Radiant Energy

[pha3z]

@ boguslaw: I guess I wasn't totally clear. Its not an issue of controlling sparking/arcing I'm confused about. From what I understand, a vacuum tube can be used as a spark gap, but I already know that. I'm asking about switching: how to open and close the circuit repeatedly like you would do with a commutator. If you can somehow use ONLY a vacuum tube and a capacitor to get repeatedly open/close cycles, then please tell me how. I don't understand. Not having to use mechanical means whatsoever would be really nice.

[Xenomorph]

Like boguslaw brought up, just google for "Thyratron", it is a tube used for switching.

[Aromaz]

@ boguslaw: I guess I wasn't totally clear. Its not an issue of controlling sparking/arcing I'm confused about. From what I understand, a vacuum tube can be used as a spark gap, but I already know that. I'm asking about switching: how to open and close the circuit repeatedly like you would do with a commutator. If you can somehow use ONLY a vacuum tube and a capacitor to get repeatedly open/close cycles, then please tell me how. I don't understand. Not having to use mechanical means whatsoever would be really nice.

Again: Refer to Inquarate's extensive work on this:
Your switch is the spark gap. Your on-off action is the magnetic effect.
The moment the electrons jumps the gap and short out (negative) at that same
moment the magnet terminate it. This way you reach the ultimate in high
frequency with high voltage. The frequency is adjusted by the distance
between the spark probes.

The valve (Vaccum Tube) only came later - to reduce the effects of oxidation
and 'dissociation' of the terminals (Probes); purely - remove the oxygen and ozone.

[Inquorate]

@ aromaz, thanks for the tip of the hat

Thought I'd post a few videos that might get people started on experiments

YouTube - c30kv magnetic diode proof of concept

YouTube - magnetic diode + transistor theory 101

YouTube - ignition coil experiments

YouTube - presentation on the properties of the aether, part 1

YouTube - development of circuit to drive hairpin with 60kv ac

[pha3z]

@ Inquorate: Outstanding videos. Wonderful presentation! Keep it up.

I have a response to your magnetic field and spark gap diode theory.

Eric Dollard has a presentation called "Transverse and Longitudinal Electric Waves" produced under the organization Borderlands Sciences. The video is available on youtube. In his video, he shows a book called "Electric Discharges, Waves, and Impulses and Other Transients." by Charles Steinmetz. The diagram shown in this book (which I have a copy of BTW) clearly indicates that any current traveling through a medium creates both a magnetic field and dielectric field. The lines of electrostatic force caused by voltage make up the dielectric field. In the beginning of this book, Steinmetz discusses transients and permanents. He defines a transient as any energy, variable, or mechanism in a circuit which is CHANGING. A permanent is an energy, variable, or mechanism which is in a constant unchanging state. After talking about this, Steinmetz then describes oscillatory patterns which usually occur due to transients. One such oscillation could be the transfer of energy back and forth between magnetic and dielectric fields.

You were saying that you don't fully understand why the spark won't jump in opposing direction and THEN be quenched afterward by the magnetic field. I'm going to propose this possible explanation: In order for any spark to begin at all, the dielectric field -- which contains stored energy -- must cause current to flow through the gap. However, if this transfer of energy from the dielectric were to occur, the energy would have to simultaneously transfer into a magnetic field around the current flow. Because the opposing magnetic field is so strong, no such event can occur. This can be viewed as a total suppression of transfer of energy between the coupled magnetic and dielectric fields.

Perhaps, you could view the electric field coupling sort of like the coupling of two magnetic fields in the coils of a transformer. It is the nature of the electric field that a transverse magnetic field and longitudinal dielectric field are always coupled. If you oppose one, you oppose the other simultaneously -- at least to some degree. What you've done here is force the total of energy storage to be contained only in the dielectric field because you have completely suppressed the magnetic counterpart. If the coupling between magnetic field and dielectric field weren't so strong, then the spark would be allowed to form before it was quenched -- as you had first thought.

Steinmetz isn't Tesla, and I'm neither one of them. But I'm looking at what Steinmetz said and offering another view. Also, keep in mind that my view is not necessarily in competition with your view. You are looking at the molecular level, while I am describing this from the field view. To understand my view, one must understand that any conductor ALWAYS has both a dielectric AND magnetic field around it -- you cannot escape that -- you can only effect which of the fields is stronger and how they are contained.

Let me know your thoughts.
Anyway, I'm going to continue on with watching your other videos now.

[Inquorate]

@ pha3z - thanks for your comments, IMO you're right on the money, I don't see why the two descriptions can't be both right

[Aromaz]

What if . . .

I am just so tempted to throw a nuke in the toolbox:

@pha3z: What if the electricity is a by-product from the magnetic;
and not the current believe that Magnetic is by-product of electricity?

[Inquorate]

I am just so tempted to throw a nuke in the toolbox:

@pha3z: What if the electricity is a by-product from the magnetic;
and not the current believe that Magnetic is by-product of electricity?

That would make sense I think; we can have magnetic fields on their own but we cannot have electricity without magnetic fields.

It would also explain why a collapsing magnetic field can contribute extra charge to a system.

[Aromaz]

That would make sense I think; we can have magnetic fields on their own but we cannot have electricity without magnetic fields.
It would also explain why a collapsing magnetic field can contribute extra charge to a system.

I am not sure yet, this I will have to go LAB extensively. Should it be true,
it will answer a lot of current questions; but will also create lots of new ones.

However I was set onto this from our old experiments: Energy sometimes
flow regardless of diodes. More than that; it will explain your very old
question: How come the electrons 'knows' where to go in case of spark
gap, and the how come of elastic appearance of electrons/electricity.

Did you ever notice how new energy discoveries and experiments suddenly
came to a halt some 80-100 years ago? Now there is so much happening
again. As if we have Century leaps. We truly live in exciting times and
I believe we are standing on the doorstep of a complete new live -
scientifically.

[pha3z]

I am just so tempted to throw a nuke in the toolbox:

@pha3z: What if the electricity is a by-product from the magnetic;
and not the current believe that Magnetic is by-product of electricity?

Aromaz, I believe you are right on the money. I was hesitant to go so far to wording things like this because I am so new to what I am researching and learning. But I believe you are precisely right.

Eric Dollard and Peter Lindemann have pointed out that the dielectric field can cause what is called "electronic activity" in a conductor -- i.e. the presence of a dielectric field causes electrons to move. It is NOT the other way around. Bearing in mind that the Electric field has two components: magnetism and dielectricity, it may be erroneous to say that moving current induces magnetism.

What is very interesting is that Tom Bearden and some other physicists have pointed out that it is a theoretical possibility that you could create a 98% aluminum / 2% iron alloy and utilize an very fast switching mechanism and create a circuit in which ZERO current is allowed to move. Every single electron will be trapped and stay that way if you only hit it with a voltage for a brief time under said conditions. Of course, the applied voltage would still issue forth a vibration in the dielectric field. Yay!!

But if you look at things like this it still brings up a question. If you establish a permanent voltage gradient between two points on a circuit and current is allowed to flow permanently (we have no transients -- changing variables), then how are the dielectric and magnetic fields forming around the conductor? It is easy to understand the idea that a rapid closure and opening of a circuit causes a wave to issue forth and to cause shockwaves to emanate from the conductor. But what in the world is happening in the case of a permanent direct current? Is it perhaps that at this point we DO have to consider things from a molecular standpoint? The electron flow is not really a smooth flow at all, but rather billions of rapid collisions happening? Could we then consider that each transfer of energy from one subatomic colliding movement to the following is causing a dielectric and magnetic wave to issue forth? If that is the case, then direct current is nothing more than billions of individual vibrations which are actually happening randomly. This begins to bring the whole idea of energy waste to into perspective. Now we can see why oscillations and resonance create great efficiency. In a non-resonant direct current system we have 99.99999% waste.

Your thoughts?

[wings]

@ aromaz, thanks for the tip of the hat

Thought I'd post a few videos that might get people started on experiments

YouTube - c30kv magnetic diode proof of concept

YouTube - magnetic diode + transistor theory 101

YouTube - ignition coil experiments

YouTube - presentation on the properties of the aether, part 1

YouTube - development of circuit to drive hairpin with 60kv ac

such experiments can emit microwaves ?
like ....

ISTF2008: Cutting the Cord - Microwave Generators
radar

[pha3z]

I believe that if you consider the above theory, it also continues to explain how electrons "know where to go". They don't know where to go whatsoever. Its the dielectric field that does the work. The dielectric field reaches out to paths of higher capacitance. It happens just teh same as how the magnetic field reaches out to ferrous materials because of the lower reluctance as the lattice realigns.

Since the dielectric field establishes itself across a spark gap, once the field is strong enough to overcome the resistance of the medium, electron flow occurs. If electron flow occurs in a vacuum, it must be electrons actually jumping clear across the whole gap. But when it occurs in a non-vacuum, the dielectric field usually ionizes the medium first and so the vibrations cause movement through the medium.

Thinking of the vacuum scenario makes it vividly obvious to see how wireless transmission can occur even with no electron propagation. If you could send a vibration through the circuit fast enough and under conditions to prevent any electron movement from occuring, the dielectric field will reach across the spark gap (even though no spark or arc happens) and cause vibration in the circuit on the other side of the gap. Of course, you don't need a spark gap to cause this. The dielectric field is going to propagate out to space wherever it has to. It always does -- just like magnetism again. But the field is going to prefer to establish itself between sources of capacitance.

[pha3z]

Here's a link to that Eric Dollard video:
Tesla transverse and longitudinal electric waves

if you have not seen this video, I highly suggest you watch it. He has another one as well. But in the beginning of this one, he shows shots of the electric field from the 1914 (tragic that we have to go back this far) book by Steinmetz. For me, this has been one of the answers to the whole puzzle. After having it shown to me that there are two components to the electric field and now understanding that all electron movement is only a by-product of the work of these two fields, so many things seem simple.

This video is also good for anyone who is not familiar with the concept of electrostatic Inductance. In the same way that electromagnetic inductance is able to magnetically couple conductors and cause electrical movement, electrostatic inductance produces a dielectric coupling which also causes electrical movement. Electrostatic inductance is actually the principle key by which Tesla coils operate (at least under Tesla's conditions) -- sadly, most of their operators don't even realize this. Most people only know about magnetic inductance.

[pha3z]

CLARIFICATION ON ABOVE: I should clarify that when I said "subatomic collisions" above that I am not describing collisions in the material sense. What I'm actually talking about is changes in pressure due to electrical fields (keeping in mind that this always means dielectric and magnetic components) coming in close range to one another at a molecular level. This chaotic field movement is what causes electrons to move.

[pha3z]

such experiments can emit microwaves ?
like ....

ISTF2008: Cutting the Cord - Microwave Generators
radar

From the article you linked:
ISTF2008: Cutting the Cord - Microwave Generators

Ironically, that article talks about "electrical conduction." And if the theory I'm trying to support in the above posts is correct, then technically, there is no such thing as electrical conduction. What appears to be traversal of electricity down a wire by conduction is really just a vibration of the electric fields. This is same thing we see with magnets and static fields at a macro level but happening on a micro level.

Also, that article talks about the way electrons are supposedly manipulated by the magnetic field. I'm wondering if what's happening is being viewed all wrong. It may be more accurate to say that what's happening is a change of the dielectric field due to the fact that its coupled to the magnetic field. I feel confident in saying that electron movement does not create microwaves. Microwaves are alternations of a specific frequency (the microwave frequency) in the electric field.

I would definitely like to hear aromaz and inquorate's thoughts on this.

Also, Inqorate's experiments would not be creating microwaves unless the frequency of his circuit is tuned such that the fundamental is microwave frequency or one of the overtones is microwave frequency. And the odds of that happening are probably slim. But for safety's sake, maybe it would be smart to be aware of what frequency's we work with.

Keep in mind that when people talk about "microwaves", the traditionally sense of the word is applied to the electroMAGNETIC wave form. Tesla thought using electromagnetic wave was completely stupid. He emphasized that we should be using scalar dielectric waves because they are far more efficient and powerful. I think they also play nicer with the human body -- though research to support this is lacking.