Konstatin Meyl's mistake in Theory and Practice

[GSM]

Konstantin Meyl's mistakes are due to his confusion between radiations and "near fields", i.e between waves which propagate autonomously and fields which are linked to their source.

.

Having watched Konstantin's demos I am inclined to agree with this statement.

I also think this near field aspect close to a resonant antenna/ conductor is also often wrongly deemed to be a longitudinal radiation component whilst actually the near resultant remains partially field coupled.

I was speaking with Eric about this particular topic yesterday, and he said that it isn't really a velocity. It is a ratio of space to time that the electricity exhibits within the bounding geometry of the coil. The reason that the resonant frequency compared to the quarter wavelength is so important is because physicists claim that it is the electrons traveling down the wire that is the cause of electricity. The apparent faster than light measurements are strictly to over turn the modern physics understanding of electricity.

Dave

Surely it is the charge which moves between electrons, and NOT the electrons themselves ?

In response to Web000x,
If you do not accept 'action at a distance' it will become pretty hard to find a way around the concept of ether. For myself, induction proofs the existence of ether and so does the fact that a HF current radiates EM waves. But as far as faster-than-light travel in coils is concerned, if you 'accept' inductive and capacitive coupling between the windings it is obvious that the energy moves FTL when measured along the wire.

Ernst.

Surely the whole point IS action at a distance - photonically - via discretely radiated energy quanta ?

How does induction prove the existence of an ether ?
Besides, if you believe in a three dimensional ether, how can Eric's uni-directional rope representation be acceptable and not interact with all else ?

Induction is the result of multiple electron spin alignments due to charge transfer between electrons = magnetic field !

If I might present my understanding -

EM radiation is purely photonic and NOT waves.
Waves require a medium through which to propagate and there is not a medium in outer space capable of propagting EM radiation.
(Also check Beardon)
There are no voltage/ magnetic fields along the propagation path of radio transmitted EM either, the equivalent field strength being that which the measuring equipment generates via its own transducing activity. The only wave like motion is that of the cylic photon generation at radiation, and then the cyclic energy transduced by the electrons/ atoms of photon energised matter where the wavelength may be imagined as per frequency of photon variation along the distance of path.

There is no transduction until the radiating photons energise electrons of matter, as do individual photons from a distant galaxy to eventually create an image via telescope CCDs. Just like putting your hand into an otherwise invisible torch beam.

EM radiation propagates via photons due to quanta stream released through induced electron excitation changes. (Tesla stated this photonic stream, reference not known)

Photons through a wire (predominatly the near surface skin region) = current = orbit alignments = induction = force upon conductor and core due to like charge motions attracting = magnetostriction = magnetic attraction.

Photons through free space = EM radiation.

Radio EM radiation is a cyclically varying photonic stream resulting from cyclical energisation changes of current aligned electron orbits.
Longitudinal radiation is where EM radiation is cyclically emitted via voltage change normal to the surface of a conductor, as via a flat surface or a tape conductor, prior to electron alignment due to charge flow normal to the direction of radiation.

What folk think of as the ether is no more than the free space through which so many fields and photons, neutrinos etc permeate. It has a representative impedance, though that is the cumulative action at a distance of all other matter and its fields/ charges/ radiations etc.

Hence if Meyl were genuinely demonstrating longitudinal radiation he would need centrally energised solid hemispheres with flats facing, as opposed to purely spherical antenna capacity 'hats'.

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

[Ernst]

In LIFO order, this time....

@ Farmhand,
Yes, this topic is about Meyls mistakes. But if that gives rise to related interesting discussions, please just continue. The only thing is that this discussion may be a little bit harder to find...

In response to Web000x,
If you do not accept 'action at a distance' it will become pretty hard to find a way around the concept of ether. For myself, induction proofs the existence of ether and so does the fact that a HF current radiates EM waves. But as far as faster-than-light travel in coils is concerned, if you 'accept' inductive and capacitive coupling between the windings it is obvious that the energy moves FTL when measured along the wire.

@ exnihiloest,
Are you saying that Longitudinal Electricity is a misunderstood near-field?
If that is true, then how are we receiving HF LE from the sun and the stars?

Ernst.

[Farmhand]

Hi Dave, Yes I see, but when I use this OLTC online calculator the effect is predicted
so I don't understand how it is not known. This is for close wound coils but it
shows the effect is calculated and so is known.

OLTC calculator
OLTC Calculator

Frequency wavelength calculator
Frequency Wavelength Calculator

Fill the boxes next to the white writing from top to bottom. Then click in a box
next to some red writing to see the results. I get secondary Frez 1840 kHz,
but the online frequency wavelength converter tells me that 48 meters of wire
should have a resonant frequency of 1560 Khz. The velocity factor is
calculated. I don't see how that could happen if it is not known.

Secondary
90
0.5
90

Primary
10
5
2
100
2

Toroid
0.01

...............

I've also read a paper describing the effect.

Class Notes: Tesla Coils and the Failure of Lumped-Element Circuit Theory

Cheers

P.S. The electron movement in a wire is an effect of the current (flow of charges),
the current itself is an effect of voltage, some of us can see this is true by
using logic. That concept was not invented by Eric, or rather he was not the
first or the only one to know that. Displacement current shows us that.

Regardless I think Ernst wants to show/discuss Meyl's mistakes.

[Web000x]

Isn't the apparent over luminal velocity of resonant air core coils just the result
of the wave not actually having to travel the entire length of the wire but calculated
as if it does travel the entire distance of the wire giving the appearance of over
luminal velocity ? Layman's answer please.

I was speaking with Eric about this particular topic yesterday, and he said that it isn't really a velocity. It is a ratio of space to time that the electricity exhibits within the bounding geometry of the coil. The reason that the resonant frequency compared to the quarter wavelength is so important is because physicists claim that it is the electrons traveling down the wire that is the cause of electricity. The apparent faster than light measurements are strictly to over turn the modern physics understanding of electricity.

Dave

[exnihiloest]

Konstantin Meyl's mistakes are due to his confusion between radiations and "near fields", i.e between waves which propagate autonomously and fields which are linked to their source.

Near resonant circuits are coupled, and share their magnetic and electric fields in which energy is located and can be exchanged from the transmitter to the receiver. This is done in agreement with conventional electromagnetism, the density of energy per unit of volume being 1/2*ε0*E² + 1/2*B²/µ0, E and B being respectively the electric and magnetic field amplitude.

The same mistake appear in the "magnifier transmitter" from Tesla who was a great and respectable inventor but not a great theorist. He failed with his idea of longitudinal waves in vacuum while Maxwell was right against him with the EM waves.
The near fields are completely linked to their respective voltage and current sources, i.e. are permanently interacting with the charges without radiating. This allows for power transmission at a distance without having to invoke any autonomous waves.

.

[GSM]

.... why I tried to rewrite Meyl's work in 4D. Unfortunately that can not be done.

.... longitudinal and transverse are occilations (AC), scalar is more like expanding DC.

Ernst.

Hi Ernst,

Yes scalar is beyond conventional maths, hence classically trained scientists cannot comprehend its existence, and thus to them anyone believing in same has 'lost it'; 'it' being their beliefs about reality.

'Expanding DC' - yes, but still with its amplitude cyclically pulse-modulated and thus embodying a rotational component; so still - somehow - requiring that extra mathematical dimension.

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

[Ernst]

A shortcut to invalidate Prof. Dr.-Ir. Konstatin Meyl's theory:

His result:

– c2 ·∇ × ∇ × B = d2B/dt2 – v2·∇(∇·B)

(again every 2 means squared!)
We know that he believes dB/dt = v·∇B, so this should be equal to

– c2 ·∇ × ∇ × B = v2·∇2B – v2·∇(∇·B)

By definition:
∇ × ∇ × F = – ∇2F + ∇(∇·F)
so
– c2 ·∇ × ∇ × B = c2·∇2B – c2·∇(∇·B)

Which leads us to the conclusion that every speed (v) equals light speed (c).

This is certainly good news for police officers who can now write ridiculously high speeding tickets for every car they see.

Just don't get caught!

Ernst.

[dR-Green]

[dR-Green]

Yes that's my point, nothing seems to "actually" exceed the speed of light, it's
only "apparent", like a short cut.

I have a coil which is 200 turns of 0.5 mm wire, turns side by side the coil is 96 mm
diameter and 100 mm high, it has 59 meters of wire which going by the calculator here
should give a 1/4 wavelength resonant frequency of 1260 kHz, however when I actually
test the coil the resonant peak is at 1570 kHz which would equal about 47.8
meters. The coil has 2.1 mH and about 4.8 pF. Which gives the resonant frequency here.

This equates to 1.244 times faster than light ? I don't think so, I think the
energy wave or whatever just traveled 47.8 meters instead of the whole 59 meters.

Cheers

But if you can take a short cut through space, which remains the same, the wire length is 59 metres and that didn't change, then how did you do that? You got from point A to B seemingly faster than the speed of light, short cut or not, you are there ahead of schedule. So how does the speed of light apply as a speed limit in the universe? The reality of "faster than light" is seen here through a certain arrangement of apparatus, so one could also say that the luminal universal speed limit is equally an illusion due to the lack of certain apparatus. The limitation of time and space as defined by physics was overcome quite easily. I mean, from a philosophical point of view, off topic from Meyl.

Anyway, you illustrated the flaw in Meyl's "experiment" through knowing the conductor length and the luminal frequency, which will be useful information for designing new coils. What Meyl has done is measure for resonance, call that "luminal", and then find another resonant peak and derive his "times the speed of light" from this. So it's all completely pointless. All he has confirmed is that one resonant peak of his coil is 1.5 times the frequency of the other, it's not relative to any speed of light.

I'm not sure that any of this ("faster than light" in this case) has any relation to wave propagation through the earth though, only the (extra) coil propagation and for design/construction purposes, because according to Tesla's diagram the velocity changes depending on the angle, reaching infinity at the poles. The "pole" being the coil and the 180 degree opposite, not the north pole and south pole as some people seem to think

[Ernst]

@ Farmhand,

I believe you are right, and this is also where the PI/2 came from:
Look in my previous post here, the time for an electrical impuls to travel through the earth is 42.44 ms. This is a straight line through the centre of the earth.
If you would now calculate the speed over the earth surface you will arrive at a speed PI/2 times greater than c.
But is this "apparent" speed or actual speed? I can not answer that with absolute certainty.

Imagine the shadow of the earth, projected by our sun, passing over a planet at a distance of 1 light year from our sun. What would be the speed at which this shadow is moving?
Would you call that apparent or actual speed?

Ernst

[Farmhand]

Yes that's my point, nothing seems to "actually" exceed the speed of light, it's
only "apparent", like a short cut.

I have a coil which is 200 turns of 0.5 mm wire, turns side by side the coil is 96 mm
diameter and 100 mm high, it has 59 meters of wire which going by the calculator here
should give a 1/4 wavelength resonant frequency of 1260 kHz, however when I actually
test the coil the resonant peak is at 1570 kHz which would equal about 47.8
meters. The coil has 2.1 mH and about 4.8 pF. Which gives the resonant frequency here.

This equates to 1.244 times faster than light ? I don't think so, I think the
energy wave or whatever just traveled 47.8 meters instead of the whole 59 meters.

Cheers

[dR-Green]

@ dR-Green,
On the differences I believe to have found between Tesla and Dollard. Let me first say that I am not ready for an in depth discussion on this subject as I do not yet fully understand both theories. But I am quite sure that when Tesla mentions 1/4 wavelength he is talking about the entire circuit length (ground to top-load). In Eric's explanaition of (3 coil) Tesla systems, he talks about 1/4 wavelength or 1/2 wavelength per coil.
This is the major difference that I believe I have found. There are some small other issues but those could also be misinterpretations on my side.

Tesla's Colorado Springs wire lengths are based on 1/4 in each coil, but then we get into the question of 1/4 of what? Because the frequency of the whole thing in the end is no longer the same 1/4 as the one he started with. Eric's theory was that there are "independent" 1/4 wave resonances going on in each coil, what Eric calls "concatenated resonance", but we have since found that this is not what's happening in the CS coil. So you are right in that respect. But apparently Tesla wasn't using the CS coil at 1/4 wave of any particular frequency that he had planned in advance, it just ended up being whatever it ended up as, so this "pot luck" is no good as far as engineering and understanding what's happening is concerned.

[Ernst]

Isn't the apparent over luminal velocity of resonant air core coils just the result
of the wave not actually having to travel the entire length of the wire but calculated
as if it does travel the entire distance of the wire giving the appearance of over
luminal velocity ? Layman's answer please.

Not sure, but I believe so.
Imagine the windings of a coil inducing current in nearby windings....

I have no reference nor any other reason to assume that the CS-transmitter resonated at 6 Hz. Just imagine the amount of copper wire required to achieve that...
But there is another possibility; the spark gap frequency. With this set at 6 Hz you could send bursts of 100 KHz at a 6 Hz rate.
There is cicumstancial evidence that during the experiment that blew up the CS generator, he used earth resonance. But not at 6 Hz, at 11.78 Hz.
Earth circumference = 40,000 Km, so diameter = 12,732 Km. The impuls would have to travel this distance twice, so 25,465 Km. At the speed of light that would take 84.88 ms (which matches the time stated in Tesla's work), thus we arrive at 11.78 Hz.

Ernst.

[dR-Green]

Isn't the apparent over luminal velocity of resonant air core coils just the result
of the wave not actually having to travel the entire length of the wire but calculated
as if it does travel the entire distance of the wire giving the appearance of over
luminal velocity ? Layman's answer please.

Yes. I haven't done these tests on the flat spirals so I can't comment from that side, but the point is you need to know what the actual wavelength is and what is "100%" before you can say your result is higher or lower than it. He hasn't bothered to consider the distance travelled, he just found a resonant peak on the coil at 4.7 Mc, called that "the speed of light", and went on his merry way from there. So we have no idea whether his result is actually "faster" or "slower" than light. If 7 Mc is below the luminal frequency of the coil based on wire length then obviously there's no faster than light measurements at all, there's no way to tell because he forgot to mention it.

[Ernst]

Ok, let's answer this in FIFO order....

@ dR-Green,
On the differences I believe to have found between Tesla and Dollard. Let me first say that I am not ready for an in depth discussion on this subject as I do not yet fully understand both theories. But I am quite sure that when Tesla mentions 1/4 wavelength he is talking about the entire circuit length (ground to top-load). In Eric's explanaition of (3 coil) Tesla systems, he talks about 1/4 wavelength or 1/2 wavelength per coil.
This is the major difference that I believe I have found. There are some small other issues but those could also be misinterpretations on my side.

@ Farmhand,
Vector calculus is not actually that difficult, there are some nice video's on youtube explaining the curl, div and grad. These help you visualise what is going on, and from there you'll pick things up quicker than you would now think.

@ GSM,
The 'old scientists' believed in ether and I think that is a good thing because many things become much more easy to explain that way. The way I interpret it, it is like this:
ether is everywhere, in the vacuum, in matter, everywhere. It behaves like an incompressable liquid. Hence, there is 'a rope' pervading all matter and any movement in this liquid results in movements propagating through this liquid.
Floating in this liquid there are carriers for certain properties, like electrical charge.
Anyway, this is the picture I get when reading the 'old science'. But there are still some issues that I do not yet fully comprehend.
Like for instance, sometimes it looks as if a charge carrier is just a mathematical construct with no actual physical presence, just like 'the beginning or end of a trajectory'.
Then when I think in terms of vortices things get more interesting but still do not provide a full explanation. A vortex in 2D can be seen as a circle with 2 forces, one on the outside pointing inward and one on the inside pointing outward. This sound like an equilibrium, but it is not. Look in a bath tub vortex, it exists because matter is flowing out perpendicular to the area of the circle. In other words, a 2D vortex can only exist in a 3D space, because it needs an extra dimension.
OK? Now add 1 more dimension to this example. We get a vortex in 3D which may look like a ball sucking in surrounding matter. But this matter has to go somewhere to maintain the vortex, so we need 1 more dimension.
This was the reason why I tried to rewrite Meyl's work in 4D. Unfortunately that can not be done.

Which brings me to the scentence I have lifted out of your post, and your use of the words 'scalar', 'longitudinal' and 'transverse' in one sentence.

longitudinal and transverse are occilations (AC), scalar is more like expanding DC.
Try to get a copy of Turtur's work. This deals with that scalar part and also proofs its existance both in theory and a practical experiment.
If you have trouble finding it on the internet I can always send you a copy by email.

@ garrettm4,
Thank you so much! Your overview is very much appreciated! I have not read it yet, but I will some time today...

Ernst.