Radiant Energy

[Aaron]

The purpose of this thread is to discuss what radiant energy is.

Here is Nikola Tesla's paper On Light and other High Frequency Phenomena

At the bottom of that paper is a link to download the PDF.

[lighty]

@Lindemann

I watched your DVD of lecture on radiant energy. Some of the requirements as I understand them are:

1. The mass of material of primary and secondary has to be equal as precisely as possible. That is the requirement proposed by Tesla regarding his high frequency coils and especially his flat archimedean spiral coils. I may be way of the track on this one but it seems to me that the amount of the dielectric charge (or rather the density of dielectric lines of force) are in some way proportional to the mass of the conductor or rather to the number of atoms available in order to resonate and produce radiant energy event. For example I've conducted a number of experiments in which I compared the highly saturated high quality ferrite core with small airgap (in order to increase the saturation point and to store more magnetic flux in the airgap- I'm talking about 0.1mm airgap and smaller number of turns of conductor. I compared it with the extremely heavy coils with smaller core (in this case Metglas ones- I used them for their high permeability and extremely narrow hysteresis curve) and open geometry (pretty much similar to the Bedini SG coil). Of course one can produce pretty much the same voltage spikes on both coils but the coil with the more conductor mass exhibit a somewhat different properties. For example the discharge of the capacitor filled with the Back-EMF from the ferrite core showed different properties compared to the discharge of the capacitors filled with the BEMF from the massive coil. I'm talking here mostly about visual and auditive quality of the discharge. My guess is that a mass of conductor definitely plays some role in the way coil produces BEMF.

2. The surface area of the conductors definitely plays a role in radiant energy release. The fact is that a Litz wire or a flat strip of conductor material shows much better properties dealing with sudden impulses. I also compared several types of wire in the pretty much similar conditions (same core, same number of ampere turns, same current and same saturation of core. The BEMF curve of the Litz wire and flat strip wire are much more steeper (thus more sudden in time) and goes to the much higher voltage. I couldn't believe a geometry could make such a difference but it did. My guess is that a conductor tube would exhibit pretty much similar characteristics- in fact I used copper tubing for Tesla induction coils primaries and they definitely show more appropriate behavior and less loses than the full conductor profiles. Of course much of that behavior can be attributed to the lower impedance those kind of big surface conductor shows when dealing with sudden impulses. The other thing I observed is that Litz wire coils sometimes gain by separating of their turns somewhat. The flat strip conductors also benefit if one winds them in a way to be oriented edgewise to each other. It surely lower their inter-capacitance and probably contribute to the lowering of the impedance of coil itself. Skin effect also plays a role in that effect but I'm not sure to what extent.

3. For Tesla resonant system it's advisable to have secondary set to 1/4 wavelength of the resonant frequency. Tesla himself advise in that direction and although I never experimentally tried that rule I guess there must be some rationale behind it. I know that if some conditions are met a stationary wave can be produced and in energy transfer it plays significant role. To be honest I'm still learning about this stuff so please cope with me as much as you can.

4. When talking about BEMF as a kind of radiant event I've learned that inductance plays significant role. With higher inductance one usually gets more severe potential gradient change (measuring with an oscilloscope it means one gets higher voltage spikes). With lowering of capacitive component of impedance voltage spikes go even higher- it's probably why flat strip conductor (for one layer coils- I've never tried multilayer coils of this type) shows significant advantage over ordinary round- profile conductor. It's surface is also extremely large so it could also play a role regarding a skin effect.


So here it is- and although there is so much more I could say about the results I obtained for now I will reduce my ranting on refining my knowledge on the phenomena I talked about. I've based my conclusions on practical experiments but my interpretation oethe results might be wrong so feel free to correct me. I'm always glad if someone disprove my conclusions with solid arguments so that I can learn more about the topic in question.

[Peter Lindemann]

Lighty, excellent!

Lighty,

Thank you for opening up such an intelligent conversation. The most important thing here is not to be "right" or "wrong", but that you are learning, experimenting, and thinking deeply about what you are seeing in your experiments! Congratulations.

There are two issues here. The first issue is the PRODUCTION of radiant energy and the second is the EFFICIENT TRANSFER of radiant energy.

The first issue is covered by Tesla in his work on the "Method of Conversion", that is, the conversion of "normal electricity" into "longitudinal waves of electrostatic force" otherwise known as Radiant Energy. As I show in my DVD, Tesla's Radiant Energy patents clearly state that Radiant Energy is defined as electrostatic charge CONVEYED by Radiant Matter. Radiant Matter is made up of neutral particles of mass at least 100 times smalled than electrons. The general "Method of Conversion" is to charge an inductor with intermittent DC current, and collect the inductive discharges in a capacitor. Then, discharge the capacitor into another inductor of high self-inductance and low impedance, to raise the voltage even higher for use in lighting systems or stepper type motors. When studying Tesla's "Method of Conversion" it becomes obvious that he was talking about a very broad phenomena. The original diagram shows SIX different processes, all of which produce variations on the Method.

The term "Radiant Energy" evolved from Tesla's friendship with and admiration of Sir William Crookes. Crookes invented the Radiometer, a device Tesla referred to as the most elegant motor ever devised. Crookes was studying the effects relating to the emissions from incandescent matter. The question was, when a piece of mass is heated to the point where it starts to emit light and heat, what EXACTLY is coming out of the matter that conveys these properties into the surrounding space? The Radiometer demonstrated that these emissions had MASS and could convey a PHYSICAL FORCE to another object. Tesla came to believe that ANY source of light and heat, such as the Sun, was emitting "whatever" is emitted when MATTER RADIATES! Whatever that was, was termed "Radiant Matter." Since it could go right through the glass enclosure of the Radiometer WITHOUT disrupting the vacuum inside, the determination was that the particle size was INFINITESIMALLY SMALL. Tesla's later experiments determined that these Radiant Matter particles where the primary CONVEYOR of electrostatic charge.

When I can, I will discuss the second issue you bring up.

Peter

[Aaron]

back emf vs. collapsed magnetic field

For example the discharge of the capacitor filled with the Back-EMF from the ferrite core showed different properties compared to the discharge of the capacitors filled with the BEMF from the massive coil. I'm talking here mostly about visual and auditive quality of the discharge. My guess is that a mass of conductor definitely plays some role in the way coil produces BEMF.

Hi Lighty,

To my understanding, back emf and the collapsed coil's voltage potential are two different things that happen at two different times.

The back emf is happening at the exact same time that a current is induced into a coil. There is the forward induction and then the back emf is counter induced and is explained by the Lenz law.

After the coil is charged and the back emf event happens and the coil power is turned off, the build up magnetic field collapses in reverse polarity and fills the capacitor with voltage potential free or mostly free of electron current and therefore no back emf in that event since it is for the most part, just voltage potential and not current.

So when Bedini's circuits for example are charging capacitors, it does so with radiant energy or the voltage potential free of current instead of charging a capacitor with back emf or electron current.

Someone else may be able to clarify the distinction between back emf/counter current and voltage potential/collapsed field

[lighty]

I think the main problem is the lack of proper terminology practice. I use the term to label the induced EMF of the higher value and reverse polarity than the voltage of the source inducing the original current flow (and thus magnetic field) that manifests itself when the conductance of the coil circuit goes suddenly to zero and the magnetic field collapses very fast. Now look at this very vague definition that is somewhat contradictory in itself Counter-electromotive force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When I think of it I cannot remember a proper term used in electronics. The phenomena is mostly labeled as detrimental as it might burn out the semiconductor devices (and thus all the protective snubber circuitry usually engineered in the circuitry) and simply calls it "transient phenomena". While that term is appropriate because it is transient phenomena it's at the same time very vague so no luck there. Just look at here Snubber - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia In relation to the transil diodes it's only mentioned that they protect circuit from the "voltage spikes". Transient voltage suppression diode - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


So what would be the proper terminology for that fast transient phenomena?

[Peter Lindemann]

What is Back EMF?

I think the main problem is the lack of proper terminology practice. I use the term to label the induced EMF of the higher value and reverse polarity than the voltage of the source inducing the original current flow (and thus magnetic field) that manifests itself when the conductance of the coil circuit goes suddenly to zero and the magnetic field collapses very fast. Now look at this very vague definition that is somewhat contradictory in itself Counter-electromotive force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When I think of it I cannot remember a proper term used in electronics. The phenomena is mostly labeled as detrimental as it might burn out the semiconductor devices (and thus all the protective snubber circuitry usually engineered in the circuitry) and simply calls it "transient phenomena". While that term is appropriate because it is transient phenomena it's at the same time very vague so no luck there. Just look at here Snubber - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia In relation to the transil diodes it's only mentioned that they protect circuit from the "voltage spikes". Transient voltage suppression diode - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


So what would be the proper terminology for that fast transient phenomena?

Lighty, Aaron, and anybody else who cares,

OK folks, here is the real answer. The Wikipedia definition for Counter Electromotive Force (CEMF) actually covers the territory pretty well. It is just a little short on detail. Technically, BACK EMF is the reverse voltage generated in an electric motor that is responsible for holding back the current when the motor speeds up. My DVD Electric Motor Secrets shows exactly what the BACK EMF is and how it works.

CEMF is any other reverse induction in an inductor that slows down the increase or decrease in the applied current. This process is described by Lenz Law, where ANY induced current opposes the movement of the magnetic field that induced it. So, when a DC square-wave pulse is applied to a coil of wire, the voltage reaches its maximum value nearly instantaneously, whereas the current rises to its maximum value on a ramp-wave with a specific time constant. The current cannot rise instantaneously, like the voltage, because the current in one turn of the coil is causing CEMF inductions in other turns of the coil nearby. So the current fights itself to reach its maximum value. These processes only happen when the current is CHANGING, either rising or dropping in value.

In the older books, the distinction between these two processes, or the names used to describe them was not made. Many names for electrical processes changed in the 1950's and 1960's. Cycles-per-second became Hertz, CEMF became Back EMF and lots of other things. It is no wonder that there is confusion about these things.

The most important thing to understand in all of this is that all of these phenomena follow ELECTROMAGNETIC INDUCTION LAWS. Currents are induced in relationship to the strength of the magnetic field and voltages are induced based on the rate-of-change of that flux. In standard transformer operations, voltages in the output winding (secondary) cannot exceed the voltage in the input winding (primary) times the turns ratio between the primary and the secondary.

The appearance of the very short duration, very high voltage transient, when the current powering an inductor on DC is shut OFF, does not follow these Laws, especially on CLOSE OBSERVATION. John Bedini has spent 30 years studying this situation and has articulated most accurately the conditions to maximize the production of this voltage spike. I refer to this situation as the energy of "the inductive collapse", since that distinguishes it from other varieties of CEMFs. The voltage producing phenomena produces a different QUALITY of electricity, according to the "Method of Conversion" described by Tesla. In fact, charging and discharging an inductor is the FIRST STEP in Tesla's "Method of Conversion" and the first step in the process of producing PURE Radiant Energy.

According to Tesla, the "fast transient phenomena" is a Longitudinal Wave, a time compressed zone of electrostatic charge or pure voltage, traveling ahead of the electron current. It appears BEFORE the current starts moving and is separate and distinct from it.

I hope this helps.

Peter

[lighty]

Thank you for opening up such an intelligent conversation. The most important thing here is not to be "right" or "wrong", but that you are learning, experimenting, and thinking deeply about what you are seeing in your experiments! Congratulations.

Well, thank you but I owe that fact mostly to you since it's been your article on MWO published by BSRF which interested me in this area of research in the first place. I really have nothing but respect for your research and for your skills as the talented popularizer of hard to understand topics.

The general "Method of Conversion" is to charge an inductor with intermittent DC current, and collect the inductive discharges in a capacitor.

Indeed it's the basic principle used by Tesla as it's obvious simply by observing the designs of various Tesla oscillators (as he called them himself). There is one thing I observed that is not so obvious at the first look. The polarity of the "fast transient phenomena" of the induction discharge used will to some degree determine the behavior of the system. For example I discovered by experiment that the - polarity of the inductive discharge doesn't behave the same as the + polarity of the inductive discharge. One would think that they're the same because it's the same if you watch either polarity voltage on the oscilloscope but in reality there are some strange things going on with semiconductors when using - polarity of the inductive discharge as well as some very odd behavior of the oscilloscope probe itself. I suspect that grounding of the oscilloscope is interacting with the - polarity of inductive discharge and it causes some serious troubles during the measurement rendering them practically unusable. I alway wondered why Bedini uses handheld oscilloscope. The thing about handhelds is that they should behave much more stable because of their floating power supply is not connected to ground in any way.

Also, if one end of the inductive discharge coil is grounded the transient voltage effect is diminished to some extent or at least changed slightly in it's nature. My guess is that any ground path in the circuit will simply allow the excessive dielectric charge to be leveled out with the surrounding media and thus effectively neutralizing it to some extent. Maybe I'm mistaken but to me it seems only logical.

As I wrote earlier there are some rules that I find must be observed in order to get the better results but I was wondering if you could elaborate some more on the best design of the coils for inductive discharge and on the methods of achieving the highest inductance with least impedance. I mean one could lower the capacitive component of impedance the way I described before but is there some other things that should be observed in order to achieve optimal results?

Your input on this matter would be much appreciated.

[lighty]

I refer to this situation is the energy of "the inductive collapse", since that distinguishes it from other varieties of CEMFs.

OK, now that is indeed a good description of what is going on and I choose to use that term in the future instead of the more vague Back-EMF.

It appears BEFORE the current starts moving and is separate and distinct from it.

Indeed. Now, it would be most useful if one could limit the movement of the electrons during the charging of capacitors with the inductive collapse voltage or rather with the dielectric charge. One could of course try putting an inductor between inductive collapse inductor and the capacitor in order to limit the electron flow to capacitor. Now, if that capacitor is then discharged into next inductor and then the same electron move limiting inductor is used to limit the electron flow to the next stage capacitor one could maybe make a kind of cascade connection to purify the dielectric charge toward the end of such cascade. Do you have any ideas on how to do that?

In one experiment I used + polarity of the inductive collapse and I put an aircore inductor in series with it. Now, when the opposite end of the series inductor was slowly removed from the ground (to where it was connected in the first place) there was produced an extremely powerful continuous arc of the most peculiar nature (of course the inductive collapse coil was in the high frequency function all the time). First of all it was a rather constant arc without any interruptions and it could be drawn a few millimeters before becoming extinguished. The other peculiar thing was the fact that the arc produced a sound just like the high frequency plasma. The spectra of arc was green to blue and it produced extreme heat enough for me to weld two small pieces of steel together. And all of that exclusively by using the inductive discharge of very small magnitude and with rather low power used to power the inductive collapse coil with rather low voltages gained in the range of 95-120V but I must again accentuate the fact that I used the + polarity of the inductive collapse. My guess is that a kind of positive plasma was induced that showed some rather peculiar phenomena. Now, I tried doing the same with the - polarity of the inductive collapse but I was simply unable to make anything work because the system had common ground and it rendered extraction of the - polarity practically impossible.

I hope this helps.

You're being most helpful indeed!

[Mario]

Hi Lighty,

Have you tried a caduceus coil? It's supposed to have no impedance at all and a very narrow induction field in that, if you want to get two coils in resonance you have to align them with the precision of a laser beam.
Here you can download a doc.:

http://www.stealthskater.com/Documen...E/Caduceus.doc

regards

Mario

[lighty]

@Mario

No, I didn't try using Caduceus coil for the purpose of inductive discharge. I could try it in the next time period in order to discern the truth from myth. Lindemann got it right- there is a lot of theoretical work out there but much less practical experiments to prove or disprove those theories.

But you gave me an incentive to try it- at least to see if the claims about extremely low impedance are correct.

[Mario]

Hi Lighty,

I'm experimenting myself working on John's solid state circuits. I will try a caduceus coil soon, but first I have a lot of different options to test. Let me know how it works out if you get a chance to play with it!

regards

Mario

[Peter Lindemann]

Lighty, two answers.....

Lighty,

You are really learning this material, and it is very gratifying to see.

OK, how do you separate the electron flow (current) from the neutral particle flow (voltage)? Believe it or not, Tesla's simple method does it. So does John Bedini's methods. When an inductor is charged with DC current, the intensity of its magnetic field is described by the "ampere-turns" of the coil. When the magnetic field discharges, the voltage it produces is described by the "rate-of-change" of the flux. The flux changes are resisted by themselves, as we have discussed, due to Lenz Law effects.

So, if you discharge your inductive collapse energy into a capacitor, here is what happens. If the capacitor starts at ZERO volts, the first few inductive collapses deliver CURRENT pulses to bring the capacitor up to the voltage level of the source powering the coil. As this process continues, once the voltage in the capacitor gets ABOVE the power source charging the coil, the balance switches, and the coil must start generating more voltage to keep getting above the voltage already in the capacitor. If you have a current probe on your oscilloscope, watch the current pulses going into the cap. The energy of the inductive collapse constantly adjusts to produce more and more voltage and less and less current to keep the capacitor charging up.

Now it gets interesting. IF your inductor has a magnetic field that is completely closed down, like a standard transformer, the voltage level you can charge your capacitor to is only a few times higher than your power source. But, as John Bedini has shown, if the inductor is totally OPEN to the environment, (no closed magnetic field) the voltage produced by the inductive collapse can easily attain 30 times the level of your power supply. With really good air-core coils, I have seem some of John's oscillators produce voltages 50 times higher than the supply.

The question is why? The answer is LENZ LAW! As the capacitor charges up above the supply voltage, current CANNOT be pushed into the capacitor by standard ELECTROMAGNETIC INDUCTION LAWS. There is NO turns ratio gain for voltage production, so all voltage gain is by Tesla's ELECTROSTATIC INDUCTION LAWS. As the current in the discharge drops, the magnetic field can collapse faster and faster because the Back EMF caused by current is diminishing. This INCREASES the "rate-of-change" of flux and the voltage can rise to higher values.

At a certain point, there is no current left, at which point the voltage can rise to VERY HIGH VALUES. This is what Tesla discovered as he scaled these systems up.

So, the coil design suitable to receive the discharge of this capacitor is the primary coil of Tesla's flat spiral or conical coil "TRANSFORMER". That primary coil is always described as "a few turns of stout wire or copper strap." Look at the designs of the coils built by Eric Dollard in the old Borderlands videos. Why? The capacitor can take all of the VOLTAGE you put in it and discharge it in less than a microsecond, creating a HUGE CHANGE of dielectric flux, the quality of which is very low on electron movement. This is the time compressed electrostatic wave. The time-compression is all the time it took to charge the cap is given back in an instant.

The other thing you are seeing is the truth that "electricity is electricity" is a false theory. Electricity can and does appear as a wide variety of different QUALITIES of energy, depending on how the circuit is set up. Only experimental work will show you this. So, again, congratulations.

Keep up the great work.

Peter

[lighty]

If the capacitor starts at ZERO volts, the first few inductive collapses deliver CURRENT pulses to bring the capacitor up to the voltage level of the source powering the coil. As this process continues, once the voltage in the capacitor gets ABOVE the power source charging the coil, the balance switches, and the coil must start generating more voltage to keep getting above the voltage already in the capacitor. If you have a current probe on your oscilloscope, watch the current pulses going into the cap. The energy of the inductive collapse constantly adjusts to produce more and more voltage and less and less current to keep the capacitor charging up.

Indeed you're right- the effects you're describing are exactly what I was referring to in one of my earlier posts. I called it a "transformer effect" because in those first few pulses when the electron flow is charging the capacitor one can observe that there is anomalous current consumption going on in the "primary". I suspected that it also has something to do with the fact that Bedini is using a full bridge rectifier in his "secondary" and that such configuration is allowing for inductive coupling to transfer energy to the capacitor. I then used only a single diode in order to reduce that effect caused by inductive transfer from "primary" to "secondary". Indeed, a single diode did reduce the anomalous current consumption on the "primary" during the "charging phase" prior to inductive collapse. It's easily seen with the current clamp and fast DSO. It was then that by chance I observed that the negative and positive polarity of the inductive collapse charge doesn't behave the same way. I won't go further into that because I already wrote about that.

But, as John Bedini has shown, if the inductor is totally OPEN to the environment, (no closed magnetic field) the voltage produced by the inductive collapse can easily attain 30 times the level of your power supply. With really good air-core coils, I have seem some of John's oscillators produce voltages 50 times higher than the supply.

In fact 50 times higher voltage is easily achieved if a proper geometry, a proper core material and electronics are used. I can normally achieve a 18V/900V ratio and more is possible but for some reasons of design I have to use the semiconductors in the capacitive discharge circuit and I have to reduce voltage to remain <1kV to prevent a possible semiconductor voltage breakthrough. As I discovered several requirements have to be observed to achieve higher voltage impulses to capacitor and among them is the speed of diode (I use special extremely fast diodes), a semiconductor used to energize the coil should be chosen and driven in a way that would allow for extremely fast shutdown of current through coil and low leakage current after, a high-permeability narrow hysteresis material should be used (I use one form of material similar to Metglas), a precise control of the saturation point of core in order to shut down energizing semiconductor device in the exact moment of highest saturation in order to prevent losses and excessive heating of the components, and finally one should use as high frequency as possible (the coil in configuration I'm using is going up to 6kHz and is limited solely by the inductance of the coil and the time necessary to fully saturate the core). It took me quite some time to get a necessary understanding and control of the processes involved in order to meet all those requirements and still I learn something new every time I try some new approach.

The capacitor can take all of the VOLTAGE you put in it and discharge it in less than a microsecond, creating a HUGE CHANGE of dielectric flux, the quality of which is very low on electron movement. This is the time compressed electrostatic wave.

Exactly! A sudden change of the dielectric flux is what's Tesla was lecturing about and the thing that usually perplexes people is the fact that there is almost no electron movement involved but rather an electrostatic impulse of great magnitude able to produce a some sort of dielectric avalanche in the secondary. Of course that's the underlying principle but several things have to be observed in order for everything to work as described by Tesla such as the proper impulse control, the appropriate sparkgap, the position of the sparkgap in the system etc. I'm just getting into this field and I plan to do several experiments of my own in the near future.

Keep up the great work.

I'm doing the best I can and I can thank you for getting me interested in these topics several years back when I read your articles on MWO published by BSRF and especially with your book The Secrets of Cold Electricity. That was my primer in this field of research so I thank you for writing all down so eloquently and concise.

[Shad]

question to Dr. Lindemann

Dear Dr. Lindemann

As I understand to create the time compressed electrostatic wave and HUGE CHANGE of dielectric flux in the flat spiral or conical coil "TRANSFORMER" the spark gap is an important medium.

From the personal writings of Nikola Tesla, as well as from your lectures I understand that dialectrica used in a spark gap is very important.

Above you discussed the first step of radiant energy conversion, please allow me to scrutinize and analyze the second step.

In one of your lectures you said that the spike must be created in a way in the spark gap, that it will crack only once.

Tesla in in his personal notes says the same - the electric ark must be avoided. He describes that this electric ark is created in conductive gases, such as air, on the molecular level and the molecules are charged and discharged that quickly that thereby light is created. In this way light currents are caused and the energy is lost, therefore he made a magnetic spark gap to interrupt the electric ark. The best would be a dialectrica, such as vacuum, or something similar, that would lock up the spike, thus isolating it, while it 'bolts' through the spark gap.

The external appearance would be that 'is cracks only once', since no electric ark is created.

Could you give some suggestion on what dialectrica would be suitable for this kind of spark gap?

My greatest sympathies go towards vacuum tubes, but since they are very difficult to be manufactured, I would do a compromise and try liquid dialectrica, such as compressing transformer-oil, liquid hexane, or other liquid dialectrica in a spark gap.

What do you think about this? What kind of spark gaps did Dollard use?

Thank you very much and best of greetings,
Shad

[Peter Lindemann]

Let's look at fundamentals..

Dear Dr. Lindemann

As I understand to create the time compressed electrostatic wave and HUGE CHANGE of dielectric flux in the flat spiral or conical coil "TRANSFORMER" the spark gap is an important medium.

From the personal writings of Nikola Tesla, as well as from your lectures I understand that dialectrica used in a spark gap is very important.

Above you discussed the first step of radiant energy conversion, please allow me to scrutinize and analyze the second step.

In one of your lectures you said that the spike must be created in a way in the spark gap, that it will crack only once.

Tesla in in his personal notes says the same - the electric ark must be avoided. He describes that this electric ark is created in conductive gases, such as air, on the molecular level and the molecules are charged and discharged that quickly that thereby light is created. In this way light currents are caused and the energy is lost, therefore he made a magnetic spark gap to interrupt the electric ark. The best would be a dialectrica, such as vacuum, or something similar, that would lock up the spike, thus isolating it, while it 'bolts' through the spark gap.

The external appearance would be that 'is cracks only once', since no electric ark is created.

Could you give some suggestion on what dialectrica would be suitable for this kind of spark gap?

My greatest sympathies go towards vacuum tubes, but since they are very difficult to be manufactured, I would do a compromise and try liquid dialectrica, such as compressing transformer-oil, liquid hexane, or other liquid dialectrica in a spark gap.

What do you think about this? What kind of spark gaps did Dollard use?

Thank you very much and best of greetings,
Shad

Shad,

Dollard used large vacuum triodes for his Magnifying Transmitter, and glass enclosed hydrogen spark arresters for the other BSRF demonstrations.

But let's start at the beginning. What was Tesla trying to do? He was trying to produce a simple DC square-wave pulse train. But he didn't have ANY electronic control devices. No 555 timer chips. No transistors. No vacuum tubes. He only had coils, capacitors, mechanical contacters, and spark gaps.

So, what does Tesla's longitudinal electrostatic wave-front look like? It looks like a DC square-wave pulse train where the pulse repetition rate is one million impulses per second, the duty-cycle is 10% On and 90% OFF, and the voltage in each impulse is 50,000 volts DC or more. This is what Tesla wants the circuit to do. This is what he wants to create by the discharge of his capacitor stage in the circuit.

So, if the spark gap is his "circuit controller" then he only wants a "single crack" each time the capacitor discharges. Just a single, unidirectional impulse of electrostatic charge to proceed forward before the circuit shuts off again. Then, the capacitor can charge up again for the 900 nanoseconds the spark gap is quiet and then discharge all of the stored energy again in 100 nanoseconds. Then repeat indefinitely.

It creates a "staccato of electrostatic bursts." Don't make this mysterious, because it is not. It is no more difficult to understand than the output of a 555 timer chip. Its just that we are talking about very high voltage DC, and very high pulse repetition rates. What is difficult is finding the circuit components that allow you to create these conditions without self-destructing!

In my Tesla's Radiant Energy DVD I go through all of Tesla's patents and discuss the various methods he used. They included spark gaps quenched by magnets, spark gaps quenched by blasts of hot air, spark gaps in insulating oil, spark gaps across rotating contacters. All of these methods work to one degree or another.

In the 1920's, as vacuum tubes started becoming available, John Bedini and I are convinced that Tesla went to Lee DeForest and had him build the first experimental Thyratrons. This is a family of circuit controlling devices specifically designed to conduct a unidirectional impulse, only when triggered, and then automatically shut off when the voltage drops to ZERO. This is most easily seen today in the function of the Thyrister, the simplest of which is the SCR. The problem with SCRs today is that they are not designed to shut OFF fast enough for the purposes of these circuits.

I hope this helps.

Peter