Konstatin Meyl's mistake in Theory and Practice

[artoj]

Analogy

A quote from page 32, of "Talking to the Birds"
"The most important factors in designing any prototypical forms would be how close is the analogy and to what degree can we elucidate the Tesla longitudinal velocity wave. A working system of acoustic resonators would help in the understanding of the electrical version. When carefully checking the acoustic analogies and equivalences to electrical circuits the Voltage analogy seems to be correct with potential difference between the standard atmospheric Air Pressure(Earth) and the Over Pressure(potential) being the equivalent, this would make the Amperage as equivalent to volumetric flow, which is better described by being call Volumetric Velocity. This last variable requires you to know the particle velocity, this seems straight forward, as the pressure wave exerts a slight density change in the medium , this condition is called Condensation, another term is compression with the less dense part of the wave called the rarefaction. There are also temperature differences in the two opposing conditions as well, this differential engineering will result in the well known acoustic sterling engine design. The movement of particles is PI/2 slower than the Sound Velocity of the medium, if taken as the electrical current these particles would have the equivalent velocity as the speed of light, thus by analogy arriving at the fundamental longitudinal velocity of light which would be equal to Light Velocity x PI/2."
I hope this helps, Regards Arto,

[dR-Green]

I am not so sure about this longitudinal component that the tcoil is claimed to have since whenever you have motion you have current and whenever you have current you have radiation due to the field being split into the simultaneous electric and magnetic fields in quadrature to each other.

Begs the question how one creates a field in motion that is nonradiant?

Even in the time honored standing wave it still takes time for the wave to travel in motion down the line and travel back, and that is in the form of a reflection, (bounce back) off of some boundary and ultimately in the form of a current. (radiation)

Its not pulling on a piece of wire back and forth as some would have us believe as that would require the physical boundaries to move with the wire or hose or whatever rather than the wave itself which in space would require the whole universe to move to accommodate such a wave theory would it not? I remember seeing some guy pulling back and forth on a garden hose to demonstrate how a longitudinal wave would work? Anyone care to elaborate on that concept? I do not see it.as realistic.

I do not see any longitudinal component in there anywhere?

I would be very interested in knowing if anyone has bought meyls demonstrator and gotten the same results meyl claims to have gotten.

Whether you move or the universe moves, the effect is the same!

Although I don't think it's necessary to think of it in terms of a boundary moving any more than a brick wall moves when a sound wave reflects off it, or the air in your room moves when you speak. It's compressed, but it isn't shoved along.

If you do the transverse wave thing with a piece of string then the boundary apparently moves up and down, because that's the only way you can set the wave into motion with your hand.

I'm not sure that it's actually possible to make the thing 100% non-radiating, whether the boundary be 2 metres or 2 cm. But what it can be is an ineffective/inefficient radiator.

[Kokomoj0]

I am not so sure about this longitudinal component that the tcoil is claimed to have since whenever you have motion you have current and whenever you have current you have radiation due to the field being split into the simultaneous electric and magnetic fields in quadrature to each other.

Begs the question how one creates a field in motion that is nonradiant?

Even in the time honored standing wave it still takes time for the wave to travel in motion down the line and travel back, and that is in the form of a reflection, (bounce back) off of some boundary and ultimately in the form of a current. (radiation)

Its not pulling on a piece of wire back and forth as some would have us believe as that would require the physical boundaries to move with the wire or hose or whatever rather than the wave itself which in space would require the whole universe to move to accommodate such a wave theory would it not? I remember seeing some guy pulling back and forth on a garden hose to demonstrate how a longitudinal wave would work? Anyone care to elaborate on that concept? I do not see it.as realistic.

I do not see any longitudinal component in there anywhere?

I would be very interested in knowing if anyone has bought meyls demonstrator and gotten the same results meyl claims to have gotten.

[Kokomoj0]

Yes well what of the quote I gave above, he clearly states the currents he
passes into the Earth are stored there as electromagnetic momentum, is this
not analogous to a tank circuit ? Are the oscillations in a tank circuit "hertz" waves ?
Or are the oscillations in a tank circuit EM radiation ? Or are they
electromagnetic momentum of vibrations ? I don't think they are radiation.

Resembling sound waves is "not" sound waves, just "like" sound waves. But I
don't see how longitudinal waves are not recognized if sound waves are
longitudinal. Sound waves resonate and reverberate and such whereas
radiation does not. So any resonance in a tank is "like" sound waves.
Seems like good Logic to me.

Anyway the directed energy is a different concept to the transmission of
energy with the patented transmitters. I think he just intended using the transmitters
to transmit the energy to the energy directing device and/or control them (remotely)
and/or to produce the enormous potential to run the energy directing
apparatus..

The atmospheric transmissions he explains that the currents are transmitted
by conduction.

Nikola Tesla On His Work With Alternating Currents -- Chapter IV

By direct quotes I mean to words written by Tesla or recorded from what he actually said, in context.

Cheers

from that same pdf:

That was the first single step, as I say, toward the evolution of an invention which I have called my "magnifying transmitter." That means, a circuit connected to ground and to the antenna, of a tremendous electromagnetic momentum and small damping factor, with all the conditions so determined that an immense accumulation of electrical energy can take place.

so lets look at what he said


That means, a circuit connected to ground and to the antenna,

an LC network possessing some tuning characteristic

of a tremendous electromagnetic momentum

Big ass coil with lots of turns/amps or high v

and small damping factor,

On the bleeding edge of going into orbit and can almost be set into oscillation with a ball peen hammer, a self oscillator

with all the conditions so determined that an immense accumulation of electrical energy can take place.

a joule ringer style exciter.

an immense accumulation of electrical energy

a resonant tank circuit


people on these boards have been dancing around this proving every other related concept but never hitting the bullseye.

Tcoil is the combination of a joule ringer of sorts, + Stifflers self resonance coils set up so the earth acts as one giant spherical capacitive LC circuit the earths spherical boundaries causing the (bounce back) and the frequency adjusted for least loss so it does bounce back rather than blast off into space and bounces back and forth within those boundaries gaining momentum with every excitation pulse, the main wave right back to its source.

Post 6 to start

the math

and here

and some maxwell

reflections polarization

finally, Superposition of plane-polarized waves (nice graphics representations)


ideally, in radio you would use what hams call the flat side, or horizontal antenna to maximize the reflected incident angle, vertical polarization works but not as well.


that said it would appear that coil 1 is a gigantic powerful magnetic source.

Coil 2 is used to convert the high voltage low current to low voltage high current for coupling to the earth capacitor.

Coil 3 is used as a self oscillator, and like stifflers toys take off with little excitation.

So coil 3 sits there ready to go into orbit as a result of its low damping.

It appears tesla found its natural frequency and simply pulsed it like a joule ringer or stifflers toys.

It appears tesla simply used the conditions of the planet to create a giant electromagnetic resonator.

The question I have is; does the earth act more like a giant pulsating AC electromagnet at that point as a result of these currents flowing through it or does the earth actually collect a charge like a capacitor?

I am thinking the former.

So that would suggest to me that he started with some self oscillator and built the rest of the coils to properly match it to the earth and an appropriate exciter. under these conditions I would agree that teslas transmitter could in fact magnify. I never bought this transformer turns ratio concept that was being passed on by some to be a consideration as a definition for magnifying in the context tesla was purported to use it.

[Ernst]

I'm not looking for quotes from Tesla on radiation in particular, I'm looking for quotes by Tesla on Longitudinal "waves" or such with respect directly to the operation of the Energy Transmitters patented for the transmission of energy by the atmospheric conduction or the ground currents.

Yes, Farmhand, I think I understand what you want. But what I am trying to say is:
- At Tesla's time there was less knowledge about the nature of the various forms of radiation. Today we distinquish transverse, longitudinal and particle (beta: electrons, alfa: protons, for example), but you can not expect someone in Tesla's time to do the same.
- Tesla does clearly distinquish various forms of radiation, though.
- Tesla does mention which forms of radiation can NOT be used for the transmission of energy
- Tesla does describe various experiments in which energy is transmitted
I do not think that a direct quote such as you are looking for exists. The best thing we can do is look at what we DO have and reconstruct it in todays terminology.

On the experiment that you quote... That is a simulation experiment, that is why I said

I do not remember having read that he actually uses this type of transmission in a (real) experiment.

All actual experiments that I can now think of, I believe he uses the earth to conduct the electric energy or particle beams. But there may be some experiment that either I do not know of or that escapes my memories at this time.

On vector calculus: this
was the (first of three) video that I thought is very helpful for visualising the concepts of div, grad and curl. Once you can visualise this, try to imagine the universe filled with ether and currents running through wires dragging ether outside the wire along. You can then see the vortices of magnetism appear. And of course the other way around.
It will also become clear why a constant current induces a constant magnetic field, while a constant magnetic field does not induce potential differences and therefor no current.
You need a change in magnetic 'speed' (either faster or slower) in order to create a potential difference.
Then if you want more try to find a copy of "Div, grad, curl and all that". It is easy to read and more or less "all there is to it".

Good luck!

Ernst.

[Farmhand]

Hi Ernst, I'm not looking for quotes from Tesla on radiation in particular, I'm
looking for quotes by Tesla on Longitudinal "waves" or such with respect
directly to the operation of the Energy Transmitters patented for the
transmission of energy by the atmospheric conduction or the ground currents.

Nikola Tesla On His Work With Alternating Currents -- Chapter IV

Demonstration for the patent examiner.

Having discovered that, I established conditions under which I might operate in putting up a practical commercial plant. When the matter came up in the patents before the Examiner, I arranged this experiment [shown in Fig. 78] for him in my Houston Street laboratory.

I took a tube 50 feet long, in which I established conditions such as would exist in the atmosphere at a height of about 4 1/2 miles, a height which could be reached in a commercial enterprise, because we have mountains that are 5 miles high; and, furthermore, in the mountainous regions we have often great water power, so that the project of transmitting it, if the plan was rational, would be practicable.

Then, on the basis of the results I had already obtained, I established those conditions, practically, in my laboratory.

I used that coil which is shown in my patent application of September 2, 1897 (Patent No. 645,576 of March 20, 1900), the primary as described, the receiving circuit, and lamps in the secondary transforming circuit, exactly as illustrated there.

And when I turned on the current, I showed that through a stratum of air at a pressure of 135 millimeters, when my four circuits were tuned, several incandescent lamps were lighted.

and true again. Though I do not remember having read that he actually uses this type of transmission in a (real) experiment. Whenever he does transmit power, he mostly does so through the earth. I will have to think hard to see if I can remember one of his experiments where he does not use the earth.
I'll try to find something for you. I feel you are trying to say that Tesla never used longitudinal electricity through the air, he was using longitudinal electricity through the earth... Is that right?

Not sure, I'm not a learned guy, I have to try to make my own conclusions.
The Earth currents travel by conduction as well, obviously, I just don't think
there needs to be a second path back to the transmitter because of the
terminal reference.

Here is the quote on the process through the atmosphere it has a return
through the Earth, I assume, it's not clearly stated.

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, on the basis of my experiments in my laboratory on Houston Street, the insulating layer of air, which separates the conducting layer of air from the conducting surface of the earth, is shown to scale as you see it here. Those [radii lines] are 60 of the circumference of the earth, and you may notice that faint white line, a little bit of a crack, that extends between those two conductors. 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, because such a thing is impossible, but it will travel by conduction and will be recovered in this [emphasis in original] way. Had I drawn this white line to scale on the basis of my Colorado experiments, it would be so thin that you would have to use a magnifying glass to see it.

For the wireless transmission of energy by the atmosphere he used two conductors,
the atmosphere and the Earth. For the wireless transmission of energy not
using the atmosphere he used only one conductor, the Earth. At least that is
how I see it in general.

Oh I am taking your hint about the vector calculus and intend to begin study
on some things.

Cheers

P.S. Now I forgot something. While it may be possible for radiation to be
reflected/deflected, when we talk in terms of radiation leaving a
system/device or radiation from a system/device I think it's gone by definition,
I think true radiation only travels in one direction and is lost to the system
which it originated from. Terms can be confusing, radiations can be emitted
and collected but radiation goes in all directions. Directed beams of energy or
particles are not radiations in my opinion. It's about control and intent.

If there is an effective intentional direction of waves I don't think it is radiation. Radiation - radii.

..

[Ernst]

Ok Farmhand,
a more direct answer then

I disagree with this statement below, the idea for making and breaking the
circuit in a radiant energy collector is to allow the energy to build before
applying it, in most cases.

I agree with you, then.

Just because he did "other" experiments at Colorado Springs doesn't mean
those other experiments were related to the actual transmission of energy.

Absolutely.
Concerning the document I refered you to; I do not agree with the author of that document on many points. But when you are looking for quotes from Tesla on radiation then this document is a very good starting point.

Yes well what of the quote I gave above, he clearly states the currents he
passes into the Earth are stored there as electromagnetic momentum, is this
not analogous to a tank circuit ?

I would say you are correct again.

Resembling sound waves is "not" sound waves, just "like" sound waves. But I
don't see how longitudinal waves are not recognized if sound waves are
longitudinal.

I understand the first line, and agree there, but I do not understand the second line.

Sound waves resonate and reverberate and such whereas radiation does not.

Not sure on this one. I think various forms of EM radiation are known to resonate.

So any resonance in a tank is "like" sound waves. Seems like good Logic to me.

True.

The atmospheric transmissions he explains that the currents are transmitted by conduction.

and true again. Though I do not remember having read that he actually uses this type of transmission in a (real) experiment. Whenever he does transmit power, he mostly does so through the earth. I will have to think hard to see if I can remember one of his experiments where he does not use the earth.
I'll try to find something for you. I feel you are trying to say that Tesla never used longitudinal electricity through the air, he was using longitudinal electricity through the earth... Is that right?

Ernst.

[Farmhand]

Yes well what of the quote I gave above, he clearly states the currents he
passes into the Earth are stored there as electromagnetic momentum, is this
not analogous to a tank circuit ? Are the oscillations in a tank circuit "hertz" waves ?
Or are the oscillations in a tank circuit EM radiation ? Or are they
electromagnetic momentum of vibrations ? I don't think they are radiation.

Resembling sound waves is "not" sound waves, just "like" sound waves. But I
don't see how longitudinal waves are not recognized if sound waves are
longitudinal. Sound waves resonate and reverberate and such whereas
radiation does not. So any resonance in a tank is "like" sound waves.
Seems like good Logic to me.

Anyway the directed energy is a different concept to the transmission of
energy with the patented transmitters. I think he just intended using the transmitters
to transmit the energy to the energy directing device and/or control them (remotely)
and/or to produce the enormous potential to run the energy directing
apparatus..

The atmospheric transmissions he explains that the currents are transmitted
by conduction.

Nikola Tesla On His Work With Alternating Currents -- Chapter IV

By direct quotes I mean to words written by Tesla or recorded from what he actually said, in context.

Cheers

[Ernst]

Forgot....

Tesla does mention that the waves he uses for energy transmission resemble sound waves.
This is probably the statement that comes closest to what you are looking for?
Sound waves are longitudinal as opposed to 'Herzian waves'.

Ernst.

[Ernst]

I think this Andre gives a very good overview of all instances where Tesla says something about the nature of radiation. He distinquishes a few forms.
When it comes to transmission of energy or electricity, he always says that 'Herzian waves' can not be used for this purpose.
Herzian waves are those that we today would call transverse EM radiation.
So it will have to be another form of radiation that he uses when he is talking about energy transfer through the air.
(in most cases, I believe, Tesla uses the earth to transfer the energy. And I have read somewhere that the ionossphere mirrors earths potential fluctuations, and vice versa. This would make it possible to transfer energy through capacitive coupling. But I forgot where I read this.)

Tesla clearly mentions that particle beams/radiation can be used for efficient energy transfer, but I believe in most cases he did not use this.

From this point on, we can only guess what kind of radiation he was using. But by reconstructing his work we should be able to do some educated guess work.

Ernst.

[Farmhand]

I was actually looking for direct quotes from Tesla in relation to the
transmission of energy with regard to his improved transmitter using
longitudinal waves or whatever.

Many things are surmised or confusingly lumped in together, Tesla showed
two ways of wireless transmission, by atmosphere and by the ground. And
radiant energy receivers are not the intended main receivers for transmissions
from a transmitter.

I disagree with this statement below, the idea for making and breaking the
circuit in a radiant energy collector is to allow the energy to build before
applying it, in most cases. Otherwise the current is feeble. Although a radiant
energy receiver can in fact supply energy to a transmitter I don't see how it
could effectively transmit as an oscillator and at the same time collect from
the elevated terminal.

Just because he did "other" experiments at Colorado Springs doesn't mean
those other experiments were related to the actual transmission of energy.

Quote from near the end.

"He has operated his
radiations receiver as an oscillator with interrupter circuitry. And if one is only interested
to collect free charges one does not continuously break the (direct) current flow. This
alternating oscillation induction in the receiver does only make sense if one is interested
in resonance coupling!"

http://www.andre-waser.ch/Publicatio...CosmicRays.pdf

Cheers

[Ernst]

@ Farmhand,
Have a look here
This is a pretty complete overview (I believe) of Tesla's work on various forms of radiation.
Since at that time (and in fact still today) there was little known about the nature of the various forms of radiation, you will not hear Tesla speak in todays terminology. But as you read this paper you will realise that Tesla was way ahead of his contemporaries on this subject as well.

And how about today's knowledge on EM radiation?
These are photons,... no,... waves,... no,... photons,... erhm, wavylike particles that have no mass when at rest. But they never are at rest, they always move at the speed of light. Hence their 0-mass is multiplied by infinity, to give a small (lucky us) mass so they can have momentum.
Therefor they are also attracted by gravitation, which alters their speed, which is constant, especially near objects like black holes. Then they also interact with eachother creating interference patterns where it looks like 2 photons annihilate leaving no trace of their energy nor momentum. Which of course is impossible so we come up with photons in superposition; traveling more than 1 path at the same time.
This may sound a little bit far-fetched-ish, but this is actually todays science.
I had seen a video on youtube about 2 years ago giving an alternative explanation for experimental data without needing to resort to these (or other) obscure particles. I remember it was pretty convincing, something about treating an EM wave as a string of capacitors.

Ernst.

[Farmhand]

Since this is all Tesla related I've been looking for references made by Tesla
to a longitudinal wave ect. I admit I haven't read much as yet but I see no
reference by Tesla as so far to longitudinal waves/electricity. But I did find
this quote below. Which clearly states the the energy of the currents he
passes into the Earth are stored as "Electromagnetic momentum of the vibrations. To me that says LC tank.

Nikola Tesla On His Work With Alternating Currents -- Chapter IV

Counsel

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 have my doubts he actually described a longitudinal wave/component in
relation to these devices.

Could someone provide a reference where Tesla clearly refers to or describes
this longitudinal component ?

Cheers

[GSM]

The action at a distance of which I write is via EM radiation from matter, and to matter.

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

[Ernst]

This thread was intended to get rid of some 'disinformation' and if one reads it and understands it, I am pretty sure it will do so.
Yet it seems there is an aweful lot more work to be done in this field...

Action at a distance....
Matter can not act where it is not. I am probably 10.000 Km away from you, or more. This makes it impossible for me to push you off your chair, no matter how great my desire to do so. I could set my kitchen tap so that it drips at the earth's resonance frequency and, supposing that the energy in a falling drop of water can overcome all frictional losses involved in this process, after some time (years) this may have build up enough energy to do the trick.
But it is not I who then pushes you from your chair, it is the earth which conveys my carefully applied force. Or... I have been quite successfull in the manufacturing of acetone peroxide. If I could prepare some ridiculous amount of that, maybe I could create an airflow powerfull enough to do the trick. But again, it is not me who pushes you of your chair (a court may judge different, though) it is the air blast that conveys the force.
So how do 2 magnets then repell or attract each other? There we clearly see 'action at a distance'.
How do electric charges attract or repell? How does gravity attract?
How does an electric current induce an electric current in another wire?
These are all 'actions at a distance'.
So there are 2 things I can do:
- stay with my believe that 'matter can not act where it is not'
- change my believe into 'matter CAN act where it is not'.

I will do the first and I believe most scientists do the same. Yet for me it is easy because I am a believer of the ether, all the above phenomena can be explained by (inter-)actions of this media. For me it is: "Case closed."
Most modern scientists however refuse the concept of ether and try to solve the experienced phenomena in different ways which leads to:
- massless particles which do have momentum
- curved space
- fields, which is a word for a 'nothing' that is allowed to act upon 'somethings'
- superpositions (things that 'are' and 'are not' at the same time)
etc. etc...
Recent additions are:
Scalar waves... (???) A scalar is defined as a 'quantity' without direction as opposed to a vector which is defined as a 'quantity and a direction'. Motion always comes with a direction. So something represented by a scalar (instead of a vector) does not have motion. A wave implies motion, and so these word (scalar and wave) contradict.
Much like 'living dead', 'black light', 'silent noise', and indeed 'massless particle'.
....
(I wanted to add one more example, but I can't remember now. Could it have been 'trustworthy government'? 'a bank working in your interest?' 'democratic elections'? Outside the field of science there is so much to choose from, but I had another scientific example in mind)

Anyway, when it comes to fighting disinformation, there is still a lot of work to be done.

Ernst.