Wardenclyffe - Tesla's true intention

[Ernst]

@GSM:

See the work of Prof. Dr.-Ir. Konstatin Meyl:

∇ × E = -μ · (dH/dt + H / τ2)

The last term is radiant energy or longitudinal electricity.
If needed I can provide the full deriviation of this formular.

Ernst.

[dR-Green]

I probably shouldn't have said "radiated radiant energy". When I use the term radiant energy I mean radiated energy. Although beyond that there's no solid definition that I'm aware of, because then you could say that every bulb produces ratiant energy in that it radiates the light. But by radiant energy I mean the same sort of light that can attract material objects or charge condensers as in the radiant energy patent. A regular source of artificial light can't do these things.

But either way, I don't think the term is being used properly at all. High voltage spikes from pulsed coils certainly isn't radiant energy in my mind, I completely fail to see the connection there. High frequencies also produce some apparently strange effects, do signal generators at RF produce radiant energy? I don't think so.

The coil is super luminal as in the measured frequency of the coil is higher than the frequency at which it should be given the distance light travels in a given amount of time, or an EM wave from one end of a wire to the other. The measured wavelength is shorter, when the physical length of the wire should dictate the frequency as being limited to c. This is an effect of the coil gemoetry. The height to diameter ratios and the velocity of light % table from Eric's book is in the coils compendium thread.

[dR-Green]

Thank you, dR-Green.
Please note the following few points:
- In all of the experiments mentioned in these pages Tesla uses incandescent lamps, not vacuum tubes. Although he does mention on page 274 that these can be used.
- In none of the experiments, except for the last one, the capacitance of this lamp is relevant. You will also notice that he does not use this capacitance in his calculations.
- In the last experiment the capacitance is relevant, but it is only important to know that it is small compared to the added capacitance. He does on page 359 actually refer to the 23 nov measurements only to show that this capacitance is about 1cm.
- If he really needed to know the capacitance of a lamp for this one experiment then it is a bit strange that he does measure it more than 3 weeks in advance, and that he measures apart from the incandescent lamp, the same lamp but broken and 4 different vacuum tubes. Your explanation does not give a reason for this.


Ernst.

I'll take a closer look but it should also be remembered that Tesla also had single terminal bulbs. These MIGHT have been referred to as tubes but I'm not sure about that. I think I've seen one of Tesla's x-rays in the CS Notes too? One of his assistants had injured one of his members so they did an x-ray. the tubes also being used for this purpose I believe. I don't know if it was in CS Notes I saw that though.

[Ernst]

@ dR-Green,
Please do not take this as "I am always right" but I think I really did a very thourough research of Tesla before I came to my conclusions. When I thought I had a breakthrough I took 3 month of of my job so I could devote all my time to this. I have surely spend more time with Tesla than with my wife. So I am pretty convinced of my findings.
But, having said that, I am fully aware that others may know something that I do not, or that I have missed.
So in case of anyone having a different opinion I would like to know all the details. Just for this reason.


I know the x-ray stories that you are refering to, but I do not believe they are in the CSN.
One of his biographies perhaps?

Ernst.

[GSM]

@GSM:

See the work of Prof. Dr.-Ir. Konstatin Meyl:

∇ × E = -μ · (dH/dt + H / τ2)

The last term is radiant energy or longitudinal electricity.
If needed I can provide the full deriviation of this formular.

Ernst.

Hi Ernst,

Thank you for this. My maths is pretty useless, and so I checked up and noted Meyl's light speed *assumptions*.

All of his calculations are based upon 'waves' (radiation) propagating at light speed as per definition [ε · μ = 1/c²], and thus this derivation prescribes the interpretation; yet we know from evidence, that excitation and scalar radiation occur at superluminal rates of propagation even though the conventionally transduced and measured responses subsequently arise at light speed.

So can Meyl's calculus be trusted ?

That is why I asked, for I wonder whether any 'scientist' has offered calculations relating to super-luminal excitation and radiation.

Cheers ........ Graham.

[Ernst]

Indeed GSM, I noticed this too. Although it is not 100% correct to derive Maxwell's equations while using (part of) it in the process, in this particular case it is not necessarily that bad.
One thing we know about Maxwell's equations; many derived conclusions have been verified and seem to hold. The only thing that can be wrong is that they are incomplete and/or do not describe every situation.
Concerning the speed of light, we know that light can be bended and therefor is subject to accelleration and therefor this speed, in the most strict sense, is not constant. But if we loosen this definition of speed a bit and allow for change in direction without changing the absolute speed then the speed of light is constant again.
However, now a new problem arises. Because when we make a statement about light, we will have to define exactly what we mean by 'light'. If we restrict its definition to transversal, Herzian EM waves then ε · μ = 1/c² holds, by its very definition as proven by Maxwell.

We know for certain that light is not just a transversal, Herzian wave because this does not account for all its properies.

I believe the way Meyl uses this equation is correct (if my memory serves me well) and he arrives at an equation that clearly shows 2 components. One transversal component traveling at c and one longitudinal at a different speed which can be either lower or higher than c (or equal).

Hope this helps,
Ernst.

[Ernst]

I just thought of a away to visualise this:
Think of a tornado, there is wind whirling around the centre at a constant speed.
But this centre can move at any speed or even be stationary.
Maxwell proved that the speed of the wind around the centre is constant.
We now assume that a tornado can not travel faster that this speed because the wind would not be able to catch up with the moving centre to whirl around it.

This assumption however is wrong because when Maxwell proved that the speed around the centre is constant he was talking about a speed relative to this centre and NOT relative to the ground.

In order to arrive at the correct conclusions you have to stick with the correct definitions. The problem with Maxwell's equations is that very few people really understand them, yet every Tom, Dick and Harry uses them.

Ernst.

[dR-Green]

Thank you, dR-Green.
Please note the following few points:
- In all of the experiments mentioned in these pages Tesla uses incandescent lamps, not vacuum tubes. Although he does mention on page 274 that these can be used.
- In none of the experiments, except for the last one, the capacitance of this lamp is relevant. You will also notice that he does not use this capacitance in his calculations.
- In the last experiment the capacitance is relevant, but it is only important to know that it is small compared to the added capacitance. He does on page 359 actually refer to the 23 nov measurements only to show that this capacitance is about 1cm.
- If he really needed to know the capacitance of a lamp for this one experiment then it is a bit strange that he does measure it more than 3 weeks in advance, and that he measures apart from the incandescent lamp, the same lamp but broken and 4 different vacuum tubes. Your explanation does not give a reason for this.


Ernst.

It begins on page 273.

Measurements of the effective capacity of a vertical wire as modified by elevation, by resonance analysis and improved method of locating the maximum rise of e.m.f. on the excited system.

... This consists of employing a small secondary circuit in feeble inductive connection with the excited system and observing in a convenient manner by a suitable instrument the changes of current or e.m.f. in the secondary. A practical and quite convenient means is to insert a minute lamp consuming but a very small fraction of the normal current and observe the degree of incandescence of the minute carbon filament or think platinum wire. As the small secondary circuit exercises no appreciable reaction on the excited oscillating system owing to the feeble mutual induction and minute amount of energy consumed in the secondary, the method is excellent and allows close and reliable reading much more so than the spark wire method. By taking a minute lamp with an exceptionally thin and short filament the energy consumed for the readings is quite insignificant and may be less than one millionth part of the activity of the oscillating system.

Here he's exploring the capacitance of an elevated piece of wire, therefore the capacitance of the lamp is irrelevant. The lamp is "external" to the oscillating system. There are lots of logical reasons for this. Wires connect from the secondary to the extra coil, from the secondary to the condenser etc.

Page 285

Experiments with secondary of oscillator to determine capacity of structure, also capacity of secondary.

Page 296

This method is suitable to determine capacities too small to be measured in other ways conveniently.

Now the capacitance of the lamp is being measured.

Page 297

Measurement of small capacities by resonance method and mode of determining maximum rise before described by means of diminutive circuit was continued.

Page 305

Patent note
Increase of capacity uses in the arts and scientific measurements.

Page 316

Estimate of turns of "Extra coil" to be used with the structure of iron pipes as capacity on free terminal...

... These data enable us to determine how many turns are to be left off on bottom of coil in order that it be in resonance with the primary exciting system under the best working conditions of the latter; the structure being connected to the coil.

Page 318

Test to ascertain free vibration of new "Extra Coil System"

Page 357

This photograph shows an incandescent lamp 16 c.p., 100 V connected with one of its terminals to the top or free end of the extra coil, the lower end of the latter being connected to the ground plate. The carbon filament is brought to incandescence by the currents transmitted from the ground plate and the rarefied gas is also glowing as evident from the photograph. It is instructive to note the great actinic power of the glowing gas which, though appearing to the eye of feeble luminosity as compared with the lamp filament, nevertheless impresses the plate at least as strongly, if not more so, than the incandescent filament.
In many experiments made a few years ago I observed this and also that certain gases are particularly adapted to impress the plate. This fact, again observed, impresses me more and more with the value of powerfully excited vacuum tubes for purposes of photography. Ultimately, by perfecting the apparatus and selecting properly the gas in the tube, we must make the photographed independent of sunlight and enable him to repeat his operations under exactly the same conditions, which is almost indispensable in order to attain the best results. Such tubes will, however, enable him to regulate the conditions and adjust the light effects at will...

... Thus with the powerful apparatus which I have perfected here the actinic rays are much more powerful than with the New York apparatus. In the experiment illustrated the results would have been the same if both of the terminals of the lamp would have been connected to the free end of the "extra coil" instead of only one, as illustrated in the diagram, which is added for the purpose of showing more clearly how the connections in this case were made.

I don't think it's strange that he measures the capacitance three weeks in advance. He was doing capacitance measurement tests, why would the thought of measuring the lamp capacitance not occur to him? He had done the Page 357 experiment previously in New York so it's not like he would have just thought of it. These sort of things surely come to mind when future experiments are anticipated Doing the same experiment 3 weeks later would certainly be an inefficient way of experimenting as the whole arrangement would continually need to be changed around.

[dR-Green]

@ dR-Green,
Please do not take this as "I am always right" but I think I really did a very thourough research of Tesla before I came to my conclusions. When I thought I had a breakthrough I took 3 month of of my job so I could devote all my time to this. I have surely spend more time with Tesla than with my wife. So I am pretty convinced of my findings.
But, having said that, I am fully aware that others may know something that I do not, or that I have missed.
So in case of anyone having a different opinion I would like to know all the details. Just for this reason.


I know the x-ray stories that you are refering to, but I do not believe they are in the CSN.
One of his biographies perhaps?

Ernst.

That's some dedication If it's not CS Notes then it's probably in "On his work with alternating currents."

[GSM]

Indeed GSM, I noticed this too. Although it is not 100% correct to derive Maxwell's equations while using (part of) it in the process, in this particular case it is not necessarily that bad.
One thing we know about Maxwell's equations; many derived conclusions have been verified and seem to hold. The only thing that can be wrong is that they are incomplete and/or do not describe every situation.
Concerning the speed of light, we know that light can be bended and therefor is subject to accelleration and therefor this speed, in the most strict sense, is not constant. But if we loosen this definition of speed a bit and allow for change in direction without changing the absolute speed then the speed of light is constant again.
However, now a new problem arises. Because when we make a statement about light, we will have to define exactly what we mean by 'light'. If we restrict its definition to transversal, Herzian EM waves then ε · μ = 1/c² holds, by its very definition as proven by Maxwell.

We know for certain that light is not just a transversal, Herzian wave because this does not account for all its properies.

I believe the way Meyl uses this equation is correct (if my memory serves me well) and he arrives at an equation that clearly shows 2 components. One transversal component traveling at c and one longitudinal at a different speed which can be either lower or higher than c (or equal).

Hope this helps,
Ernst.

Hi Ernst,

Complex;- in my mind at least regarding the math study of this topic, for this is as like me being an enquiring fresher, and you the Prof. (Or anyone else who might be able to contribute)

So Meyl has a 2 component derivation for transverse plus longitudinal radiation transfer of energy, which indeed should always be the case lest only pure sinewave excitation be involved thereby allowing the scalar term to be ignored (as modern day 'science' has so conveniently done).

Does Meyl's equation have capability for integrating either sine or pulse energisations, and thus offer any clues for minimising energy propagated as conventional (luminal) EM radiation ?

Given that energy is related to velocity, and that radiation is inextricably linked with not only source input EM frequency, amplitude, phase, but with radiator polarisation and directivity too, do the Meyl equations specifically cover the different polarised natures of radiation for both of the derived terms ?

Can Meyl's equation also be used in reverse as a method for deriving energy quanta received from the transduction of either transversely or longitudinally inducing EM radiation, such that the scalar term may be on the left with some energy input plus luminal output (excess to that local input) being on the right ?

In other words, is there possibility to show generation of single frequency superluminal radiation (only), followed by energised luminal transduction (only) at that same frequency, with a resultant COP >1 ?

Could this be what Tesla had envisaged (though without the maths) via his Wardenclyffe tower ?

If the conservation of energy rule applies within Meyl's equations, then anyone chasing 'free energy' via spark gap plus longitudinal propagation and resonant EM transduction will be chasing their tail and need to look elsewhere; however, if anyone can show non-decomposition of matter related energy increase (Kapanadze?), then conservation of energy cannot hold via scalar-planar (super-light-speed)technology.

(Just my morning cuppa muse again.)

Cheers ........... Graham.

[Ernst]

@ GSM,

it is pretty complex to visualise. I must admit I have some difficulty there. It is like the gyroscope where the result seems to conflict with logic, while in reality it does not. It is just difficult to 'wrap your mind around' rotating systems. I am pretty sure Meyl's equations cover the things you mention because it is 'simple' vector algebra. But to go into this in detail would cost me half a day at least. And then I will have a mathematical answer which will still have to be translated into some practical experiment.
We have been using Maxwell's equations without the longitudinal term for about a century now and within this domain the laws of thermodynamics (=conservation of energy) hold. We can now proof that these equations are incomplete, there is an overlooked term, meaning more (or less) energy!
The laws of thermodynamics still apply. Just like I said before we have to review our definitions. These laws define an ISOLATED system. But when you include longitudinal electricity which can travel at any speed, there are no longer isolated systems.
Every electrical system in the universe is connected to every other electrical system in the universe. This, together with the laws of thermodynamics, implies that if my garage Wardenclyffe gains energy, some other electrical system in the universe looses energy.
Which one? I really don't know and to be honest, I couldn't care less.
Does this answer save me from having to work through Meyls math again?

Back at Wardenclyffe...
Tesla wanted to use this longitudinal electricity created by the 'free system' (see rare notes) to excite the second system, which is actually the main system.

Just look at the time line in 'the problem of increasing human energy', he has solved the complete free-energy problem before moving to Colorado Springs. What kind of experiments does he perform there? Various oscillator designs, various coil types, means of transmitting electricity through the earth, optimizing voltage increase etc. etc.
Everything applies to his Wardenclyffe project plus a few extra's to be able to use it as a telephone/messaging system.
Note this in the CSN:

June 6, 1899
Arrangements with single terminal tube for production of powerful rays. There being practically no limit to the power of an oscillator, it is now the problem to work out a tube so that it can stand any desired pressure. The tubes worked with in New York were made either with aluminium caps or without same, but in both cases a limit was found so that but a small fraction of the obtainable e.m.f. was available. If of glass, the bottom would break through owing to streamers, and if an aluminium cap were employed there would be sparking to the cap.

Why? Because that is the longitudinal link, the 'plasma bridge' as I called it before.
After Colorado Springs he writes his famous article that I just mentioned and he starts on Wardenclyffe.
To me this makes all perfect sense, these are all actions on one line (so to speak).
Although I really appreciate dR-Green's efford to show me his line of reasoning, I will have to stick with mine.

BTW in "a Prodigal Genious" two accidents are mentioned that befell Tesla's assistants. One had to do with liquid lead, the other one with x-ray burns. Also I found an x-ray of a foot made by Tesla but this was not related to any accident. Could it be that these stories got mixed up in our heads? Because of its today use, x-rays are probably automatically associated with accidents?

Ernst.

[dR-Green]

Although I really appreciate dR-Green's efford to show me his line of reasoning, I will have to stick with mine.

BTW in "a Prodigal Genious" two accidents are mentioned that befell Tesla's assistants. One had to do with liquid lead, the other one with x-ray burns. Also I found an x-ray of a foot made by Tesla but this was not related to any accident. Could it be that these stories got mixed up in our heads? Because of its today use, x-rays are probably automatically associated with accidents?

Ernst.

I would have to suggest again to read the Eric Dollard content, because this is like discussing the 6 o'clock news after the 9 o'clock news has been published... The 6 o'clock news isn't discussing up to date information.

I know what a bummer it is to have to read something before you can get to work, but I would really suggest it as being necessary. [edit] Although by "necessary" I mean there is coil construction information and other various practical things, this is enough to get started with actually doing something, not loads of reading just a bit of learning. Discussing and analysing how someone else rides a bike without knowing what it's like to ride one isn't the way to maximise productivity Konstantin Meyl could waste weeks, months or even potentially years of your time.

The Crystal Radio Initiative will reveal a lot more than any amount of Meyl or hypothesising over interpretations

Tesla X-Ray

Confusion seems to exist as to the nature of N Tesla's radiant matter efforts. This subject was of great importance to Tesla. All understanding here originates with the ideas of Sir W. Crookes, the inventor of the vacuum tube and thereby the grand uncle of atomic physics. Here is where to start, Crookes. What was Tesla's radiant matter anyway? Rest assured those who talk the most on this subject are the ones that know the least, a fundamental of human behavior. What is claimed to be Tesla is often rather the opposite. Presently, because of the efforts of certain individuals with engineering background, the established pseudo-Tesla mythos is dissolving. For those forces that despise Tesla, some with a pathological fervor, this requires a damage control operation on their part. Hence it can be expected, since the Bearden-Bedini axis has become QRU, a new much more advanced for of dis-info regarding Tesla may come about.

Tesla's radiant matter is NOT composed of electrons, protons, or quarks. These are but mathematical abstractions. The starting point is the pre-Einstein work done in studying the Roentgen Ray and the phenomenon of the anode and cathode. (E.P. Thompson has a book on this . Vassilatos has several writings on Crookes.) Tesla's radiant matter would be in the form of "Le Sage" particles, or "Thompson Corpuscles", and components of the nucleus Mendelev pre-hydrogen aether gasses.

Tesla exposed himself to massive intensities of his radiant output. From the electron volt standpoint he should of died a few weeks after these experiments. But he did not, why?

Tesla utilized direct rays, these from a single element vacuum tube fed by a source of mono-polar electro static potential. This much like radiation from the sun, this is what Tesla was after, a sun in a bottle, lookout Edison! Today the X-Ray is derived from a reflected, not directed, source of radiation.

Rather than rays we now have radiation. This is analogous to the primary induction from the sun producing visible light, or radiation, upon its impact with matter. Today the X-Ray tube has a heavy metal (Tungsten) anode. Rays from a thermionic (DC) cathode strike this anode, or target, giving rise to reflected photonic radiations that have been given the name X-Rays. Of course these "Einstein Rays" are destructive to living organisms, but the "Tesla Rays' are not. This is something to think about.

[Ernst]

Thanks again for your clarification, dR-Green!

[Ernst]

@ GSM (and other who might be interrested),

I have changed my mind and took some time to go through Meyl's work again because I think you are right in saying that if there is a description of how these waves behave we might find a clue on how to optimise their production.
The most important clue that I have found is that we normally do not produce this radiation (in air or absolute vacuum) because it is non-conductive. If however we reduce the air pressure to a point where it becomes conductive we will produce longitudinal electricity.
Longitudinal electricity is created only in a conductor, but once created it can travel through an insulator. (for the second half of that statement I do not yet have conclusive mathematical evidence, it is just my sense of logic that tells me it has to be that way)
So to optimise production of these waves in air, we must reduce the air pressure to the point where it is the best conductor.

Ernst.

[boguslaw]

@ GSM (and other who might be interrested),

I have changed my mind and took some time to go through Meyl's work again because I think you are right in saying that if there is a description of how these waves behave we might find a clue on how to optimise their production.
The most important clue that I have found is that we normally do not produce this radiation (in air or absolute vacuum) because it is non-conductive. If however we reduce the air pressure to a point where it becomes conductive we will produce longitudinal electricity.
Longitudinal electricity is created only in a conductor, but once created it can travel through an insulator. (for the second half of that statement I do not yet have conclusive mathematical evidence, it is just my sense of logic that tells me it has to be that way)
So to optimise production of these waves in air, we must reduce the air pressure to the point where it is the best conductor.

Ernst.

The point is that our normal DC electicity is longitudnal wave when voltage is electric field propagating and amperage is magnetic curled around the E field inside. I have already found some interesting counteracting article which almost convinced me that Meyl was mistaken and longitudinal EM wave do not exists, but the next day I have seen Russian article about special solution to wave equation and Maxwell equations and this is it.

First read this document http://www.scientificexploration.org...16_3_bruhn.pdf

then look at picture in this forum :
Капанадзе 4


I wish I could be better in math but to me it may be the solution, and the surprising one.