Tesla Science Center at Wardenclyffe deal Struck

[RAMSET]

Ultimately no secrets here..........

Mike
This is too good an opportunity to rush.
Our intentions here are sincere,And obviously Eric is also sincere.
There is some time to make a plan and figure out all the details.

I've asked for a bit of help with the details on this end [a trusted member here].
We want that first impression to be a good one.................[one that lasts]

Thx
Chet

[mbrownn]

Agreed, sorry for my over enthusiasm.

[Slider2732]

@GSM - thank you so much for your kind words

Just been looking at the Wardenclyffe site on Google Maps with my wife. We were surprised at there being so many swimming pools, for one thing. I was under the impression that it was a 'challenged' area, good to see that it probably isn't so bad at all.

Chet and I have talked by phone a few times, with one aim being the formulation of a demonstration of technologies. Such a demonstration would enable a good positive possible inclusion of all of our viewpoints and wishes for the Science Center. Every Tesla club in the land and further will probably want to demonstrate their discharge towers and have demo's at the site, but, this team here at EF could bring a good structured plan along. There are common yet overlooked devices, like the radiant collectors. There are masses more potential wireless products beyond the charging of electric toothbrushes and iPods !

If people here are in agreement, we can work toward a team effort, collaboration on projects which demonstrate both Tesla's known technologies and the relevance to 21st century life.
Take for example GBluer's Slayer exciter, an exciter that nearly all here are familiar with. His circuits are a classic example of the relevance of resonance. Literally transforming the Tesla circuits of 1912 into the circuits of 2012. Purists will disagree as to the value of updated tech, but the real world situation is one of change. Without change, this race and its achievements will end up in another worlds museum !

That's the direction that I see for a demo, a mix of the established Patent builds and those that are new, with more modern components. Things that people outside of circuit building have never seen.
Give people who visit the center the knowledge that this stuff is both viable and useful. Also the knowledge that what they believed was impossible, needs some readdressing. The take away value, to think upon and to wish to see more of on the shelves of Walmart. Technologies with the Tesla Science Center name on them.

If we can work with Eric, work with each other to formulate a strong demonstration, then at least Jane and the crew can have the knowledge of realistic options for inclusion...of builds or ourselves.

In such a light, we can begin to sort through what we know and what we can build. What's useful, what will likely remain a curio.
Noone is leading or directing, except all of us and with the land not being formerly handed over til the beginning of next year, that offers us time to discuss and make progress along the way

[dR-Green]

Take for example GBluer's Slayer exciter, an exciter that nearly all here are familiar with. His circuits are a classic example of the relevance of resonance. Literally transforming the Tesla circuits of 1912 into the circuits of 2012. Purists will disagree as to the value of updated tech, but the real world situation is one of change.

I suppose I would consider myself a purist to a certain extent, at least publicly. The reason for this is basically for purposes of "un-learning" all the different directions that people have gone. The basis of Tesla's work is still not accepted or acknowledged, and there are effects that people have not seen - why have they not seen them? My answer is because they are not purist enough. So while "developments" are fine, it's like John Bedini always said about his device, first get it working with the correct specifications, then you can do what you like. But in Tesla's case no one seems to be concerned with what Tesla was actually doing. So I will promote the purist point of view

First on the agenda is the obvious - wireless transmission/reception. This is done via the earth, hence transmission distance having no meaning. Based on the belief that the transmission is via the air, this provides the basis for the scientific argument/reasoning for why Tesla supposedly failed in this idea. There's one obvious way to fix that - do it right. This forms the basis of Eric's Crystal Radio Initiative. Power transmission is illegal, and radio transmission requires a license. Experimentation and development can be done in receive mode with a coil built for a commercial AM band radio station, and with an amateur radio license, transmissions in the amateur radio band. Tesla did intend to power aeroplanes which obviously would not be connected to the earth, but this is something that "we" will have to develop and get working via Tesla's reasoning, I don't believe it will be too productive with the "modernist" view, the planes will be falling out of the sky when they are out of range. The CRI could provide insights into this based on the principle that the receiver apparently begins to radiate the received signal in the "local" area.

Single wire light bulbs, lighting of filaments as opposed to energising gas, I should think that just about any "Tesla coil" out there is capable of this, it's just a matter of a high enough frequency and voltage. It should be a relatively simple undertaking for anyone who has such equipment, which seems to be a lot of people. As far as I'm aware only 5 people have done this in the last 100 years or so. This purist doesn't buy the "suppression etc" theory, there's another reason

[Farmhand]

Hi dR, I think the lighting of the bulbs while held in the hand are a function of
your capacitance and the currents going into your capacitance and back ect.

If I'm not mistaken you are referring to effects like I show in this video from
about 2 minutes, bear in mind the bulb is a 240 v bulb and the setup is solid
state and powered by only about 10 watts from a 12 volt battery and the
bulb is a 25 Watt bulb.

If you watch the whole video you'll hear me say that I light the receiver lights
through my body but I don't think I showed it. The lighting of bulbs held in the
hand is really nothing special and quite a few people can do it but to what
end ? What actual use is it ? At the time I thought it was neat and it is but
now I understand it more.

Resonant Dirt.wmv - YouTube

I do agree that exciters are not showing wireless power transmission the way
Tesla ultimately intended it to happen. But they do show some things.

Tesla enjoyed showing big sparks and streamers as a demonstration of the
voltage and power at the terminal, but he didn't build them to do that. I don't
think many dispute that.

Cheers

[dR-Green]

Yes I agree it's nothing special really, I was referring more to the single wire bulb lighting in general. My point is out of all the "Tesla coil" videos that show lightning bolts and "wireless" fluorescent tubes etc, what percentage of those people show these kinds of basic effects that Tesla demonstrated? It's a very easy thing to do and a lot of people already have everything that's required to do it. Why would you think it was neat "at the time", what has changed?

The "purist" in this respect sees a lot more than the "modernist" does, and learns through experience and observation that it's (his) capacitance that allows the bulb to light with only one wire, and the energy will easily pass through him and power the receiver etc. Such things are mysteries to the majority of people interested in Tesla, but these are very basic/fundamental effects that should be well known in this field. By all means build exciters or whatever, they would make cool gadgets and what not for selling in the gift shop in the same way as plasma balls or even for some practical uses, but please, not at the expense of completely overlooking the fundamentals and compromising the reason for the building's existence in the first place. If no one bothers to be somewhat purist about it then the game is already lost and the Tesla name would just be for marketing. Just some concerns and reasoning from the purist point of view, the whole thing can easily spiral completely out of control, just look at all the "Tesla" stuff on this forum alone, yet Tesla's work is still a mystery. Not enough purism! By following Tesla's guidelines you will surely see the same effects and come to the same conclusions. What better and more efficient way of understanding and developing it?

And that concludes the purist propaganda

[Slider2732]

Exactly right dR-Green !
Your view has the validity of any and in many ways is precisely the mixture aim that would work for a team effort
Indeed, Bedini has always said to simply copy exactly the circuits he has shown before crying off that a certain device doesn't work...they don't work because they weren't built to the plan of the designer.
And, I also agree about the Tesla designs. Just because we can do things easier, doesn't make them better. But, it could be argued that many of us who start with a simple transistor setup, may well track toward the authentic genuine understandings as time passes and familiarity is gained.
Capacitive couplings with Hertzian propagations are nowhere, yet are visually close to true wireless in the near field. People (including myself) always talk of a 'range' of wireless field in videos of their builds and yes I know exactly what that means lol, back to the drawing board.

I know that Farmhand has conducted a huge amount of experiments regarding his own tower builds and great to have your input Farmhand (the plasma from the bottom of the 4ft tube in the latest vid was a sight to behold!).
Visual spectacles are part of the showman side that, in my opinion, are very valid.

Purist views and building to those parameters have their place, otherwise the original technology and original Patents would really be lost to time.

[Slider2732]

*Double post, the forum software seems to have troubles - I think it objected to the purist comments and self mutated !

[Farmhand]

Yes I agree with there is a place for a lot of stuff, Arcs included. Tesla actually
describes in the Colorado Springs Notes how to go about producing the best
Arcs and steamers by using spheres with very high voltages and points with
lower potentials. It is a demonstration of the voltage and power at the Terminal,
a valid practice initiated by Tesla himself, but should not be the ultimate goal of
course. dR's lighting of the bulbs like he can is very impressive, no doubt about
it. Nothing has changed with regard to me thinking it's neat, it still is. And I do
agree demonstrations of lighting incandescent globes is much more impressive than fluro's.

Lets all hope Tesla is well done by. He deserves more recognition.

Cheers

[RAMSET]

Good direction......

Slider
Thanks for the help ,and the clarity that the group is in charge here!
Men of like minds and beliefs with a common goal and an obvious grasp of the "challenge" [excellent input here].

For additional clarity.... We know this venue at Wardenclyffe is receptive to Tesla Technology and we will have no problems getting meetings ETC.


"So the game is afoot!"

the ball is in our court !

Thx
Chet

[Farmhand]

If we watch this video we can see that the Tesla memorial society of New York
would have us believe that Tesla wanted to transmit energy by radio waves at Wardenclyffe as his greatest dream.

Most powerful conical Tesla Coil on Earth - Mid-American Science Museum, Arkansas, USA

Not sure what to think about that.

[dR-Green]

And, I also agree about the Tesla designs. Just because we can do things easier, doesn't make them better. But, it could be argued that many of us who start with a simple transistor setup, may well track toward the authentic genuine understandings as time passes and familiarity is gained.
Capacitive couplings with Hertzian propagations are nowhere, yet are visually close to true wireless in the near field. People (including myself) always talk of a 'range' of wireless field in videos of their builds and yes I know exactly what that means lol, back to the drawing board.

Yes I played with Johnny Davro's simple SEC in the past, that's a nice little circuit that I'd like to play with more at some point As an example of why I don't disagree with such things, my "revelation" came when I was playing with an AV plug with the radiated field (not SEC in this case) in the popular way. I noticed it had a certain range obviously, but then, I could extend the range by holding the AV plug in my left hand for example, and placing my right hand in the radiated field. Now the AV plug worked where it did not before. Ideally it seemed, I would be touching the coil output directly and have arms of infinite length. The earth already exhibits these properties, and the whole thing suddenly made sense.

I don't see any reason why transistors couldn't be used to make something work "properly", all that's really needed is an RF amplifier, but vacuum tubes would probably be more robust. Beyond that it's mostly a matter of which end of the coil is the output. Farmhand has demonstrated the single wire/"wireless" bulb lighting in his video using solid state, in fact we got told off by Eric for using spark gaps. And given the new information it makes more sense to be using transistors/vacuum tubes, or RF amplifiers.

Anyway, on the "wireless range", this was when I was testing the CRI circuit that Eric posted with a coil that I had already built which happened to be within the correct frequency range. I call this the Texas Pete arrangement.



The coil is receiving a 882 kc signal via the earth, transmitted from a transmitter 84kM away.



The circuit can be considered as two halves, a resonant transformer, and a crystal radio receiver (the circuit of which resembles an AV plug). The coil receives the signal through the earth, and through resonance the top of the coil "radiates" the received signal. The metal plate labelled C0 near the top sphere basically acts as the antenna for the crystal radio circuit in the conventional way to pick up this radiated signal (and in this case it's also the tuning condenser so it's not configured properly). The coil is now acting as a relay station and allowing for radio reception where it can't be received normally, through using the receiver effectively as a second transmitter. The question is, to what extent is the signal radiated in the local area by the receiver. Either way, even if within a very small area, the effectiveness of the original transmitter is now increased simply through setting up a resonant Tesla receiver and receiving/using one signal (Telluric) as opposed to the other (Hertzian).

This is a video of it, the scope shots are irrelevant because things weren't connected properly, the audio is muffled as another consequence (refer to the audio videos for the actual sound). But the quality of the radio signal can be compared in terms of the interference that one might expect, bearing in mind that the antenna for the normal crystal receiver is positioned for the best possible reception near the window without actually taking it outside, while the Tesla receiver has no such provisions, just connected to earth at the furthest end of the room from the window.

Crystal Sets Gone Wild - YouTube

So it might be worth considering these sort of effects while working at the drawing board

[dR-Green]

dR's lighting of the bulbs like he can is very impressive, no doubt about
it. Nothing has changed with regard to me thinking it's neat, it still is.

It's just not "as" neat in the same way once you figure it out. Like you said you're the capacitance, so metal plates or hands or whatever doesn't really make any difference. Just that people don't expect to see bulbs lit with open circuits, and they certainly don't expect to see them lit while they're being held I like that sort of stuff for reasons of unravelling the "absolute reality" that people insist we are experiencing.

I know what to think of that so-called "Tesla society" video - classic disinfo It's people like that who prevent any development, the scientists of the world can sit comfortably while no one disproves or threatens their opinions. The world's most powerful Tesla coil, which can do... Nothing.

[Slider2732]

See, both of you guys are definitely to be commended in your efforts and results.
I know we can demonstrate effective circuits in the coming weeks and months - if indeed that is your want too.
Purpose is something I see as missing with a lot of experiments. It works, neat, now what ? lol
The practical uses are my personal aims...rewiring the house for 1 wire, effectiveness of induction wireless for crossing solar outputs through window panes (Kyle Carrington's great suggestion), true wireless longitudinal powering of R/C aircraft (with highly virtual grounds !).
Moving beyond the theoretical, out of the lab and into daily life.

Experiments for a possible demo are well underway here.
My new Simple Wireless Electricity system of solid state wireless is moving along well. Over 60ft on 1 wire to light a mains nightlight out in the backyard, an LED powered with no connections in water, amplified pancake coil over 1 wire.
Hopefully, with a cleaner build, such a system has a use within a demo ?
Here's the latest video: Simple Wireless Electricity - Part II - The BAC's - YouTube

[Farmhand]

Hi Slider, The purpose for me building a medium power Tesla transformer is
having one allows me to do more HV experiments of many kinds. The uses are
many and varied.

I think what you have with the transmission to the yard is a Single Wire Earth
Return transmission line. SWER, it is in widespread use and has been for quite
some time. That's not wireless.



The other wireless effects look mainly like induction to me, which is technically
wireless, but the inductive effects are no more wireless than a transformer,
which is wireless in the same way. I don't want to sound like a wet blanket
but that is my opinion. Not a whole lot more useful because of the distance.

The commercial wireless energy transfer I think is based on induction.
Experiments of 60 Watts over two meters has been achieved by strongly
coupled resonant circuits at only 40% efficiency. So they dissipated more
than they transferred. If you can show better efficiency than that at the
same or higher powers then you're in business.

Science Magazine: Sign In

I think they have the short distance wireless power transfer covered.

Cheers

P.S. I say we ought to take it as a challenge though. Anyone think they can
better the results claimed by the paid researchers ? I think I can. At least I think
I can beat them in at least two of these three area's. Getting better results
in only one area I think is dead easy, two not so easy, three not easy at all.

1. Efficiency
2. Distance
3. Power

Depending on the source of energy and it's use depends on which is most
important. If a device is plugged into the wall I would want it to be efficient,
also if it used power a lot of the time i would want it efficient, but if it was to
power a remote latch once or twice a day then it need not be efficient.
..