being a real wire or the earth, there is never transmission of current through a "single wire" alone.
My record of transmission using a terminal capacity which was a wire at a height of 12 mtr, powered by 1 KV at 2 Khz, was only 50 mtr! And I don't even speak about energy recovering but of signal detection. Only EM waves propagate and so can be detected at long distances. Ordinary near fields remains linked to their source, with the field lines looping just around.
What you are talking about ? It's not about EM waves or fields. It's about electrostatic disturbance like sound wave in electrified rod.Longitudinal wave of charge distribution....I think the same is possible in magnetic field. So we should get from Maxwell equations if they are complete : one transverse EM wave and two kinds of longitudinal disturbances in ambient background (in charge and magnetic field of Earth). If that is what Tesla used then problems should fade out...
Tesla used experience of pioneers, for example Dolbear patent 350299
testable hypothesis?
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.10.22, 09:28:56
The reason is that a current must loop. We must always inject current between two poles, for example between a big capacity above the ground, and the ground.
When charges move, they influence in their environment other charges that move also. There is a global redistribution of charges that tends to cancel the electric field. At high frequencies, this current reduces to a vibration of charges and atomic dipoles about their rest position. In vacuum (or air), the displacement current is due to the influence of the field onto the electrons/positrons pairs of the ZPF. In any case, the wire being a real wire or the earth, there is never transmission of current through a "single wire" alone.
When the ground disturbance causes a greater potential difference between the terminal and the ground current flows into the terminal capacity as a result, which I think causes displacement currents to the atmosphere and the Earth, then when the ground disturbance causes a lesser potential difference between the terminal and the ground the current flows back the other way because the capacity of the terminal discharges through the coil to the ground. There is a loop. The receiver is tuned to the period of the disturbance (vibration) or a harmonic of it.
That's why a single wire transmission line won't work well, the terminal cannot displace current to it well because of it's capacity and physical form. The capacity of the Earth is immense and the ground surrounds the transmitter.
With a single wire transmission line the receiver terminal would still displace current to the Earth. And the terminal would still discharge through the coil.
The transmitter and receiver are separate systems, the transmitter can disturb the ground by itself. Then when a receiver is connected to the disturbed ground the effect is it that the receiver transformer is operated in reverse manner to the transmitter, rather than disturb the ground it takes the disturbance out of the ground. Simple. The transmitter and receiver are not connected except by the Earth.
You need to consider the transmitter would be disturbing the ground even with no receiver in place. This is a big point, the receiver could operate regardless of what is disturbing the ground, it's just that the transmitter does it best. The transmitter does not transmit as such to the very distant receiver. It disturbs the ground to resonate, the receiver then is disturbed by the ground. It's really very simple, and easy to visualize.
The way you explain it is like without the receiver the ground would not be disturbed, that is not reality in my opinion.
QuoteMy record of transmission using a terminal capacity which was a wire at a height of 12 mtr, powered by 1 KV at 2 Khz, was only 50 mtr! And I don't even speak about energy recovering but of signal detection. Only EM waves propagate and so can be detected at long distances. Ordinary near fields remains linked to their source, with the field lines looping just around.
Of course a wire will radiate, the terminal needs to be a sphere or an improved terminal as described in this patent. http://www.google.com/patents?vid=1119732
You would need a lot more than 1 kV to cause a disturbance to a distance and the frequency should be a harmonic of the Planet. The transmitter should be operating with a continuous sine wave.
There is only one transformer in the patent because that is all that is needed to disturb the Earth, the receiver just need to tap the Earth disturbance it need not be a big thing, there could be many
small ones or small ones and bigger ones it would not matter. The transmitter works alone to disturb the Earth.
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=1119732
The terminal is designed to hold the charge, a piece of wire can't do that because of it's tiny radius, the curvature is too great to allow an accumulation of charge, with a wire the charge leaks off.
Cheers
EDITED: Here is a rough drawing of the way I see it. The ground disturbance is produced by the transmitter which is designed not to radiate,
the terminal holds charge and is charged and discharged by displacement currents to the earth, ultimately caused by the exciting circuit (primary).
The receiver terminal is charged and discharged by displacement currents to the Earth as well but the cause of the current is the potential difference
between the terminal and the ground caused by the constantly varying potential of the ground disturbance. The output is via the "output" coil coupled to the receivers
oscillating coil. There is no voodoo about it. A non magnifying receiver would also work to utilize the potential difference but without magnification the potential is very low
and so not much current can be forced through the load. The phase of the receiver compared to the transmitter would depend on the distance to the receiver from the transmitter and the wavelength of the disturbance.
I neglected to draw the displacement current path on the "non" magnifying receiver. And the other lines I drew to represent the displacement currents are not meant to be an accurate depiction of the actual paths.
The drawing is not to scale in any way either, the transmitters/receivers would not be that big in relation the the planet. ;)
The real beauty comes when travelling (walking) waves and/or beat frequencies are used.
And without an extremely good ground connection the current will face significant resistance in the surface before being able to reach the more conducting deeper layers of the Earth,
and so the energy would be dissipated quickly. The receiving apparatus should also have an extremely good grounding to bypass this higher resistance layer.
(http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd168/Toey1/Magnifyingtransmittertheory001.jpg)
.
When we look at the picture above we can also see (in my opinion) that the transmitter is using the Earth like a big secondary "LC tank".
And the "LC Tank" can be attached to and tapped anywhere on the planet, doing so would cause the transmitter to input more energy to
maintain the oscillations in the tank. No free energy or voodoo needed.
A receiver could be acted on efficiently if the receiver is tuned to a suitable "harmonic" of the Earth disturbance.
Cheers
P.S. Another way to look at it I think is as though the transmitter is working the ground in the area it sits in as an electrical diaphragm.
The resonating disturbance also comes back to work the diaphragm and return energy not removed from the system.
This is where the efficiency comes from. Again this is just a general drawing to explain how I see it.
Not to any scale.
(http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd168/Toey1/Magnifyingtransmittertheory002.jpg)
..
Quote from: forest on 2012.10.22, 15:38:21
What you are talking about ? It's not about EM waves or fields. It's about electrostatic disturbance like sound wave in electrified rod.
...
Every unbalance between positive and electric charges is accompanied by an electric field. Every motion of charges is accompanied by a magnetic field. Charges and fields are linked, it's the same physical reality.
An electric disturbance doesn't exist without fields.
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.10.23, 05:24:05
...
A receiver could be acted on efficiently if the receiver is tuned to a suitable "harmonic" of the Earth disturbance.
...
Not one experiment supports this idea.
Earth ground is full of negative electrons, it is a capacitor. When you displace charge and have inbalance you have energy and system is going to compensate it with current flow. Dolbear patent is all about this.It's the same Tesla used in large scale and Farmhand described correctly.
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.10.23, 01:01:14
...
That's why a single wire transmission line won't work well
...
It works but it is not a "single wire". There is always a terminal capacity that couples to the ground. Every conductor near other conductors constitute a capacitor. It's very easy to see it in a single wire experiment.
Quote from: forest on 2012.10.23, 06:48:18
Earth ground is full of negative electrons, it is a capacitor.
Irrelevant statement due to the gauge invariance.
Quote
When you displace charge and have inbalance you have energy and system is going to compensate it with current flow.
...
I agree and that's why the fact that the earth is full of charges of whatever sign is not relevant. Only the relative position of charges of opposite sign, and their movement, is a question of energy.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.10.23, 06:38:01
Not one experiment supports this idea.
As far as I can tell the experiment has not been properly done in full size with a distant receiver except by Tesla in private.
Can you show reference to some of these full sized experiments, which "don't" show evidence of Tesla observations ?
The term "Tesla's observations" meaning what
he "actually" said and when considered in context.
I do not dispute the fact that there must be a return path for current. I think the drawings and such above explain it well enough.
Some people will dispute it for fun, so be it. I see no reason to argue about it forever. I don't think it defies any known boundaries of the natural world.
Things will do what they do regardless of what people think, or think they know, myself included. The proof is in the experiment as is the disproof.
It is well explained why the full sized apparatus is required and must be used as intended for this to work as Tesla describes.
Cheers
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.10.23, 07:45:30
...
Can you show reference to some of these full sized experiments, which "don't" show evidence of Tesla observations ?
...
Sophism. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_burden_of_evidence.
When I say one wire I mean one wire, wire meaning a man made conductor. That is the accepted meaning I think.
Anyway here are some more pictures.
Single wire Earth return, This method is in use now. One wire two conductors
http://www.google.com/patents?id=p5g_AAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=2#v=onepage&q&f=false
(http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd168/Toey1/Transmissionmodes003.jpg)
Atmospheric conduction. No wires two conductors
http://www.google.com/patents?id=CLJIAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false
(http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd168/Toey1/Transmissionmodes002.jpg)
Improved transmitter. No wires. However many conductors make no real difference. Only the transmitter is needed to create the ground currents.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=m7R9AAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false
(http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd168/Toey1/Transmissionmodes004.jpg)
And this is how Meyl does his demos but without being connected to the ground. Not much use except with low voltage.
Meyl uses a single wire transmission line, the number of conductors is irrelevant, but it won't do anything without a receiver. It is too piddly weak. and the frequency is far too high.
(http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd168/Toey1/Transmissionmodes001.jpg)
Cheers
I'm not making any claims ex, you are, I am trying to explain what "I think" Tesla meant.
You claim it doesn't work. Prove it. Show the experiments that show that.
I don't claim it does definitely work, just that how Tesla claimed it worked is not how most people are debunking it, ie.
People claim radiation, or scalar waves and all sorts of rubbish. Why ? That is the real mystery to me.
You made the claim of it not working so prove it. If I made a claim that it definitely works show me and I'll retract it.
Thinly veiled way of calling me an ignoramus. Well done. ;D I'm impressed.
Cheers
Tesla was in the process of "trying" to prove these things but he ran out of money. Bummer. :(
..
Single wire Earth return, is a fact and in use. One wire two conductors. It is a single "wire transmission line. Say it isn't.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-wire_earth_return
QuoteSingle wire earth return (SWER) or single wire ground return is a single-wire transmission line for supplying single-phase electrical power from an electrical grid to remote areas at low cost. Its distinguishing feature is that the earth (or sometimes a body of water) is used as the return path for the current, to avoid the need for a second wire (or neutral wire) to act as a return path. It is principally used for rural electrification, but also finds use for larger isolated loads such as water pumps, and light rail. Single wire earth return is also used for HVDC over submarine power cables.
http://ruralpower.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=11:swer-how-does-it-work&catid=2&Itemid=3
QuoteSWER is single wire earth return power distribution. Instead of using 3 wires to distribute electricity SWER uses one wire with the return path through the ground.
This is cheaper and easier to build and maintain. This site contains more details for the various swer components, and construction methods:
Cheers
ELF communication is done by electromagnetic waves which are not "radio" waves according to the wiki article.
The description of the receiver is one that is described by Tesla as one particular way to receive the energy.
The best way though I assume is with another arrangement just like the transmitter, (tuned to the vibration) with the Magnifying receiver.
The way described below to receive is accomplished by placing Earth connections at points about half the wavelength apart to attain the greatest difference in potential, no magnification, crude method. And probably a distraction technique.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication_with_submarines
QuoteElectromagnetic waves in the ELF frequency range (3–300 Hz) (see also SLF) can penetrate seawater to depths of hundreds of meters, allowing communication with submarines at their operating depths. Building an ELF transmitter is a formidable challenge, as they have to work at incredibly long wavelengths: The US Navy's system (called Seafarer) operated at 76 hertz,[1] the Soviet/Russian system (called ZEVS) at 82 hertz.[2] The latter corresponds to a wavelength of 3,658.5 kilometers. That is more than a quarter of the Earth's diameter. Obviously, the usual half-wavelength dipole antenna cannot be constructed, as it would spread across a large country.
Instead, one has to find an area with very low ground conductivity (a requirement opposite to usual radio transmitter sites), bury two huge electrodes in the ground at different sites, and then feed lines to them from a station in the middle, in the form of wires on poles. Although other separations are possible, 60 kilometers is the distance used by the ZEVS transmitter located near Murmansk. As the ground conductivity is poor, the current between the electrodes will penetrate deep into the Earth, essentially using a large part of the globe as an antenna. The antenna length in Republic, Michigan was approximately 52 kilometers (32 mi). The antenna is very inefficient. To drive it, a dedicated power plant seems to be required, although the power emitted as radiation is only a few watts. Its transmission can be received virtually anywhere. A station in Antarctica at 78°S 167°W was noticed when the Soviet Navy put their ZEVS antenna into operation.[2]
Due to the technical difficulty of building an ELF transmitter, only the US and the Russian Navy owned such systems. Until it was dismantled in late September 2004, the American Seafarer, later called Project ELF system (76 Hz) consisted of two antennas, located at Clam Lake, Wisconsin (since 1977) and at Republic, Michigan in the Upper Peninsula (since 1980). The Russian antenna (ZEVS, 82 Hz) is installed at the Kola Peninsula near Murmansk. It was noticed in the West in the early 1990s. The British Royal Navy once considered building their own transmitter at Glengarry Forest, Scotland, but the project was canceled.
Cheers
Well, this is how I see it anyway.
We cannot use too high frequency
We cannot use too low frequency
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1101.msg26043#msg26043
Gibbs I don't see how the two terminals on opposite sides of the planet could have displacement currents directly between them but
if in reality they did, it makes no matter to me. It's still wireless transmission with one conductor as I see it. That drawing is
an acceptable representation of the principal in my view, for what it's worth. Maybe a big capacitor around the Earth inductance.
Yes
Too high frequency dissipates too much energy at shallow depth (according to most)
and too low frequency won't transmit as much power. O0
Cheers
REACTIVE CURRENT TRANSFORMER - Rudolf Klavdievich Katargin et al
http://www.google.com/patents/US20120086413
I don't think the patent "application" has much merit. He is making the reactive power from 220- 240 v AC for the purpose of converting it to real power, seems like a pointless exercise.
The power induced in the receivers would not be reactive power I don't think, the reactive power would be in the transmitter coil if there was any but I don't see how. The coils are all coupled.
I don't think there would be any free energy or any point to doing that. Just my opinion from the little bit I read so far.
Cheers
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.10.23, 08:34:54
When I say one wire I mean one wire, wire meaning a man made conductor. That is the accepted meaning I think.
"single wire" means only one wire, therefore "no return". If there is a return through the earth playing the role of a wire, then it is not a "single wire", it is an ordinary circuit obeying Kirchoff's laws.
Quote
...
Atmospheric conduction. No wires two conductors
Capacitive coupling between the terminal capacities.
Same thing as moving away the two plates of a capacitor connected to an inductance. The fact that the inductance is constituted of 2 inductances in series with their midpoint connected to the ground doesn't change anything. It looks like two circuits but there is only one. While the resonance is maintained, there is a significant displacement current between the two "plates". When the two "plates" of the resonant circuits are too far from each other, the ground is no more negligible and so constitutes also a capacitor "plate" towards which a part of the current is diverted.
There is not one point differing from Maxwell's equations or from ordinary engineering.
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.10.23, 09:31:32
ELF communication is done by electromagnetic waves which are not "radio" waves according to the wiki article.
...
I have invoked this point many times. How many times should I do it again? It's simple electromagnetism laws.
Calculate the wave length of ELF!When you are at a distance less than a wavelength, the plane EM wave is not yet built or not completely built, of course it's not pure "radio" waves, you are in a bath constituted by E and B fields not linked by the Poynting vector, not propagating. And if you are at some wavelengths, there is a mix of EM waves and such fields.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.10.24, 06:56:06
"single wire" means only one wire, therefore "no return". If there is a return through the earth playing the role of a wire, then it is not a "single wire", it is an ordinary circuit obeying Kirchoff's laws.
Capacitive coupling between the terminal capacities.
Same thing as moving away the two plates of a capacitor connected to an inductance. The fact that the inductance is constituted of 2 inductances in series with their midpoint connected to the ground doesn't change anything. It looks like two circuits but there is only one. While the resonance is maintained, there is a significant displacement current between the two "plates". When the two "plates" of the resonant circuits are too far from each other, the ground is no more negligible and so constitutes also a capacitor "plate" towards which a part of the current is diverted.
There is not one point differing from Maxwell's equations or from ordinary engineering.
A wire is a man made conductor, don't try to say I'm saying what I'm not saying.
Wire equals man made wire. A conductor is anything that will conduct.
Wireless means no man made wires. Which is intended to cut infrastructure maintenance.
Displacement current is not conducted in a wire or a conductor because it isn't conducted as far as I can tell.
The atmospheric wireless transmission was designed to create and use a conducting path in the ionosphere not displacement currents, not a wire, a conducting path.
Bottom line is we disagree. I make no real claims except that What people say Tesla said is not what Tesla said most of the time.
And Show me where I said there was anything but electromagnetic waves ! Don't twist my words.
I'll say it again I am not saying the latest transmitter actually worked. I am saying many people are twisting Tesla's words to suit their own agenda's or beliefs.
You on the other hand are claiming it does not work. Prove it with experiment. Tesla claimed it worked not me. He is dead he cannot prove anything.
If you insist it doesn't work well then good for you. Fact is ELF communications can be picked up anywhere on Earth. and is wireless, no wires, only natural medium
and it's not radio waves or radiation, I'm not a radio engineer or other wise qualified. But I can see ELF communication has no wires and is not radiation or radio waves
those are the main points.
Then I ask anybody again, where is the words from Tesla claiming these were free energy devices. So many people claim he wanted to transmit free energy to the world at no cost
to anyone, which is a complete joke.
So to sum up ELF transmissions use no man made wires (wireless) and can be received anywhere on Earth. I don't dispute the displacement currents.
People can attribute whatever laws they like to that but I think that is the reality.
Cheers
P.S. Wire= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wire
conductor= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_conductor
..
does a changing electric field create a magnetic field?
Can a changing electric field transfer energy?
Exnihiloest makes a pertinent point regarding ELF
radiation construct: the near field is composed
of electric and magnetic fields which are not yet
phase linked into the radiant wave. The near
field is unique in this respect.
It is possible to sythesize ELF waves in the
ionosphere itself by unorthodox means:
ELF/VLF Generation (http://memberfiles.freewebs.com/42/82/77078242/documents/Efficiency_Scaling_for_Ionospheric_ELFVLF_Generation.pdf)
Quote from: Dumped on 2012.10.24, 16:28:44
Exnihiloest makes a pertinent point regarding ELF
radiation construct: the near field is composed
of electric and magnetic fields which are not yet
phase linked into the radiant wave. The near
field is unique in this respect.
It is possible to sythesize ELF waves in the
ionosphere itself by unorthodox means:
ELF/VLF Generation (http://memberfiles.freewebs.com/42/82/77078242/documents/Efficiency_Scaling_for_Ionospheric_ELFVLF_Generation.pdf)
Yes that may be true, I don't think I disputed that.
My main points are that wireless means no man made wires, and ELF waves can be tapped for energy anywhere on Earth.
The very fact that the military transmitter work is proof that Tesla's system could also work the way he describes, maybe not as well as he claimed.
But the actual efficiency to me is irrelevant and I think without testing Tesla's system Tesla's way, which the military do not do, "publicly" anyway.
There are VLF transmitters for submarine communications as well. Which can operate at below 14 kHz. Of course what we are told is likely only part of the story.
I think the subs use "towed antenna arrays" and such things. I doubt they would come out and say it was Tesla's idea but much of it is based on his findings, in my opinion.
When underwater subs are completely surrounded by a conductor. The military can't build a big tower like Tesla designed because people would see it and know Tesla was at least part right. So they use rings of wires, like some coilers do for a top capacitance.
QuoteThe design had an output of 2 million watts in the frequency range 14-18.5 kilocycles without corona and could be operated at lower frequencies at a lower efficiency. All circuits were duplicated for reliability and operational security. Six salt water wells provided cooling for the VLF Transmitter and the Power Plant. Two Helix Coils (houses) matched the output of the transmitter to the aerial array.
http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahdb/search.pl?mode=place_detail&place_id=103552
Harold Holt was one of our prime ministers, he went missing in 1967. It is rumored he met with foul play from submarine frogmen. The facility is named after him. C.C
The history of submarine communications radio systems
is a fascinating study. Here are some links which may
keep viewers occupied for several hours:
Naval Radio Station Haiku (http://www.haikuvalley.com/History/HAIKU-NAVAL-RADIOSTATION-1946/534476_wrXM6b#!i=92031892&k=bwBNgT5)
American Marconi Foundation downloads (http://www.american-marconi.org/Downloads/Downloads.html)
OMEGA Navigation System (http://www.jproc.ca/hyperbolic/omega.html)
Wireless Giant of the Pacific (http://www.scribd.com/doc/62366811/Livingston-Pacific-Wireless)
Haiku Stairs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haiku_Stairs)
Very Low Frequency (http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/c3i/vlf.htm)
Stanford VLF Group (http://vlf.stanford.edu/)
More on HAARP and VLF (http://wwwppd.nrl.navy.mil/whatsnew/haarp/)
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.10.24, 07:39:09
...
The atmospheric wireless transmission was designed to create and use a conducting path in the ionosphere not displacement currents, not a wire, a conducting path.
...
You are saying here what was expected
but has never been demonstrated. A conducting path is either looped otherwise the current don't flow, or it radiates (antennae) and even in this case, there are displacement currents around the antenna. This is trivial.
All experiments with near coupled resonant circuits are in agreement with Maxwell's equations.
I don't see the interest to endlessly speak about fuzzy "atmospheric wireless transmissions" which would be neither near fields nor EM waves, when there is not the least beginning of the least experimental evidence. Or show us which experiment wouldn't work according to classical electromagnetism.
Quote from: Dumped on 2012.10.24, 17:55:37
The history of submarine communications radio systems is a fascinating study. Here are some links which may keep viewers occupied for several hours:
Naval Radio Station Haiku (http://www.haikuvalley.com/History/HAIKU-NAVAL-RADIOSTATION-1946/534476_wrXM6b#!i=92031892&k=bwBNgT5)
American Marconi Foundation downloads (http://www.american-marconi.org/Downloads/Downloads.html)
OMEGA Navigation System (http://www.jproc.ca/hyperbolic/omega.html)
Wireless Giant of the Pacific (http://www.scribd.com/doc/62366811/Livingston-Pacific-Wireless)
Haiku Stairs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haiku_Stairs)
Very Low Frequency (http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/c3i/vlf.htm)
Stanford VLF Group (http://vlf.stanford.edu/)
More on HAARP and VLF (http://wwwppd.nrl.navy.mil/whatsnew/haarp/)
I agree. It's interesting because there is not only the question of fields/waves production and detection but also this one of the propagation or interaction with the earth (atmosphere + subsoil + ocean + interface soil/air...).
Many strange things are witnessed in Australia.
We cannot expect to be told everything because of security. However we can expect not to be told a lot.
Wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Defence_Satellite_Communications_Station
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/pinegap.htm
Strange video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ayyj1pYjuD4
http://ellisctaylor.homestead.com/brightskies.html
Go to these co- ordinates in Google Earth, it looks to me like a large circular ring of supports to hold a ring of wires. I have seen a better photo but can't find it. Note the strange rippling of the ground around it, which you'll need to zoom in to see. I will post a close up any one wants one who doesn't have google Earth. This one in the picture is at Exmouth. There are facilities in a number of places in WA. And also the Pine Gap facility. I don't think they have been twiddling their thumbs at these places. They have serious intent and as much money as they need. Billions. If they need more money they just get their RB friends to print some, then our money becomes less valuable. It cost's them nothing, we pay, you and I and everyone who uses money. Much of it is Tesla Tech in my opinion.
This facility is only 6 meters above sea level so it is basically Grounded directly to the Ocean.
(http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd168/Toey1/ELF.jpg)
People will have to do their research and join the dots.
QuoteTower zero is encased in wood/asbestos sheeting to form a very high enclosed oblong box, it has a two man elevator running up the inside of the tower - the top inner aerial shape is surrounded by a larger enclosed box.
The aerial array utilised enormous quantities of copper tube and wire "ground counterpoise" arrays buried in the ground under the entire complex.
Access into the hill side tunnel opening takes one into a large (at least three story) underground section at the base of Tower Zero. Here is something like the innards of a giant "transistor radio" with a huge heavy duty copper wire coil some 50 feet high and 15 feet in diameter - all supported on hard wood (Jarrah) frames fixed with wooden (Jarrah) nuts and bolts !!! Sections are lined with stainless steel sheeting. There may be further and deeper sections under the copper coil which were not seen by this witness.
There is a large power station (possibly running on gas from bore holes into a nearby large natural gas reservoir).
Although officially recently handed over by the US Navy to Australian Navy control the base still has many US "consultants" who live in the nearby town of Exmouth. The Jarrah fittings and copper coil in Tower Zero were installed in 1968, after the main building contractor teams had left the facility.
Supposedly this Exmouth Tx site is transmitting vlf or elf E/M radio messages to submarines. However this eyewitness description of the underground wooden frame and giant coil is a dead give away. It perfectly describes major elements of Tesla's Wardenclyffe, Long Island, and the earlier Colorado Springs research versions, Magnifying Energy Transmitters. The wooden construction is required to handle very high voltages and very high frequencies (possibly as high as microwave band frequencies) by containing the induced coil electro-static wave from discharge to ground - it is NOT needed to handle very low frequencies (vlf), or extremely low frequencies (elf).
Tesla claimed in 1908 that he could hit any antipodean planetary city with an enormous E/M energy pulse delivered in micro seconds that would "create an explosion equivalent to more than the power of the extant World navy's combined Dreadnought Battleship broadsides" (i.e. a huge force similar to that of a nuclear explosion) from just such a device.
http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1919-05-00.htm explain Fig 4 please ???
Quotehttp://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1919-05-00.htm explain Fig 4 please
In fig 4 we see a circuit which I have tested extensively whereby no current is looped nor radiated which is absurd. It can operate at low voltages (12v) and at very low frequencies(1 Hz) to power a series load and it is easy to understand why for those that have built and tested this system. The changing potential on the wire/load couples to the space surrounding the conductor and this phenomena is well known in electrostatics. What is not shown is that the "capacity" varies to a great degree based on the relative humidity of the air surrounding the circuit.
The ground path or ground connection is not required, as well much of the confusion here relates to magnetic and electric lines of force which in reality do not exist, there are no real lines that is absurd, we are dealing solely with gradients.
Quote from: forest on 2012.10.25, 11:12:59
http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1919-05-00.htm explain Fig 4 please ???
The power supply is AC and the capacity is coupled to the other side of the generator.
allcanadian,
The link you provided (http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1919-05-00.htm) is most interesting reading.
Although Tesla was a brilliant man, he was not
infallible. Towards the end of the article where
he expounds on the impossibilites of the Hertz
wave and the Heaviside Layer one must wonder.
If Tesla were alive today he'd probably rethink
much of what he'd written...
Can you see the error of his assumptions in
Figure 15? And also Figure 20?
This is interesting...
"The other invention, of still greater importance, is a peculiar oscillator enabling the transmission of energy without wires in any quantity that may ever be required for industrial use, to any distance, and with very high economy. It was the outcome of years of systematic study and investigation and wonders will be achieved by its means."
@Dumped
QuoteIf Tesla were alive today he'd probably rethink much of what he'd written...
I imagine you may be correct however in the same light I would imagine he would be quite disappointed at the lack of progress we have made. Oh it may look like progress with the advancements in communication, computers and such but fundamentally most of the things which matter the most are really no different than 80 years ago. Here is one example, take a new car versus one from 50 years ago and strip away all the pretty bells and whistles until we have only the primary components which matter, how have they changed?. One might say there is no comparison by appearance before however after we see very little has changed which is true, appearances can be deceiving.
@forest
QuoteThis is interesting...
"The other invention, of still greater importance, is a peculiar oscillator enabling the transmission of energy without wires in any quantity that may ever be required for industrial use, to any distance, and with very high economy. It was the outcome of years of systematic study and investigation and wonders will be achieved by its means."
That is interesting, Tesla also speaks of transmission through the Earth in a straight line at which point one can dismiss what he say's or consider how it could be possible. I prefer the latter as simply rejecting things we may not fully understand does not require a great deal of intelligence in fact it does not require any. It is also interesting to note that to some extent this has been proven as possible, quantum entanglement travels at hundreds of times the speed of light between any two points and the change in state constitutes energy. Which is odd isn't it?, not that long ago it was completely impossible and now it is not, the speed of light could not be breached and now it has .... it's all very confusing at times. It is also interesting that Albert Einstein knew of this and said it would happen and that when it did his GR theories would fall flat on their face, Einstein was a very smart man.
AC
Quote from: allcanadian on 2012.10.25, 21:40:34
...
It is also interesting to note that to some extent this has been proven as possible, quantum entanglement travels at hundreds of times the speed of light between any two points and the change in state constitutes energy.
...
This is an oversimplified and misleading interpretation of QM. The idea of energy moving to complete an entanglement is totally unfounded.
With entangled photons, obtained for instance from non linear cristals like barium borate, the only observation is that when we measure the polarization of one of the two photons, we get a random result, for example vertical, and this determines the polarization of the other photon, horizontal. So if we measure many photons at point A, we get a random sequence but the astonishing thing is that we get instantaneously the same but opposite sequence at point B. But the non-locality doesn't imply that energy has travelled between the two points. A measurement doesn't change the photon energy. And it is not even demonstrated that something has travelled, probably not.
Even a simple photon is not something that travels in a classical view, i.e. it is not something moving successively from point to point along a path. The Wheeler's delayed choice experiments prove that the path depends on the final configuration of the setup, at the moment of the arrival. If you change the path after the photon is supposed to have passed this point, nevertheless the experimental result is changed.
We must remember that a photon has no proper time (see Eintein's relativity when v->c). For a photon its emission and absorption are instantaneous, even if light years are separing the two points. We observe a certain time for this transaction, which is t=c/d, d being the space distance separating the two points. This doesn't imply a speed in the sense of classical physics, with intermediate times and distances. Some concepts of QM stipulate that quantum interactions create the time and so, there would be no time until the photon is measured or interacts.
The QM formalism is clear and relevant but not the interpretations. Nevertheless it is known that "quantum entanglement" doesn't "travel at hundreds of times the speed" because nothing at all has been shown to "travel". It's just an image for the instantaneousness. In QM, an instantaneous interaction doesn't imply a travel because an absolute and immanent time according to which the quantum phenomena would evolve and intermediate quantum events that are not even observable could be timestamped, doesn't exist.
AC is this the quote you refer to.(second paragraph) Because I don't think he is actually saying the currents go straight through.
QuoteThere is another difference. The electromagnetic energy travels with the speed of light, but see how the current flows. At the first moment, this current propagates exactly like the shadow of the moon at the earth's surface. It starts with infinite velocity from that point, but its speed rapidly diminishes; it flows slower and slower until it reaches the equator, 6,000 miles from the transmitter. At that point, the current flows with the speed of light -- that is, 300,000 kilometers per second. But, if you consider the resultant current through the globe along the axis of symmetry of propagation, the resultant current flows continuously with the same velocity of light.
Whether this current passing through the center of the earth to the opposite side is real, or whether it is merely an effect of these surface currents, makes absolutely no difference. To understand the concept, one must imagine that the current from the transmitter flows straight to the opposite point of the globe.
Dr. Tesla filed two patents using the title Art Of Transmitting Electrical Energy Through Natural Mediums. The first, U.S. Patent No. 787,412 applied for May 16, 1900, does not provide a lot of information. The second, Canadian Patent No. 142,352 applied for April 17, 1906, explains many of the things being discussed in this thread. I think the 1900 patent was to lay claim to the method without disclosing very much information. The 1906 patent was applied for near the end of the Wardenclyffe project when it was clear that it was not going to be completed. I think Dr. Tesla at this time wanted to protect the details. The fact that it was filed in Canada would somewhat obscure it.
I put together the attached document that contains quotes from the 1906 patent and what I think they mean. You should however examine the entire patent before reading my writeup. You will probably find details I missed.
Keep in mind he always said, and stressed over and over again, that his method delivered power via conduction, not induction. Also look at Nathan Stubblefield's work on his wireless telephone - transmitting voice signals through the earth. It worked but had limited range because it used inductance and was also troubled by interference in New York City where electricity was already in use.
If Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter transfers energy by longitudinal waves, this should be easy to determine, as the transmitter and receiver will not be coupled.
If so, then longitudinal waves are sent out and the receiver intercepts them.
@Grumpy
If energy was carried away by waves, whatever the waves, longitudinal or transversal, the source would have to constantly provide this energy to the waves, as does a radio transmitter.
The behavior of high Q resonant circuits show that energy is conserved in the circuit, going back and forth between the terminal capacity and the coil and the associated electric and magnetic fields. When the source is disconnected, the oscillations are weakly damped, due to the losses, demonstrating that no significant energy is radiated.
Exactly Ex., A big tank. and no matter what type of wave it is, when it is tapped the transmitter must provide more power, Tesla states that, clearly in the quote below.
He is clearly stating that if energy is taken out at another place then the transmitter input would increase.
http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/nt_on_ac.htm#043
QuoteNow, there is a vast difference between these two, the electromagnetic and current energies. That energy which goes out in the form of rays, is, as I have indicated here [on the diagram of Fig. 82], unrecoverable, hopelessly lost. You can operate a little instrument by catching a billionth part of it but, except this, all goes out into space never to return. This other energy, however, of the current in the globe, is stored and completely recoverable. Theoretically, it does not take much effort to maintain the earth in electrical vibration. I have, in fact, worked out a plant of 10,000 horse-power which would operate with no bigger loss than 1 percent of the whole power applied; that is, with the exception of the frictional energy that is consumed in the rotation of the engines and the heating of the conductors, I would not lose more than 1 percent. In other words, if I have a 10,000 horsepower plant, it would take only 100 horsepower to keep the earth vibrating so long as there is no energy taken out at any other place.
And to comment on one point that thx1138 makes in the DOC, when Tesla says the effect gets greater as the distance increases,
that is clearly because there is a node (0 volts) at the ground plate of the transmitter. So the further away you go the closer you get
to the anti-node (Max potential difference). Not a gain in energy, the only energy that could be added in my opinion would be from
natural oscillations from lightning strikes but because of the randomness of them they would likely be opposing the work of the transmitter half the time anyway.
This sketch kinda shows what I think would happen, however wasteful the exercise. Just imagine it scaled up so that the receiver is on the other side of the planet.
The sensitive device could use an inductive plate or something for the ground maybe. Do the testing after heavy rain and use a small stake would be my choice. ;)
The sensitive device could be a handheld oscilloscope with a stake and elevated terminal to attach to..
With a small setup the ground wave would have no resonance, it would be just a disturbance, and a weak one too.
(http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd168/Toey1/Experiment002-1.jpg)
Cheers
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.10.26, 14:05:54
@Grumpy
If energy was carried away by waves, whatever the waves, longitudinal or transversal, the source would have to constantly provide this energy to the waves, as does a radio transmitter.
The behavior of high Q resonant circuits show that energy is conserved in the circuit, going back and forth between the terminal capacity and the coil and the associated electric and magnetic fields. When the source is disconnected, the oscillations are weakly damped, due to the losses, demonstrating that no significant energy is radiated.
Waves produced by changes in an electrostatic field take little energy to create, as you are only moving charges with potential. The charges have the energy, your potential is just a slight imbalance. This would not be an EM wave as there is not magnetic field unless charges are moving or changing.
Like the image attached, but without using a charged mass to move the other charges:
@Grumpy
Your getting warmer...
wikipedia.org/wiki/Contactless_energy_transfer
QuoteElectrostatic induction or capacitive coupling is the passage of electrical energy through a dielectric. In practice it is an electric field gradient or differential capacitance between two or more insulated terminals, plates, electrodes, or nodes that are elevated over a conducting ground plane. The electric field is created by charging the plates with a high potential, high frequency alternating current power supply. The capacitance between two elevated terminals and a powered device form a voltage divider.
The electric energy transmitted by means of electrostatic induction can be utilized by a receiving device, such as a wireless lamp.[23][24][25] Tesla demonstrated the illumination of wireless lamps by energy that was coupled to them through an alternating electric field.[26][27][20
Transient Electric Phenomena and Oscillations By Charles Proteus Steinmetz p616 -- Picture below from this excellent book
Quote from: allcanadian on 2012.10.27, 00:58:26
@Grumpy
Your getting warmer...
wikipedia.org/wiki/Contactless_energy_transfer
Transient Electric Phenomena and Oscillations By Charles Proteus Steinmetz p616 -- Picture below from this excellent book
Can you explain exactly what that has to do with the Magnifying Transmitter ? Considering it is designed to operate at relatively low frequency,
which is explained by Tesla on numerous occasions in numerous places. And also designed to work at resonance with a continuous wave.
Where are the transients ? And where is the very high frequency ?
Cheers
Quote from: Grumpy on 2012.10.26, 20:52:28
Waves produced by changes in an electrostatic field take little energy to create, as you are only moving charges with potential.
...
1) There are not "electrostatic fields" when voltages and currents are varying.
2) All electric fields, electrostatic or not, derive from a potential, except those from electromagnetic induction. Energy is V*I, large V and weak I represent an energy as significant as weak V and large I!
(http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1101.0;attach=8616)
After the sphere is connected to the ground and then is isolated, it remains positively charged. So the work to remove the negative stick from the vicinity of the sphere by fighting the electrostatic force will be identical to the work done by the mutual attraction of the sphere and the stick when it was approaching the sphere. Net energy gain: zero.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.10.27, 11:17:25
(http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1101.0;attach=8616)
After the sphere is connected to the ground and then is isolated, it remains positively charged. So the work to remove the negative stick from the vicinity of the sphere by fighting the electrostatic force will be identical to the work done by the mutual attraction of the sphere and the stick when it was approaching the sphere. Net energy gain: zero.
You are correct, and you
deliberately ignored my statements to prove your point!
Quote from: Grumpy on 2012.10.26, 20:52:28
Waves produced by changes in an electrostatic field take little energy to create, as you are only moving charges with potential. The charges have the energy, your potential is just a slight imbalance. This would not be an EM wave as there is not magnetic field unless charges are moving or changing.
Like the image attached, but without using a charged mass to move the other charges:
If the work required to change the potential is less than the work that the changing potential imparts, then I have gained energy!
I guess this is kinda what I'm trying to say here (bottom quote), I just found this.
http://www.teslaradio.com/pages/li_notes.htm
QuoteDeveloping Long Island plant Tesla considered mainly the transmitting tower, oscillators for production of HF currents, choice of operating frequency, design of various coils, arrangements of terminals, etc. His propagation theory was based on the charge redistribution along the globe. As he did not consider only the static case, for higher frequencies (in this case frequencies above few Hz) he assumed that the zones of a half wavelength extent contain alternatively positive and negative electric charge. He considered transmitter frequencies as low as 4 Hz, but he devoted more attention to 60 Hz. On June 8, 1901, he wrote:
Assume frequency of dynamo on plant under process of construction, 60 cls, and capacity C of terminal insulated 10000 cm. With full steam-pressure on one of the boilers I can easily get 150 HP This will be only half of actual output. To use the power to the full extent we must charge the terminal to a pressure P given by equation:
C·p2 = 150 746, from which . . . P = 409700 V . . ."
Continuing further his consideration along these lines, Tesla came around with figures that with 100,000 cm capacity terminal on the polar cap (a point on the opposite side of the globe to the transmitter location), one could get about 2 HP, which, in his opinion ". . . is enough to demonstrate practicability of power transmission."
[/i]
QuoteThe ideas which were developed, and the results of research which Tesla carried after his return from Colorado Springs in January 1900 were not fully disclosed in Tesla's papers which he published after 1900. Something was disclosed in [1] in 1904. Here Tesla explained his intelligence transmission "World Telegraphy" plant at Long Island. However, very little is said about technical details, most of statements .are prediction-like types. From technical point of view, more interesting things had been disclosed in 1912 paper [2]. Another description of Tesla's system is found in a handbook [3]. Tesla's claim that "his" system is different from "Hertz's" is based on the fact that at low frequencies, and with small antenna I in terms of wavelength, radiation of Hertzian type electromagnetic wave is small. "Tesla's waves," if we are allowed to use such a name, are in fact surface waves in modern terminology (as known, this type of waves are significant in the range of long waves) or the Earth cavity waves, known better as ELF (extremely low frequency) waves. In "pure Hertzian" wave (in Tesla's terminology) there is no induced current in the Earth, except on reflection region which is not essential for the discussion. In contrast to the latter, guided surface or ELF waves do not exist without current in the Earth crust. Having this in mind, we can conclude that there is a truth in Tesla's statements about specific behavior of low frequency, guided to the Earth waves. As regards correctness of his approach to the propagation theory based on outlined assumptions, more study is needed and we hope that it will be done in the future.
..
Quote from: Grumpy on 2012.10.28, 02:46:47
You are correct, and you deliberately ignored my statements to prove your point!
If the work required to change the potential is less than the work that the changing potential imparts, then I have gained energy!
Sorry I didn't notice it, as you presented nothing to support this magic method.
What do you propose to make it? An operation of the holy spirit?
(http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/2552/miracleoccurssw3.gif)
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.10.28, 11:20:08
Sorry I didn't notice it, as you presented nothing to support this magic method.
What do you propose to make it? An operation of the holy spirit?
I believe that if there is any merit to Tesla's "waves" and methods to produce them, such as his Magnifying Transmitter, may produce longitudinal electric waves.
Th Holy Spirit may be easier to evoke.
Quote from: exnihiloest
What do you propose to make it? An operation
of the holy spirit?
Surely you jest, but you're nearer the source than
many may believe.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.10.28, 11:20:08
What do you propose to make it? An operation of the holy spirit?
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/302l/lectures/node55.html
In fact, if the wire is straight, and the electric potential decreases uniformly with distance traveled along the wire, then the longitudinal electric field-strength is given by E = V/L (see Sect. 5.3), where L is the length of the wire.
If I pulse this wire, is a longitudinal electric wave produced?
http://puhep1.princeton.edu/~kirkmcd/examples/bernstein.pdf
It is well known that electromagnetic waves in vacuum are transverse. A longitudinal
electric wave can only exist in a medium that can support a nonzero polarization density P
(volume density of electric dipole moments).
Sounds like we have to polarize the vacuum to have a longitudinal electric wave.
Can anybody provide a quote from Tesla, of words he spoke or wrote, which state that "longitudinal waves"
are the mode of propagation with the "improved transmitter" or the way the energy is transmitted, and a link to the source or a title of the
document which the quote is from ?
And I may as well ask again for a quote from Tesla, of words he spoke or wrote, which state that he was claiming
to get more energy out of the transmitter system than he put in. So can anyone provide one of those ?
No quotes will be a good indication to me that no one can.
Cheers
Quote from: Grumpy on 2012.10.29, 01:54:23
http://puhep1.princeton.edu/~kirkmcd/examples/bernstein.pdf
It is well known that electromagnetic waves in vacuum are transverse. A longitudinal
electric wave can only exist in a medium that can support a nonzero polarization density P
(volume density of electric dipole moments).
I agree.
Quote
Sounds like we have to polarize the vacuum to have a longitudinal electric wave.
Quote(from the McDonald's paper)
Let us recall the origins of the standard lore. Namely, the rate of work done by the field E on current density J is
J·E = ∂P/∂t·E = − 1/4π·∂E/∂t·E = −∂E2/8π/∂t (19)
using eqs. (8 ) and (11).
This work is done at the expense of the electric field energy density ufield, which we therefore identify as
ufield = E2/8π=E2x/8π·cos2(kx − ωt), (20)
for the longitudinal wave (3).
We readily interpret this energy density as moving in the +x direction at the phase velocity vp = ω/k, even though the derivation of eq. (19) did not lead to a Poynting vector.
We should also note that energy is stored in the medium in the form of kinetic energy of the electrons (and, in general, ions as well) that contribute to the polarization, P = Ne(x − x0) = − E/4π.
Therefore, even if the polarization is created in the vacuum where the positron/electron pairs are concerned instead of only the electrons in a wire, there is no clue that "the work required to change the potential is less than the work that the changing potential imparts".
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.10.29, 10:45:13
I agree.
Therefore, even if the polarization is created in the vacuum where the positron/electron pairs are concerned instead of only the electrons in a wire, there is no clue that "the work required to change the potential is less than the work that the changing potential imparts".
Agreed.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.10.24, 07:13:47
I have invoked this point many times. How many times should I do it again? It's simple electromagnetism laws.
Calculate the wave length of ELF!
When you are at a distance less than a wavelength, the plane EM wave is not yet built or not completely built, of course it's not pure "radio" waves, you are in a bath constituted by E and B fields not linked by the Poynting vector, not propagating. And if you are at some wavelengths, there is a mix of EM waves and such fields.
I made a big mistake in this post, I mixed up klm and meters.
Forget ELF, Tesla said below 35 kHz. Where does ELF end and VLF begin ?
http://www.google.com/patents?id=oSo_AAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false
OK so Tesla says the 1/4 wavelength should be an
odd multiple of the Earth diameter. Easy.
The Earth is 12756 km diameter. The 1/4 wavelength for 29.4 kHz is 2551 meters, which is roughly 1/5 of the Earths diameter.
So 29.4 kHz is a reasonable frequency to use. What is so complicated about that.
And 17.64 kHz has a 1/4 wavelength of 4252 km which is 1/3 the diameter of the Earth. Also a reasonable frequency to use.
The next one down is 1/4 wave length equal to the Earths diameter about 5.964 kHz or 12575.45 meters.
It's all spelled out in the patent. Obviously not many people actually read it.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=oSo_AAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false
So to sum up, in order to use 29.4 kHz about 2551 meters of wire would be needed for the secondary/extra coils in total, or just the secondary if no extra coil is used,
but to be more precise, the length of the wire needs to be calculated depending on the propagation velocity through the secondary circuit.
As described in this patent, http://www.google.com/patents?id=p5g_AAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false
Cheers
Quote from: Grumpy on 2012.10.28, 02:46:47
If the work required to change the potential is less than the work that the changing potential imparts, then I have gained energy!
The attaining of free energy may not be from induction process itself, for it would violate action reaction. However, I see some connected truth from the statement above.
http://www.lanl.gov/orgs/pa/science21/LaserCooling.html
"Laser, or optical, cooling is based on a principle of physics known as anti-Stokes fluorescence and occurs when the amount of energy emitted by a solid, when exposed to an energy source, is more than the energy it absorbs. In other words, a laser aimed at certain materials will excite the materials' atoms to a higher energy state. These excited atoms absorb a little extra energy from the heat of the surrounding material. When they produce photons, the photons are of a higher energy than the initial laser energy and this radiation of energy cools the material."The process could have been sending out waves that excite the aether, cooling it down. It absorb energy from ambient and return a greater amount of energy.
Still no reference by Tesla to say that the transmitter was meant to be a free energy device. Where do people get all the free energy
claptrap from regarding these things ?
Here are some bits of info from his Long Island Notes (supposedly). In my opinion. It clearly states there is no free energy.
I can't even understand how people could imagine it to be anything other than a power transmitter, if they had done some research.
http://www.capturedlightning.com/temp/Rare_Notes.pdf
(http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd168/Toey1/Rarenotes.jpg)
(http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd168/Toey1/Rarenotes2.jpg)
(http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd168/Toey1/rarenotes3.png)
There is far too much hearsay on these forums considering they are supposed to be scientific.
People say all kinds of things but in many cases they provide no quotes, no references and no evidence.
Cheers
FH,
We don't need Tesla's consent to talk about free energy and we are not searching free energy for Tesla. We are in charge of this free energy business whether Tesla in it or not.
The association between Tesla and Free Energy has many aspects from various interpretations of his work, to the artistic license taken by writers selling books.
The term "magnification" can easily imply more out than in. I have only seen two modern presentations of a Tesla transmitter and receiver, together, and that is on the "Tesla Radio" site, and Eric Dollard's videos.Both can be found for free with a web search. Neither state anything about overunity, that I can recall. Eric does claim it is possible in his book on the Magnifier.
EX equated Tesla's magnification equation to "Q" factor. This is a measure of the efficiency of a circuit. What if his Q was calculated or measured to be 100?
I think that the transmitter and receiver may work better when the wave or whatever comes off the top terminal is focused like a beam rather than all around with a hemisphere.
There are stories about Tesla's Pierce Arrow car running without fuel and on electricity, but I don't know that this was ever confirmed. Gerry Vassilatos (spelling?) claimed that Tesla discovered a radiant charging effect and tells a nice story about it, but I don't know that his source has ever been revealed. If you can get this radiant charging effect to work, which Dollard does show in his video, then you might have the start of something. Of course, Eric doesn't seem to have done much with it.
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.10.30, 00:15:18
...
The Earth is 12756 km diameter. The 1/4 wavelength for 29.4 kHz is 2551 meters, which is roughly 1/5 of the Earths diameter.
...
roughly 1/5000 of the Earth diameter! ;)
Your confusion between m and km makes irrelevant the remainder of your post.
Quote from: GibbsHelmholtz on 2012.10.31, 02:08:17
FH,
We don't need Tesla's consent to talk about free energy and we are not searching free energy for Tesla. We are in charge of this free energy business whether Tesla in it or not.
Blasphemy! Respect our God or His curse will come upon us.
O0
Quote from: Grumpy on 2012.10.31, 02:27:46
...
What if his Q was calculated or measured to be 100?
...
Q= 2*π * E[stored]/E[dissipated/cyle].
Q=100 means that we dissipate about 1/16th of the stored energy, during each cycle.
In best optical cavities, Q can exceed 100 million.
Without losses, Q would be infinite.
But for an energy gain, Q must be negative (as Q is defined from the energy, it is a redundancy to say it). This can be experimented with RLC circuits whose R is negative: the system oscillates in a runaway. Unfortunately in practice we need energy for real negative resistances to work.
MAybe we don't understand resonance ? What is the reason , why current in parallel tank circuit is higher then in power source ?
Quote from: forest on 2012.10.31, 10:47:17
...What is the reason , why current in parallel tank circuit is higher then in power source ?
Considering the tank circuit as a dipole connected to a power source, the current is the same. See Kirchhoff's circuit laws.
Do you mean "is higher in some component of the tank circuit"?
Or do you simply wonder at the principle of a transformer?
I'm sorry FH.
I know you love Tesla, many do. You're defending him from being call crackpot, delusional, dreamer... but we should let Tesla be who he is. Setting him free is the only way for him to truly become your friend.
@Farmhand
QuoteStill no reference by Tesla to say that the transmitter was meant to be a free energy device. Where do people get all the free energy claptrap from regarding these things ?
QuoteNikola Tesla states:
"I have harnessed the cosmic rays and caused them to operate a motive device. ... I have advanced a theory of the cosmic rays and at every step of my investigations I have found it completely justified. The attractive features of the cosmic rays is their constancy. They shower down on us throughout the whole 24 hours, and if a [power] plant is developed to use their power it will not require devices for storing energy as would be necessary with devices using wind, tide or sunlight. All of my investigations seem to point to the conclusion that they are small particles, each carrying so small a charge that we are justified in calling them neutrons. They move with great velocity, exceeding that of light. More than 25 years ago I began my efforts to harness the cosmic rays and I can now state that I have succeeded in operating a motive device by means of them. I will tell you in the most general way, the cosmic ray ionizes the air, setting free many charged ions and electrons. These charges are captured in a condenser [capacitor] which is made to discharge through the circuit of the motor. I have hopes of building my motor on a large scale, but circumstances have not been favorable to carrying out my plan."
You know there was another great mind by the name of Victor Schauberger and Victor stated we should always consider things in an opposite sense, we should do the opposite of what we do today. This is not any easy task as we have been taught to think a certain way from the day we are born, we have been told what to think from the moment we could comprehend the spoken word, we think we are open minded but we are not.
Now if Tesla's transmitter was doing the exact opposite to what you think then what would he be doing?. His transmitter was based on the wave like disturbances from lightning strikes as well as the phenomena relating to what occurs when the circuit is closed on a long transmission line, he tells us --- " the cosmic ray ionizes the air, setting free many charged ions and electrons".
Could it be that you have it completely backwards?, is Tesla producing a discharge to transmit energy or is he producing a conductive path for something already present to discharge itself producing a wave like disturbance to transmit energy?.
In the former we must always lose and we have nothing to gain in the latter the only energy required is that to switch on a conductive path for naturally occurring energy to flow from one region to another and if the energy flow can sustain the switching losses then the process is self-sustaining.
You see there is always another way and while we would senselessly hammer on the surface of a body of water in order to create waves we could just as easily drain a very small volume of it abruptly and produce the very same waves. Now if we never have to refill the body of water which is absurd then what have we lost and what have we gained?.
In general I have a simple rule, if we have not considered everything in an opposite sense as well then we are completely lacking in perspective and understanding. I would have though people would have figured this out by now, Equal and Opposite ..... Equal yet Opposite... We do the opposite yet produce the same result.
AC
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.10.31, 10:14:24
roughly 1/5000 of the Earth diameter! ;)
Your confusion between m and km makes irrelevant the remainder of your post.
Yes You're right I definitely made a big mistake there. I'll redo the calculations.
Cheers
P.S It's really just a matter of numbers.
Theoretically if the Earth is 12756000 meters diameter and we use 1/4 wavelength we divide the Earths diameter by 4 to get 3189000 meters.
Then if we divide 3189000 that by 3 we get 1063000 meters which is close to 70 Hz, which is ELF.
If we divide the 3189000 meters by 101 we get 31574 meters which is 2400 Hz.
I admit I made a silly mistake but that does not change the facts only the numbers.
And if we divide 3189000 by 797 we get 4001 meters which is about 18.750 kHz
Cheers
Grumpy, there are lots of "stories" about lots of things but most of them are just stories.
Gibbs, I don't "love" Tesla, I just think fair is fair, Tesla is made out to be a crackpot because of all the false claims people attribute to him.
AC I read what Tesla wrote and it seems all pretty clear to me where is your evidence for you're claims.
No I don't have it backwards. The energy transmitter was designed to transmit energy.
The radiant energy collector collects radiant energy and his motors, well they motored.
All the Notes and words I see from Tesla describe an under unity system using long waves to transmit energy using Earth resonance.
Show us some words from Tesla to back up what you say, or show some evidence of you're own to back it up, because as i see it
what you are saying goes directly against what Tesla has said and I think it is fairly clear given all the references and quotes.
I know you all love the idea of free energy from Tesla's stuff. Some of his stuff did collect free energy and when it did he was not afraid to say it.
Tesla made note on several occasions that there was no extra energy, he explained how the magnification was not extra energy just increased power ect.
He did so I think because it was being used to ridicule him even back then, people did not understand, he wasn't claiming extra energy, but people say he
did and even to this day that non existent claim of extra energy is providing ammunition for the debunkers, the debunkers don't care if the claims are or were real they just want to debunk.
So I am asking for people to provide quotes with references to words spoken or written by Tesla which describe a claim of extra energy in relation to the operation of the transmitters.
Do you have any evidence there was a claim of extra energy made by Tesla regarding the operation of the transmitters ?
Without any supporting evidence anyone can claim Tesla claimed anything they wanted him to claim. It's just silly.
Cheers
Quote from: forest on 2012.10.31, 10:47:17
MAybe we don't understand resonance ? What is the reason , why current in parallel tank circuit is higher then in power source ?
This may help:
http://amrita.vlab.co.in/?sub=1&brch=75&sim=318&cnt=1
The current 'in' a parallel tank circuit 'is' higher than the current from the power source. As well, the current in L will not equal the current in C and the difference between I
L and I
C will be the current provided by the power source.
@Ex is still correct because Kirchhoff's current law applies to the relationship between the tank circuit (a lumped circuit) and the power source.
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.11.01, 04:44:11
Tesla made note on several occasions that there was no extra energy, he explained how the magnification was not extra energy just increased power ect.
FH, please explain what you mean by the difference between "extra energy", and "increased power".
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.10.31, 10:44:28
But for an energy gain, Q must be negative (as Q is defined from the energy, it is a redundancy to say it). This can be experimented with RLC circuits whose R is negative: the system oscillates in a runaway. Unfortunately in practice we need energy for real negative resistances to work.
Exn,
We can see energy gain as negative Q, but we can also see energy gain as positive Q with a hidden energy source. lol
I think it could very simple in practice than in theory. I'm studying the circuit of this canceling coil.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJsVSMQqCOM
I decomposed it down to an LC circuit. I think that's what it is. In my experiment a while back I see the effect of adding LC increase light brightness. Touching the oscillator shows similar effect.
I don't claim that this has anything to do with Tesla although the author did.
Free energy comes from coupled oscillators.. The main ingredient is resonant circuit (high Q) . The second oscillator is passive and gets a copy of first energy done by nature and has to not load first one. Then the storage system and a way to tap second oscillator without completly damping oscillation.
Tesla used more advanced system with 4 oscillators : 2 forming transmitter and 2 receiver.
@Farmhand
QuoteWithout any supporting evidence anyone can claim Tesla claimed anything they wanted him to claim. It's just silly.
I think silly is relative, playing the he said/she said game which will always lead us right back to where we started is kind of silly. Looking for supporting evidence which doesn't actually support anything in reality seems kind of silly but if it works for you then I say go for it, I think I will opt out.
AC
Who is looking for supporting evidence that doesn't support anything in reality ? You ?
Because I am asking for people to provide evidence of their claims that the transmitters were free energy devices.
Who is playing the he said she said game ? It's not a game it is research.
Cheers
Quote from: forest on 2012.11.01, 15:32:22
Free energy comes from coupled oscillators.. The main ingredient is resonant circuit (high Q) . The second oscillator is passive and gets a copy of first energy done by nature and has to not load first one. Then the storage system and a way to tap second oscillator without completly damping oscillation.
Tesla used more advanced system with 4 oscillators : 2 forming transmitter and 2 receiver.
Can you demonstrate this free energy. And can you show evidence where Tesla got free energy from a system of four oscillators ?
Poynt99 I already have shown what I mean by "not extra energy just increased power".
Cheers
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.11.02, 00:36:06
Poynt99 I already have shown what I mean by "not extra energy just increased power".
Cheers
I presume then you are referring to an equal amount of energy in both cases, but over a shorter duration of time for the "increased power" scenario?
Quote from: poynt99 on 2012.11.02, 00:57:56
I presume then you are referring to an equal amount of energy in both cases, but over a shorter duration of time for the "increased power" scenario?
It can be that way, but it can also be a case of oscillating energy/reactive power. Consider a case where no energy is drawn from the receiver and the input is
for eg. 100 Watts with the plant in an idle state. There is no output but there could be a great deal of oscillating energy so in every cycle the peak power could also be quite high,
much higher than the 100 Watts. The 100 Watts represents the losses to keep the system running "ready" or idle. As with a regular transformer the flux is maximum when the transformer is idle
but the power factor is low there is a lot of power but no output. As the load is applied/increased the input power increases and the power factor gets closer to 1.0. Given the amount of oscillating energy in
such a system energy could be taken from the output at a rate of power much higher than 100 Watts as well, or it could be taken at a lesser rate of power.
When a load is drawn at the receiver the the oscillating energy is tapped and the reactive power is less and so the transmitter input increases to meet the demand much like any regular power system.
Cheers
After the calculation from 7,200,000 V at a capacity of 1000 cm. I found that it is a design of 1.2 GW power station assuming he going to use 35kH.
So Tesla planning to take half of Niagara fall power and provide it freely to the world? I guess it's possible for a plan, but unrealistic in so many ways.
Well it seems longitudinal waves are the norm, so there should be no doubt he
was using longitudinal waves. But all ground waves are longitudinal.
Current doesn't flow in wavy lines, it travels straight to and from longitudinally.
Therefore all current, displacement current is propagated longitudinally. There
is nothing special about that, it's just the way it is. The military ELF and VLF
transmitters also create standing waves and transmit the energy longitudinally
in the most part I would imagine.
When we look at a scope trace we see voltage over time or current over time,
the wavy lines are not reality, just a graph. The current intensity/magnitude
varies over time but it flows longitudinally, pressure waves. Which is basically the same
way the current flows in a wire, along it, with varying intensity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LP0PeO2zpfM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LP0PeO2zpfM)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waYXcrHXKsY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waYXcrHXKsY)
Cheers
P.S. Take the example of Single Wire Earth Return. How does the current
flow through the Earth ? Transversely in a wavy path or Longitudinally in a
straight path ? I say it goes straight (longitudinally). There would be
absolutely no reason for it to flow in any other way but straight (longitudinal).
(http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd168/Toey1/small_swer_schematic.gif)
..
This is what I believe Tesla means by "Magnification".
This is the circuit, the input is 12 volts at 300 mA = 3.6 Watts continuous. The primary resistance is less than 1 Ohm maybe 2 Ohms, ( I guess I should remeasure it). :-[
(http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd168/Toey1/ArmstrongOscillator111sm.jpg)
This is the wave form the Yellow trace is the primary coil negative end to circuit ground. The blue trace is a remote probe about 500 mm away so it's voltage means very little.
(http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd168/Toey1/ArmstrongOscillatorDrain1.jpg)
I see 160 volts across the primary, and the current must be substantial as well, can anyone tell me what the peak current would be, the frequency is 909 kHz.
Cheers
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.11.03, 02:58:41
Well it seems longitudinal waves are the norm, so there should be no doubt he was using longitudinal waves.
None experiment has been able to demonstrate such waves. All experiments involving alleged "longitudinal waves" are perfectly explained either by leakages of ordinary EM waves or by conditions of near field in the quasi-stationary state, following Maxwell's equations.
Quote
But all ground waves are longitudinal.
AM radios prove that your affirmation is false.
Quote
The military ELF and VLF transmitters also create standing waves and transmit the energy longitudinally in the most part I would imagine.
False again. The military ELF and VLF transmitters are designed according to Maxwell's equations and the radiated waves perfectly obey the known laws of electromagnetism. There was no surprise with their propagation, their range nor their penetration.
Although longitudinal waves in vacuum are totally incompatible with the known laws of physics, I'm really ready to admit them in front of an experimental evidence. I have myself led experiments on this subject but the only evidence until now is that they are impossible to observe. So, to consider them as a reality when they are not even a solid hypothesis is a delusion.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.12.15, 11:32:27
None experiment has been able to demonstrate such waves. All experiments involving alleged "longitudinal waves" are perfectly explained either by leakages of ordinary EM waves or by conditions of near field in the quasi-stationary state, following Maxwell's equations.
AM radios prove that your affirmation is false.
False again. The military ELF and VLF transmitters are designed according to Maxwell's equations and the radiated waves perfectly obey the known laws of electromagnetism. There was no surprise with their propagation, their range nor their penetration.
Although longitudinal waves in vacuum are totally incompatible with the known laws of physics, I'm really ready to admit them in front of an experimental evidence. I have myself led experiments on this subject but the only evidence until now is that they are impossible to observe. So, to consider them as a reality when they are not even a solid hypothesis is a delusion.
Then what is this guy talking about in the video below ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLAB-d8VnZ8
Are you saying that current flows in transverse wave motion ?
I think we must be talking about different things.
Anyway the primary DC resistance is 0.2 Ohms not counting the tuning coil or the capacitor, the tuning coil is also 0.2 ohms.
primary inductance is 30 uH just the primary and up to 45 uH with the tuning coil.
I'm going to try to measure the current in the primary tank and the current through the mosfet.
As well as see where the primary oscillations are limited to on the positive side. I'm not convinced
some of the voltage I see on the yellow trace is not caused by the influence of the secondary directly on the probe wire.
I think I might need to make a small cage to put the coil in so the measurements can be made more accurately.
..
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.12.15, 11:32:27
QuoteThe military ELF and VLF transmitters also create standing waves and transmit the energy longitudinally in the most part I would imagine.
False again. The military ELF and VLF transmitters are designed according to Maxwell's equations and the radiated waves perfectly obey the known laws of electromagnetism. There was no surprise with their propagation, their range nor their penetration.
Although longitudinal waves in vacuum are totally incompatible with the known laws of physics, I'm really ready to admit them in front of an experimental evidence. I have myself led experiments on this subject but the only evidence until now is that they are impossible to observe. So, to consider them as a reality when they are not even a solid hypothesis is a delusion.
Does this statement
QuoteThe military ELF and VLF transmitters also create standing waves and transmit the energy longitudinally in the most part I would imagine.
Say that I say the radiated waves
do not perfectly obey the known laws of electromagnetism ?
..
Farmhand,
A wave's definition is not based upon the path taken by the associated current. Being transverse or longitudinal means the disturbance created by the wave is perpendicular (transverse) or along the same path (longitudinal). Current flow and potential density along the wave's path are always longitudinal (simplified).
A scope can only show the longitudinal aspects of either wave - the current flow/potential density. Unfortunately, this means some will think the current is wiggling perpendicular to the current flow path. Don't bother arguing with those folks :-\
its too bad they use the word "condensation" to mean compression. Physicists are all screwed up! :D
that guy is too intense, he scares the knowledge right into your brain! ;D
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.12.15, 13:22:49
Then what is this guy talking about in the video below ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLAB-d8VnZ8
...
You mix anything with anything. Reread. You missed "longitudinal waves
in vacuum" (meaning also in air, for waves of magnetic or electric origin).
Nobody denies longitudinal waves in matter! Sound is a longitudinal wave.
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.12.15, 14:07:20
...
Say that I say the radiated waves do not perfectly obey the known laws of electromagnetism ?
..
They do obey, up to the limits of our knowledge of the parameters determining their medium of propagation, which are not obvious for example when it is question of the Earth's crust.
Quote from: EMdevices on 2012.12.15, 14:46:03
...
that guy is too intense, he scares the knowledge right into your brain! ;D
His method reminds me this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccvKsT7OG8s
Quote from: WaveWatcher on 2012.12.15, 14:33:36
...
A scope can only show the longitudinal aspects of either wave - the current flow/potential density. Unfortunately, this means some will think the current is wiggling perpendicular to the current flow path. Don't bother arguing with those folks :-\
A current can't be modelized by a longitudinal wave of electrons only, i.e. it's not a first disturbance of the electrons at a end of a conductor, then moving step by step by Coulomb influence up to the other end. This doesn't work.
For instance, if you prevented the possibility for a magnetic field to appear around the conductor, the current couldn't flow. A charge is not a point but an extended thing including its electric field and this field reinforces transversally when it moves, phenomena that is viewed as a magnetic field from a referential at rest. There are always necessary field waves along a conductor for a current variation to propagate, and these waves are transverse.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.12.15, 15:29:59
You mix anything with anything. Reread. You missed "longitudinal waves in vacuum" (meaning also in air, for waves of magnetic or electric origin).
Nobody denies longitudinal waves in matter! Sound is a longitudinal wave.
They do obey, up to the limits of our knowledge of the parameters determining their medium of propagation, which are not obvious for example when it is question of the Earth's crust.
No you mix anything with everything, Who said anything about longitudinal waves in a vacuum ?
And so are the current waves in the ground transverse or longitudinal ?
Is the energy propagated in a transverse wave motion ?
Is the current propagated in a transverse wave motion. ?
I think all current flows in a longitudinal fashion and energy is also propagated in a longitudinal wave motion.
We look at a scope trace and think up and down or side to side but really it is a two dimentional depiction of a helical or spiral motion isn't it ?
I am aware that there is a "transverse" component to some waves. But my point is how does the energy and current actually move in straight lines or in helix or spirals ?
I get annoyed at some of your comments because you seem to be commenting on things I did not say, as if I did say them. And ascribing claims to me I did not make, by inference.
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012-11-03, 03:58:41
Well it seems longitudinal waves are the norm, so there should be no doubt he was using longitudinal waves.
QuoteNone experiment has been able to demonstrate such waves. All experiments involving alleged "longitudinal waves" are perfectly explained either by leakages of ordinary EM waves or by conditions of near field in the quasi-stationary state, following Maxwell's equations.
I think that statement you made is off the point and misleading as to what I was saying and talking about in context.
I was referring to longitudinal waves being a normal occurrence and Tesla was using longitudinal waves. And you say
Quoteno experiment has ever demonstrated such waves. All experiments involving alleged "longitudinal waves" are perfectly explained either by leakages of ordinary EM waves or by conditions of near field in the quasi-stationary state, following Maxwell's equations
.
I do not know which experiments you refer to.
So are you saying that in a solid like the Earth or a conductor there is no such thing as a longitudinal wave of current ?
I think you see many experiments on you tube and assume i am trying to defend them or to defend some other persons claims
of their interpretation of longitudinal waves. I do not. All I want is to get a clearer picture for myself.
To me if the current is flowing straight to and from in varying intensities then it's a longitudinal wave. The displacement of the media is along the axis of propagation.
Anyway the way your post appeared just after I provided some info to show what I think Tesla meant by Magnification reeks of distraction.
So what of the magnification ? If I input 3 Watts continuous from a 12 volt supply at 250 mA to the primary and the primary is showing 40 volts RMS and 5 amps of current,
then I would call that a
magnification the magnified power is there to utilize so as to overcome the resistance the output might face.
The output might be only 1 Watt and the process inefficient, but the Magnification of power is still there.
Cheers
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.12.15, 15:41:26
His method reminds me this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccvKsT7OG8s
It is exceedingly difficult to imagine where such
distorted beliefs originate and penetrate the
minds of men.
It must be pointed out that those beliefs taught
in the video are not unique to segments of Islam;
they are shared by numerous other religions
including Judah-ism and some sects of Christendom.
As always, it is really about power over others and
the ability to control the minds of the people.
Ah, but one day not too far off, we'll see truth and
wonder how we could have been so deceived...
Quote from: exnihiloest
A charge is not a point but an extended thing
including its electric field and this field reinforces
transversally when it moves, phenomena that is
viewed as a magnetic field from a referential at rest.
There are always necessary field waves along a
conductor for a current variation to propagate,
and these waves are transverse.
And there you have it! Those conditions are present
in the ionosphere where enormous currents can flow
producing the aurorae and other phenomena.
Can it be said that lightning is an example of a
longitudinal wave?
You expect me to answer so many questions, just answer this question before I will bother to continue any argument with you. What do you say the patent depicts ? What is it ?
I say it is a depiction of a VLF or ELF transmitter designed to transmit primarily by ground currents and that it would be capable of transmitting to the other side of the planet.
That's not a claim that is my opinion.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=m7R9AAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=2#v=onepage&q&f=false
What do you say it is Ex. ?
..
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.12.16, 10:36:54
Quote from: exnihiloest
Of course I do not deny this, in fact I was very reluctant to even bring into this conversation anything about "longitudinal".
I don't think it is necessary info for the understanding of the basic principal of operation.
Not only it is necessary, but there is no other way to explain the observations.
If you try to explain and modelize a current with longitudinal waves only, you will fail, or you will be a new Maxwell if you succeed but I ask for the math. :)
Quote
Nor is any "free energy" claim or aspect needed to understand the basic principal.
The reason I began posting in this thread was to try to understand why people think that these energy transmission devices are free energy devices, I don't think they are.
I think the device depicted in the last Tesla transmission patent is a VLF or ELF transmitter which transmits primarily by ground currents. Is it, or is it not ? That is the question.
The question was asked by Maxwell a century ago. Ground currents are not a sufficient explanation but an epiphenomenon. If people pretend that observations don't fit Maxwell's electromagnetism, could they or you specifically clarify which?
Quote
Put all the other stuff aside. What is it and what can it do in layman's terms ?
I say it is a depiction of a VLF or ELF transmitter designed to transmit primarily by ground currents and that it would be capable of transmitting to the other side of the planet.
That's not a claim that is my opinion.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=m7R9AAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=2#v=onepage&q&f=false
What do you say it is Ex. ?
..
You can say it is ground currents or it is an operation of the holy spirit, it doesn't change anything: "ground current" remain void words until you qualify operationnally your ground current, how it flows and how it can be at the origin of an effect from one circuit upon the other, with a quantified analysis to support this affirmation. Then you should explain why you need this theory of ground currents to explain a particular case when a more general theory perfectly fits the Tesla's observations and much more: that one from Maxwell. Resonant circuits can couple at a distance when they share, at least partly, a field and this field is the result of a current of charges going back and forth. In far space we could replace the ground by an indentical capacitance at each end of the coils and get the same effect with no ground (even in the lab it's feasible).
Tesla's "Magnifying" Transmitter without ground: :)
(http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1101.0;attach=8870)
You expect me to answer so many questions, just answer this question before I will bother to continue any argument with you. What do you say the patent depicts ? What is it ?
I say it is a depiction of a VLF or ELF transmitter designed to transmit primarily by ground currents and that it would be capable of transmitting to the other side of the planet.
That's not a claim that is my opinion.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=m7R9AAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=2#v=onepage&q&f=false
What do you say it is Ex. ?
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.12.16, 19:22:00
...
I say it is a depiction of a VLF or ELF transmitter designed to transmit primarily by ground currents and that it would be capable of transmitting to the other side of the planet.
That's not a claim that is my opinion.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=m7R9AAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=2#v=onepage&q&f=false
What do you say it is Ex. ?
I say that the patent presents only a resonant LC circuit able to couple with another one in order to transfer energy from one to another. I say that this works, according to Maxwell's equation, in particular thanks to displacement currents as between two capacitor plates. I say that this works only at a distance on the order of the wave length. I say that to obtain a long wave length for transfering power over long distances, while maintaining a sufficient coupling, the size of the tower must be proportional and so, should be totally incompatible with wave lengths able to circle or cross the earth, not even able to reach tens of Km. I say that "ground currents" are not an explanation, I say that there is neither a single rational argument nor an experimental fact that supports the so-called "ground currents" which are only a charge distribution creating an image, see the picture below. I say that an opinion is useless when electromagnetism and science in general is concerned, only facts and logic matter.
That's academic science (the only one that works until now).
I also say that spreading opinions supporting that something "would be capable of transmitting to the other side of the planet" while they are sustained by nothing real, has the same effect upon a reader as spreading lies: an effect of disinformation, and consequently should be avoided.
That's my opinion.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_of_image_charges: "ground currents" as an image of charges of the upper capacity. That's why the ground can be eliminated with the schematic of my previous reply. Note that this static case can modelize as well a quasi stationary distribution like that of the Tesla tower.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/Method_of_mirror_images.png)
Fair enough, I disagree. End of story for me. No point to any argument. I think I have presented my perspective well enough.
Now so have you or you can continue, it's up to you.
I stick to it being a VLF or ELF transmitter designed to use primarily ground currents, and capable of transmitting a disturbance to the other side of the planet.
Cheers
Gary Peterson has done a great deal of experimental work with Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter.
His web site is here:
http://www.teslaradio.com/pages/wireless.htm
Interesting takes on the magnifier here, with nine different mechanisms proposed:
http://www.teslaradio.com/pages/wireless_102.htm
I think Ex. is correct in explaining the electromagnetic mode of operation of Tesla's Magnifier. However, I think Ex. overlooks the other mode of operation which Tesla spoke of many times in his notes and onterviews. Don't hold that against him, as evidence of this "other mode" is very sparse.
I have come to suspect that Tesla discovered a different means of producing electron flow, by using the ponderomotive force produced by HV pulses to the raised terminal of his transmitter. This was the true current that he spoke of and why he always said that his transmitter utilized currents of conduction rather than electromagnetic waves.
Tesla's statements are interesting. I don't recall anyone achieving the aurora effect around their magnifier replications. In any even, Tesla understood electromagnetic waves, and states his device uses condcution currents.
My experiments . . . in Colorado showed that at a height of 1 mile it is plenty enough rarefied to break down under the stress and conduct the current to the distant points. . . . My patent says that I break down the atmosphere "at or near" the terminal. If my conducting atmosphere is 2 or 3 miles above the plant, I consider this very near the terminal as compared to the distance of my receiving terminal, which may be across the Pacific. . . . I have constructed and patented a form of apparatus which, with a moderate elevation of a few hundred feet, can break the air stratum down. You will then see something like an aurora borealis across the sky, and the energy will go to the distant place. . . . An apparatus which permits displacing a certain quantity of electricity in the terminal—we shall say so many units—will produce an electric potential at a distance of 5 miles, and the fall of electric potential per centimeter will be equal to the quantity of electricity divided by the square of the distance. . . . Now, I have satisfied myself that I can construct plants in which I may produce, per kilometer of the atmosphere, electric differences of potential of something like 50,000 or 60,000 volts, and at 50,000 or 60,000 volts that atmosphere must break down and will become conductive. . . .
The earth is 4,000 miles radius. Around this conducting earth is an atmosphere. The earth is a conductor; the atmosphere above is a conductor, only there is a little stratum between the conducting atmosphere and the conducting earth which is insulating. . . . Now, you realize right away that if you set up differences of potential at one point, say, you will create in the media corresponding fluctuations of potential. But, since the distance from the earth's surface to the conducting atmosphere is minute, as compared with the distance of the receiver at 4,000 miles, say, you can readily see that the energy cannot travel along this curve and get there, but will be immediately transformed into conduction currents, and these currents will travel like currents over a wire with a return. The energy will be recovered in the circuit, not by a beam that passes along this curve and is reflected and absorbed, . . . but it will travel by conduction and will be recovered in this way.
Nikola Tesla was a genius there is no doubt.
He was right about many things that he
described in his various writings and lectures.
But he was also wrong about certain things
too. As a man desperately in need of financial
support he did frequently engage in hyperbole
in order to promote his "discoveries."
Much of what Tesla said/wrote must be taken
with a grain of salt.
If the ground currents were 100% EM or not makes no difference to me, the point i make is the ground currents are there.
If the entire system encompasses the entire planet's solid mass then there is no radiation in a ground wave even if it is an EM wave.
This is the major point I contend, the system is not designed to radiate primarily from the air capacitance/terminal.
It was designed to send out waves more through the ground. If those waves are EM or longitudinal makes no difference to me.
All I say is it is not much different to a modern day VLF or ELF transmitter, they work.
..
Tesla's does consitently states that his system (the magnifier) passes currents of conduction through the ground, and that transmitter and receiver make a complete circuit.
I have not found any statements elluding to these currents being created by electromagnetic means. While discussing the deep ground plate for his magnifier, he states that it has to be very deep the grip the earth and shake it. What does he mean by that?
Many think that the Magnifier is spraying energy all around and that it must be wasted, but Tesla specifically sought to avoid this, and I believe he achieved this in that his system requires both sides, transmitter and receiver, for the conduction currents to manifest. How genius! No work is done without both sides, and the current would adjust with the load. Amazing!
Of course, it's still rather impractical. I mean, why transmit electricity when you can just generate it? You could sell or lease the receivers, but once someone knows how to make one, then everyone has one.
This is not to say that any of this energy is "free". Free if you steal it, but not free to generate at the transmitter.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2012.12.18, 03:34:39
Many think that the Magnifier is spraying energy all around and that it must be wasted, but Tesla specifically sought to avoid this, and I believe he achieved this in that his system requires both sides, transmitter and receiver, for the conduction currents to manifest. How genius! No work is done without both sides, and the current would adjust with the load. Amazing!
Of course, it's still rather impractical. I mean, why transmit electricity when you can just generate it? You could sell or lease the receivers, but once someone knows how to make one, then everyone has one.
This is not to say that any of this energy is "free". Free if you steal it, but not free to generate at the transmitter.
Very true. I will give you the answer. The ONLY purpose of transmit energy is ...to collect EXTERNAL energy. But I think you knew that already, in many TPU threads it was said many times....
Why we all cannot catch the simple idea : Earth magnetic field is not weak and is not static ! Any disturbance in our generated magnetic field is a cause for electric current but must also disturb ambient background = Earth magnetic field... besides gravity and magnetism are the effects of the same energy flow, only the medium is different...
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.12.16, 16:17:15
Not only it is necessary, but there is no other way to explain the observations.
If you try to explain and modelize a current with longitudinal waves only, you will fail, or you will be a new Maxwell if you succeed but I ask for the math. :)
I did not do that, why try to make it look like I did ?
QuoteThe question was asked by Maxwell a century ago. Ground currents are not a sufficient explanation but an epiphenomenon. If people pretend that observations don't fit Maxwell's electromagnetism, could they or you specifically clarify which?
I did not do that why did you try to make it look like I did ?
QuoteYou can say it is ground currents or it is an operation of the holy spirit, it doesn't change anything: "ground current" remain void words until you qualify operationnally your ground current, how it flows and how it can be at the origin of an effect from one circuit upon the other, with a quantified analysis to support this affirmation. Then you should explain why you need this theory of ground currents to explain a particular case when a more general theory perfectly fits the Tesla's observations and much more: that one from Maxwell. Resonant circuits can couple at a distance when they share, at least partly, a field and this field is the result of a current of charges going back and forth. In far space we could replace the ground by an indentical capacitance at each end of the coils and get the same effect with no ground (even in the lab it's feasible).
Are you saying there are no ground currents ?
QuoteTesla's "Magnifying" Transmitter without ground: :)
(http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1101.0;attach=8870)
You mean Tesla transmitter and receiver without ground.
Cheers
[/quote]
Ground currents IMHO are not ground currents. They are the same as Tesla put in upper stratosphere. The only difference is the medium : in deep ground it behaves as Tesla described as a polished metal ball while the air is a gaseous medium of high resistance. Btw resistance is the big mystery which should be solved quickly to get the whole picture of wireless energy transfer.
In both cases however my intuition points me to explanation very straightforward and easy yet profound and hard to accept by many. All the radio waves we are using today are longitudinal waves in magnetic field around us , and this is exactly what Tesla wanted to use to pass energy - Earth magnetosphere. That's why he stated that beside the air there is a second medium.
By "ground currents" I mean nothing exotic, all I mean is currents that use the ground as a conductor.
It would seem obvious to me that the antenna/air terminal is not designed to radiate EM waves or Hertz waves.
It seems it is designed to suppress them as Tesla states and by doing so the currents into the ground are increased, as they must be, because if less energy is dissipated from the antenna then more is put into the earth as "activity",
by way of the current from the ground plate of the transmitter.
If the device actually did resonate the planet then the entire system would act as a "tank", and any receiver connected to the Earth could tap the energy in the tank.
The oscillations in the receiver (and transmitter) are made possible because of return displacement currents from the air terminal, both to the atmosphere and the earth.
I can't be sure but I don't think any of that goes against the accepted laws of whatever.
Cheers
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.12.17, 17:46:19
Fair enough, I disagree. End of story for me. No point to any argument.
...
You have an opinion, I have arguments. I gave arguments, and I stated them clearly. They follow from the common human knowledge in electromagnetism. If you don't understand the point, it's your problem, not mine.
Normally an opinion is a result of thoughts founding a conclusion about a problem, it's not just a reformulation of patent claims, supporting them with fuzzy words, with explanations that are science incompatible, and with a complete lack of experiments able to confirm them and to dismiss conventional electromagnetism.
Quote from: Farmhand on 2012.12.18, 10:01:17
...
If the device actually did resonate the planet then the entire system would act as a "tank", and any receiver connected to the Earth could tap the energy in the tank.
...
Certainly not. With a LC tower above the ground, the ground creates an image of the charges and so plays the role of another capacitance that balances the upper terminal capacity for the charges to go back and forth, otherwise they can't. A LC circuit with one end of the coil that is not connected, doesn't work, but with two terminal capacities, it works. We have the same principle with a vertical quarter-wave antenna above the ground: it is like a vertical half-wave dipole without ground. So for the "earth tank" to be used as a full tank, we would need another tank of same capacity, i.e. around 710µF which means in terms of spherical capacity, a conductor sphere of about the same diameter as the earth. A coil between the moon and the earth could work but I think we have not yet the technology...
Quote from: Grumpy on 2012.12.18, 03:34:39
Of course, it's still rather impractical. I mean, why transmit electricity when you can just generate it?
Remember that Dr. Tesla was interested in
fuelless generation of electricity. That is accomplished at Niagara Falls and all other hydroelectric plants by harnessing gravity via the falling water. Of course that is geographically limited to places where there are waterfalls.
So the point of
economically distributing power is to generate it where it can be cheaply generated (hydroelectric, geothermal, solar array, or near a source of fuel such as coal, oil, gas etc. so the fuel doesn't need to be transported to the generating plant) and then transmitting the generated electricity to where it is needed. He stated this in either a patent or an interview that I can't locate right now.
Another potential benefit of his transmission system is that electrical power may be obtained in remote locations where it is not economically profitable to build and maintain transmission lines such as the northern regions of Canada, the Australian outback, the depths of Africa, Siberia, etc. Keep in mind that very little of the planet was accessible in his day. There were no pipe lines or airplanes or petrochemical fuels. Railroad engines and ships were powered by coal and only a few cities even had electrical systems.
Quote from: Grumpy
You could sell or lease the receivers, but once someone knows how to make one, then everyone has one.
Tesla has several patents that concern the individualization and noninterference off transmitted signals (US 685,953-685,956, US 723,188, and some foreign patents - if I remember correctly, British and German). Keep in mind that the receiver had to be be tuned to a specific pattern of transmission pulses to work. I don't see why those same methods couldn't be applied to power transmission. He was always talking about transmitting industrial scale power, i.e. enough to light a city. It would then be distributed from the receiver via wire to the individual users.
This individualization somewhat negates the argument that it would be "free" electricity because it gave him the ability to shut off the receiver by ceasing to transmit that particular pattern of pulses should the customer not pay. He could also measure consumption at the point of origin since the transmitter required only a small amount of power to maintain operation while increased demand required increased generation at the transmitter.
Quote from: Grumpy
This is not to say that any of this energy is "free". Free if you steal it, but not free to generate at the transmitter.
Keep in mind the industrial scale of the transmitted power. It wouldn't be easy for an individual to build a receiver of that scale while cities and/or large corporations could undertake the endeavor and then bill their consumers. And, again, he could always shut it off for nonpayment.
Personally, I don't think he ever had any intention of transmitting free electricity. I saw a quote somewhere that he said (I'm paraphrasing) that the reward for a development should be equal to the effort expended in achieving it. He was also aware of the huge amounts of capital necessary to build the transmitters and was quite aware that he could not hope to raise those capital investments without returning a profit.
Tesla later stated, in an interview with his attorney at the time, that the efficiency of the magnifier system was 93% to 95%.
"Free Energy" is not a feature and attention should be focused on "how" the energy is moved, as that is the novel feature of the system.
I don't have the graphics skills to do this in 3D or to show the constructive interference but there are links in the attached documents that can explain the idea with a little imagination.
(http://s1.postimage.org/nonjatfen/Globe_Animation6.gif)