Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters

[Allcanadian]

Hakasays

Good point AC.   *Technically* a one-wire Tesla setup still uses two electrodes, except the second electrode is 'the rest of the universe', or something you might call a virtual ground.  Eric Dollard calls it 'counterspace' or 'virtual ground'.  A similar analogy might be the imaginary 'ground' that exists between the three wires in a Delta transmission line.

Exactly, the notion of a closed loop only works with lower frequencies and potentials. At higher voltages, 10kV+, the leakage to the environment occurs at both the (-) and (+) terminals. For example, in a HV one wire grid transmission line the Earth is the ground but completely different electrons enter the conductor at each end, ergo it is not a closed system. That's the wonderful thing about open systems because they are open to other influences.

Griffin notes the glass at the front gets hot, which does support your hypothesis that Bremsstrahlung (braking radiation) X-rays are being formed on/within it.

My theory was that by using single high magnitude discharges at a given small time period I could more accurately measure the related effects. Where alternating currents or repeating cycles dampen or have other associated effects in themselves. I noticed electrode material being vaporized in a plasma ball and being deposited on the glass over time and also small sparks near the surface of the glass. As such it seemed clear to me the glass was not a neutral element and was involved in part of the process and related effects.

I take it you use a Whimhurst or Vandegraff to get to the very high DC voltages you've used in your work?

I used Ruhmkorff coils, Tesla coils, rectified Tesla coils using 20kV diode(PRHVP2A-20) strings, my Van De Graaff and mixed systems. For voltages above 500kV I often used current from a rectified Tesla coil to feed the lower connection of the Van De Graaff in a compound setup. I never used commercial capacitors and found it easier to just build my own components for whatever voltages/currents I was working with at the time.

AC

[Hakasays]

I'm not interested in devotion to Tesla either, I'm only interested in studying, understanding, and replicating his work.

And it looks like my personal single-wire CC Tesla tube may arrive in as soon as this weekend if anyone has suggestions or predictions or experiments to attempt with it.

[Hakasays]

I have argued strongly against biological testing until we have a better characterization of the single-wire cold-cathode tube rays being emitted.  Much safer to test on electronics and the like.
But I am also impressed at the results

At such a low power level the efficiency is almost mind-boggling.

[Hakasays]

Received a lovely Xmas present from Griffin, but day-job has been so busy lately there's been no time to even look at it. 



For physical construction, the bulb is the same as the Tesla Brush bulb, which is ambient air under a deep (diffusion or turbomolecular pump) grade vacuum.

Griffin has constructed two versions of this bulb, one conical (like a CRT) and the other cylindrical as pictured below, but otherwise created identically.  But they seem to perform differently, which I cover below.

He says the bulb has to be worked a bit in HV RF first to get an output, presumably to bake-out or otherwise oxidize/alter the fill gas mixture ratio, or possibly alter or de-oxidize the aluminum emitter.  Ambient vacuum will have residual moisture, which may also catalyze these reactions in the tube.

The CRT-shaped bulb he says worked almost straight-away, but he says this one has had issues getting this one started, getting 'baked-in'.  His setup was limited to relatively low power of 100-200w peak with a diathermy disruptive-discharge power source.  My supplies will go upwards of 3kw so if it simply requires a higher energy to get this tube rolling it should be fairly straightforward.  It'll take a little time for me to get set up for this though.



As for operation, Griffin notes that the majority of emissions are forward, with a lower-level backwards as well, and an emission angle that roughly aligns with the angle of the tube body  He notes the front face of the bulb becomes warm/hot, which tends to suggest braking radiation as a likely source of the rays/emissions.

Just now realizing what I'm likely to be working with, I ordered a schintillation phosphor screen, as a mere geiger counter seems insufficient for what is being tested.   I think I will braze together an aluminum box/shield as well to ensure that any stray emissions are kept to a minimum while under study.

Will update when I get more data (hopefully work doesn't get crazy again)

[Hakasays]

Received another bulb from Griffin to experiment with, this one has been 'baked-in' and confirmed working well before shipping.  Intensifying phosphor screens are expected to arrive today so may be able to start doing tests by the weekend.

Eric suggested the bulbs may be acting as a cathode ray tube, but in open-air.
So these may in-fact be called 'atmospheric cathode ray tubes' which would help differentiate them from a standard X-ray tube, and why Tesla considered his shadowgraph tubes to be safer than Rhoetgen's.  Determining the exact specta and quantifying these differences is my focus in upcoming experiments, while Griffin is more focused on power/data transmission and health effects on microorganisms/seeds/etc.

Pictured is the 'bake-in' process with images spaced 5min apart.  Output of the tube starts low and gradually increases during this time, which I think is largely due to aluminum electrode acting as a 'getter' as it is heated+oxidized.

[Hakasays]

Update: I've been experimenting with the 'radiant matter' tube or whatever you wish to call it to attempt to replicate Griffin's recent shadowgraph results.  I tried using a few different setups to gauge the voltage/current/frequency needed for such a setup.
All of the successful replications to-date have been using antique diathermy machines, but for mass-replication this will surely not suffice.

Single Extra coil HF driven ->   (under 20kv with moderate current) Can get the tube to begin to glow in this state, but no emissions detected past the tube.  Overall tube remains cool except for some heat predominantly near the electrode.

Dual-coil HF driven -> (under 30kv but high current).   Pushed the coil to ~250w at what I would estimate at 10-15kv using a linear amplifier.
Same result as above, with the connecting leads breaking out but no externally detectable emissions (other than the bluish light from the tube)

VTTC -> Effectively same result as above.

Disruptive Discharge Tesla Coil -> I scavenged this together from a 12kv NST and some film capacitors today.  Basically a low-power Tesla Coil with a high enough voltage to generate a blue corona an inch in air and draw sparks to a grounded rod to perhaps 6in.
Estimate 50-100kv at perhaps 100w at the terminal end.
This generated more vigorous results at low power, but it was quickly discovered the bulb was arcing internally to the edge of the tube, to a label fixed to the end.
The arc appears to have had enough current to create a pinhole seal break that tinkerers will know by the change in characteristics of the tube over time.   A failed tube will slowly shift from a white/blue glow to a light purple, then to a dark purple as a vacuum is lost.
Since this one is pinholed it will probably be atmospheric pressure within a week   Will have to get another....

To help save time replicating I plan on visiting his lab in the near future so we can work out as many bugs as possible and confirm what precise characteristics of the diathermy machine are responsible for the cathode/radiant emissions.


What was interesting is that with the failing vacuum, the tube energizes much more readily, and the result is that the far-end of the tube becomes warm/hot to the touch while the rest of the tube remains cool.   Perhaps the vacuum quality is directly proportional to the spectra of waves emitted?  Deeper vacuum = higher spectra emissions?



I know the experimental documentation is fairly lax at this point, but I find that in cases like this it is better to find a solution and then work backwards to better documenting the procedure.  That way you're not spending weeks of effort writing papers destined to fail.

[Grumage]

Hi Hakasays.

You could try to seal the glass envelope with some Sodium Silicate, Egg preserver. Or good old clear Silicone sealant.

Cheers Graham.

[Hakasays]

Hi Hakasays.

You could try to seal the glass envelope with some Sodium Silicate, Egg preserver. Or good old clear Silicone sealant.

Cheers Graham.

That's why I love you guys, always for the simple solutions!
I was thinking softening it with a torch would work, but Griffin commented that a long, careful annealing process is needed for such things.   Of course will have to re-vac it but that's a more manageable problem

I will try the silicate route and probably follow it up with some form of epoxy as well.  If that works it will at least give us a way to salvage partially-failed bulbs and breathe a little more life into them.

The last resort is of course the 'viking funeral'...
https://www.bitchute.com/video/5i8ToWyM5kyD/

[picowatt]

Torr seal or Hysol-1C...

[Hakasays]

Torr seal or Hysol-1C...

Well it's not cheap but I guess you get what you pay for     thanks for the advice

Anyway, to help speed things along I plan on visiting his shop this weekend to do a collaboration and 'crash-course' using both our equipment.

Primary goals are:
  - Attempt to replicate emissions without using a diathermy machine  (and thus narrow down the critical operating parameters)
  - Perform a cloud chamber experiment

If it turns out that a disruptive discharge circuit is absolutely required, that would explain a lot about why there have been no published replications since Tesla.



As a small update he did confirm that the bulb experiences a very strong electrostatic attraction towards both paper and aluminum, that is retained for several seconds/minute after power is remove.

[Hakasays]

Griffin's full experimental update just posted here:   https://youtu.be/caxdjI3H3zY

[Hakasays]

Well was a crazy weekend, but we made a lot of progress.

The primary goal of the weekend trip was to reproduce the radiant bulb effect without using a diathermy machine, so we can confirm the operating parameters and so I can reliably continue experiments in my own shop.  It was also meant to get a feel for the tubes themselves and roughly study the effects firsthand.
We do a couple of these weekend 'crash courses' a year now and every time is quite productive.

I'm working on a more thorough write-up, suffice to say we were able to get measurable results using only my equipment, and combined with observations made thus-far I am confident I will finally be able to reproduce and study in more detail in my shop.

In the meantime, Griffin did post a guide of how he produces the replica 1890's Tesla 'Radiant Matter' tubes, which I also got to see produced firsthand:
https://youtu.be/AJwi6MIcHlE

It's quite the artistic endeavor, and I see a lot of overlap between glassblowing and the world of CNC machining.  Except instead of breaking small endmills and blowing your tolerances, it's microcracks and detaching electrodes



ps: Yes, safety protocols are in-place with shielding and short exposure times throughout.  Not looking to 'Madam Curie' ourselves while we figure out how these rays differ from Roentgen's.

[Hakasays]

In terms of setups used in the weekend tests:

* Diathermy machine.  Roughly equivalent to Adrian Marsh's except without the 'floating ground capacitor':
https://www.am-innovations.com/category/generators/generators-fischer-diathermy/
  This diathermy machine operates at approx 3000kc.

* Disruptive Discharge Tesla Coil worked well at reproducing effects, almost equivalent to the diathermy machine setup.  This makes sense as the core schematics are nearly equivalent.

* VTTC (vacuum tube Tesla Coil) setup also reproduced the effect but with diminished intensity.  This also corresponded to threshold voltage+current.  Basic Armstrong oscillator setup, with lots of current provided via microwave transformer.  Also working at approx 350kc.

* HF radio equipment has NOT produced effects, most likely due to the low (<15kv) standing potentials achieved with it).  Tested around 2000kc at up to 400w.



Some scattered notes regarding experiments and results

* Replica bulbs are atmospheric (no special fill gasses) that operate around 0.0001 Torr   (upper limit of 2-stage rotary vane pumps)
  - Effect disappears with diminished vacuum (a purple nitrogen glow means no rays will be emitted)
  - Effect also disappears under high-grade vacuum (turbo-molecular pump).
  - Narrow (~1in) bulbs have the correct glow but do not emit any rays (being 'dragged' down by the glass?)

* Tubes are all single-wire.  No anode is present in any of these tests.
   (no roentgen tubes can be found online or in literature that posses this characteristic)

* The emissions are cold-cathode; performance appears relatively constant whether the cathode is hot or cold.


* The phosphor screens are more weakly intensely illuminated than I expected.  Requires a very dark room to perceive any effects.  This is likely what was throwing me off in my initial tests the last two weeks.


* Rays could not be produced using HVDC alone, using a setup rated to >100kv.  This also rules out 'conventional' X-ray actions.

* Voltage appears to be a critical factor, critical current remains TBD.  Nothing occurs below 16kv P/P

* No rays produced at 16kv P/P @ 120cps AC (directly powered from NST)

* VTTC emissions confirmed that the bulb emits with HV RF, disruptive discharge not explicitly required.

* The cloud chamber did not produce any visible traces, only a 'cloud' of condensation.
   https://www.bitchute.com/video/agx20KoUuhiT/
   - Future attempts may produce more quantifiable results by using impulses so that smaller particle quantities can be observed

* The bulbs still produce the rays with a needle-point cathode rather than an electrode.
   - IMO this effectively rules out collision/scattered Roentgen rays as any cathode reflections would have been tangential.  The only viable Roentgen source in this case would be Bremsstrahlung (braking radiation) originating at the front face of the bulb.
   - Heat can be felt from the front of the glass as well as close to the cathode, also supporting this possibility.

* Very crude HVL calculation suggests the rays produced are soft, perhaps 15-35kVp.  Measurement was made by increasing layers of foil and comparing pixel brightness of phosphors on a resulting shadowgraph.



Going forward, my near-term focus is to improve detection and characterization (ie: perform high-quality HVL experiment to confirm and quantify ray penetration rates vs applied voltage/power).  I also want to see what types of solid-state electronics can be used to detect (CDS cell, amorphous or polycrystaline solar cell, photodiode, phototransistors, etc.

The rays may also have electrostatic effect in open-air that we wish to falsify as well.
And finally, I'd like to reproduce and quantify the capacitor charging effect as it relates to both Tesla's Radiant Energy patents and to Dollard's 1980's Borderland experiments.



As always, everyone feel free to AMA and suggest any experiments you think might be worthwhile

[Hakasays]

Based our observations thus-far, I'm starting to lean toward the possibility of the rays being high-energy beta particles (electrons / cathode rays) rather than X-ray photons.

One is the unusually high (impossibly high) readings on dosimeter for a given amount of phosphor screen ionization.
Second is the unusually high attenuation of the rays going through benign material such as plastic+rubber.

Griffin has a similar take on it:

I would propose that instead of the electron remaining as an electron, it collides with glass atoms and knocks off an orbital electron. This may be considered as a beta particle stream, although the frequency of the stream is unknown. In any case, the rays emitted may or may not be in the xray spectrum. This depends upon the frequency sensitivity of the phosphor screen, as a similar effect may in-fact be occurring.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/12/161207092959.htm

But if such a thing is true it would mean the beta particles (electrons / cathode rays) would have to be on the order of 2-30MeV to get an equivalent level of penetrating power.  How you could get 5MeV emissions from a 50-200kv HV source remains to be seen...



I was able to confirm the bulbs I brought back are still working so I can perform experiments locally (albeit with reduced brightness).
So the near-term tests will be confirming / ruling-out beta particle emissions:

T1: Taking shadowgraphs of multiple materials of differing thickness but with the same total density (plastic, rubber, aluminum, etc).  The resulting shadowgraph should be approx the same brightness for all materials while we would expect materials like plastic to be nearly transparent.

T2: Using foil grids, it should be possible to steer or block particles if a high potential is applied.  Being charged electrons, the rays should be deflected towards or away from a HV potential in open air.    The difficulty here is doing the test far enough from the bulb to rule out deflections inside the bulb itself (HV will steer the rays inside the bulb just as in a TV cathode ray tube).



I'm curious if anyone with a radiological background could weigh-in on the beta particle hypothesis or know a mechanism that might explain it.

[chief kolbacict]

I'm curious if anyone with a radiological background could weigh-in on the beta particle hypothesis or know a mechanism that might explain it.

Wesley from a nearby forum.  do ask him a question.