Tesla experiment, arc IS NOT spark

[Jbignes5]

Yes, I am attempting to intuitively grasp your concept, but it takes time, patience, and openness to new information. In my last post I wrote a long paragraph about isomorphism, surface meaning (encoded in symbols) and deep meaning (occult, or hidden meaning pointed to by the symbols but understood only by contemplating the relationship of symbols within a symbol set, and relationships between multiple symbol sets describing the same thing). I deleted it from my post because I thought it was too wordy.

I think I understand what you mean about one particle. It's like the yin yang, it seems to be divided into two but one cannot move without the other and one is continually changing into the other. So we think we see two but it is only one and seeing two is an illusion.

I also get what you say about conducting without conductors. What dollard says about electrons being the resistance or the destruction of electricity makes sense to me, and my intuition as I stated before is that pulsed power interrupts the current before it has a chance to penetrate the conductor and waste energy wobbling electrons. Dollard calls conductors reflectors and talks about energy being transmitted in the dielectric. This makes sense to me.

Here is a little random food for thought, spinning an octohedron, or two five sided pyramids, into a sphere generates the star tetrahedron formation, or two four sided pyramids inverted in relation to each other. Is this the process of the one generating duality?

Flower of Life - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also here is my intuitive theory attempting to relate the four fundamental circuit elements to the tai chi, or yin yang concept, and to Stephen wolfram's classes of computation.

Thunderbolts Forum • View topic - The electrical tai chi: I Ching, Wolfram, and Electricity

And yes, I think that everything is fractal, or recursive... This is one reason electric universe theory resonates so well with me, because plasma phenomenon observed in he laboratory is scaled up by different orders of magnitude.

Nice you seem very well caught up in the teachings of others. That is exactly what I had done for about 4 years lol. With over 20 years in this field of research it has taken a very long time to see these in relation to one another.

It is interesting that you bring up the dual pyramid. That is my junction particle actually. Put two 4 or 5 sided pyramids together with the base to base and you have the junctions that makes up a planar layer from 90 degrees from the line of force. So it would look like a + with the bottom of the plus being the line of force coming from our planet and the left and right directions being 90 degrees to the up and down line. This is called a shell layer and if one looked down on that shell one would see an octagon shape in between a grouped bunch of lines. This is the grid I talk about and it has a fluidic density, meaning it is very dense because of the mass of our planet. More mass means closer lines.

The interesting part of this is that we have evidence of the density that our current dogma talks about the higher you go away from our planet. with extreme densities having a barrier skin like effect, for instance water or our ionosphere.

I hope I am not complicating this too much with too much information. Later I will include some drawings that might help with the grid explanation.

Hey are you any good with cad or simulation programs? I am an excellent hardware tech but I suck bad at those types of software. That is the most important side to my Theory is getting a visual explanation that someone can look at and see the dynamics of this natural grid.

[fzzzy]

@jbignes5 I feel like we are hijacking this thread. Can you create a new thread to discuss your theory?

To get back to the arc is not spark topic, I plan on finding the components I need to reproduce the experiments tomorrow and will try to replicate over the weekend.

I still think having an accurate dielectric induction measurement device is critical. I looked into the photo multiplier tubes recommended by Dollard, but they start around a hundred dollars and go up to hundreds of dollars. The ones I found are also not as simple as the one shown by dollard. I will keep looking to try and find a similar tube that is hopefully not too expensive.

[fzzzy]

HI Sucahyo,
Attached working diagram with some modifications.. Regards Alex

This seems interesting. I may try to replicate this as well. Thanks.

The simplest thing to test it with would probably be Eric dollard's analog computer for generating dielectric induction. Only a few caps and induction coils required. I will be replicating that setup soon, assuming I can figure out what parts will be suitable for it.

[EgmQC]

This seems interesting. I may try to replicate this as well. Thanks.

The simplest thing to test it with would probably be Eric dollard's analog computer for generating dielectric induction. Only a few caps and induction coils required. I will be replicating that setup soon, assuming I can figure out what parts will be suitable for it.

If you want to replicate this experiment and get the same result you need extremely low ESR capacitor and High Q RF power Coil , its what Eric used.His coil was RF Power coil , you can find that type of coil in surplus store usually, for the capacitor you can use high quality vacuum capacitor. There alot of replication of that experiment on youtube but you will see that nobody got close to the same result as Eric because they don't use the same thing but if you follow what i wrote , you will get the same as Eric.

Best Regards,
EgmQC

[fzzzy]

That can be comparable to an solar panel but with better performances an very low cost of realization. That idea is an my intellectual property dated 06/26/2010

It's only 6/25 here, so your invention comes from the future

[Jbignes5]

No disrespect..

@jbignes5 I feel like we are hijacking this thread. Can you create a new thread to discuss your theory?

To get back to the arc is not spark topic, I plan on finding the components I need to reproduce the experiments tomorrow and will try to replicate over the weekend.

I still think having an accurate dielectric induction measurement device is critical. I looked into the photo multiplier tubes recommended by Dollard, but they start around a hundred dollars and go up to hundreds of dollars. The ones I found are also not as simple as the one shown by dollard. I will keep looking to try and find a similar tube that is hopefully not too expensive.

Sucahyo knows I would never disrespect him in that way. I think this is absolutely relevant to the arc and spark debate. But this would be able to simulate this on the computer, it would just be a complete simulation rofl.
If Sucahyo thinks this was off topic I am sure he would have said so by now. I have tried starting a topic like my Theory and to tell you the truth all I got was half baked bs. Seeing that you have done or gone in the same direction as I have it wouldn't be hard to fill you or anyone else in on how it seems to work.

They always talk about the dielectric of air breaking down and to tell you the truth nothing could be further from the truth. It's not a breakdown but an alignment of those conductors and That is what Tesla figured out.

In a DC discharge they do not realign the way an AC discharge does. DC is only one way and AC is a reversal of the conductors midway through it's cycle. Two very distinct effects and two very distinct results. As evident by a one terminal Tesla coil. Where is the other terminal in that setup?

[fzzzy]

Sucahyo knows I would never disrespect him in that way. I think this is absolutely relevant to the arc and spark debate. But this would be able to simulate this on the computer, it would just be a complete simulation rofl.
If Sucahyo thinks this was off topic I am sure he would have said so by now. I have tried starting a topic like my Theory and to tell you the truth all I got was half baked bs. Seeing that you have done or gone in the same direction as I have it wouldn't be hard to fill you or anyone else in on how it seems to work.

They always talk about the dielectric of air breaking down and to tell you the truth nothing could be further from the truth. It's not a breakdown but an alignment of those conductors and That is what Tesla figured out.

In a DC discharge they do not realign the way an AC discharge does. DC is only one way and AC is a reversal of the conductors midway through it's cycle. Two very distinct effects and two very distinct results. As evident by a one terminal Tesla coil. Where is the other terminal in that setup?

Ok, no problem. With these last two paragraphs you wrote I think I am starting to visualize what you are talking about, and I see how it is relevant to this thread.

I can make pretty good technical diagrams and would be glad to help get your ideas in visual form. I use OmniGraffle which isn't a fancy cad program but it's easy to use and produces great looking illustrations.

I'm also a programmer and would be very interested in writing a simulation of your theory. I can't promise it will actually happen but I'd like to explore it.

I will go back and read your earlier posts more carefully now that my intuition is starting to kick in.

[Jbignes5]

Ok, no problem. With these last two paragraphs you wrote I think I am starting to visualize what you are talking about, and I see how it is relevant to this thread.

I can make pretty good technical diagrams and would be glad to help get your ideas in visual form. I use OmniGraffle which isn't a fancy cad program but it's easy to use and produces great looking illustrations.

I'm also a programmer and would be very interested in writing a simulation of your theory. I can't promise it will actually happen but I'd like to explore it.

I will go back and read your earlier posts more carefully now that my intuition is starting to kick in.

I know I tend to be information heavy in my posts. But I thought it would be relevant to at least explore your depth of knowledge and to tell you the truth I was very impressed with the work you did already.

We can start another thread on building the simulator so that this thread can stay on point, that I agree with but I feel that this discussion will only help everyone here as well and that includes us.

I already have a biased view so any other directions would not be explored and this would be the perfect place to explore the other side as well. Meaning that we can get further input to the mechanics behind the process and what makes the difference between an arc and a spark should be the basis of the model we make. We could nix two birds with one stone here.

[sucahyo]

Is that your Stingo circuit without the arc forming at the end? Pulsed DC or AC rectified?

This would be another way to control forest fires, if scaled up. Can the negative ions blow out the flame?

Sorry for overlooking your post. Yes, I do the experiment using stingo too. If it scalled up, it would call fourth lighting first before estingushing fire lol.

Yes, it blow away the flame.

Probably you produce electricity like an battery or better similarry an static homopolar generator

I only see a small amount of voltage when connected that way. I found bigger voltage when connecting a metal in the middle of the arc to my body. It produce shock just like being a conductor of electricity grid:



I don't consider Tesla is out off topic here .


I also interested in a simulator that can simulate my circuit. Circuit Simulator 1.5i can't . Notice that my PNP leg connected in an unusual way, this has much better efficiency that the correct one in real life.

[boguslaw]

Do you feel spherical shield like of electrostatic stinging effect around circuit ?

[sucahyo]

Do you feel spherical shield like of electrostatic stinging effect around circuit ?

I am not a sensitive person,I don't feel it. But I get the feeling of electrocuted after effect sometime even without touching the circuit, but not sure how.

[vrand]

Sorry for overlooking your post. Yes, I do the experiment using stingo too. If it scalled up, it would call fourth lighting first before estingushing fire lol.

Yes, it blow away the flame.

I only see a small amount of voltage when connected that way. I found bigger voltage when connecting a metal in the middle of the arc to my body. It produce shock just like being a conductor of electricity grid:



I don't consider Tesla is out off topic here .


I also interested in a simulator that can simulate my circuit. Circuit Simulator 1.5i can't . Notice that my PNP leg connected in an unusual way, this has much better efficiency that the correct one in real life.

Keep up the good work sucahyo

Putting out a fire electrically is a breakthrough if can be done easily & cheaply. If an electric field can stop a fire from happening then homeowners can protect their homes without the need for water sprinkler system that is expensive.

Electrostatic fire control and extinguishing device
United States Patent 7104337

A fire's electrostatic field is used to directly control and extinguish a fire. A flame is, in and of itself, a virtual electrode. The inventive electro-static fire control and extinguishing device uses at least one common electrode and allows the fire's own electrostatic field to act as the other virtual electrode to repel the fire's flame, controlling the spread of the fire or to control its direction or to totally extinguish it. The electro-static fire control and extinguishing device exploits the electrostatic properties of the fire's flame, directly using at least one electrode set at the appropriate electrostatic charge to create the desired fire control while the fire acts as the second source of the electrostatic field in which the electrostatic attraction/repulsion interaction takes place. A high voltage electrostatic field is produced by a high voltage static generator and the desired charge level is delivered to the flame via a conductive grid.

In this invention he used a HV electrostatic field. Maybe your device works similar, better or easier?

When you have the time I would enjoy seeing a video of it blow away the flame.

Thanks

[crackahcrackah]

I think the best example of the grid in which we live in is these lines of force coming out of our planet and bending to the external medium. Lets say the earth for example: this is a rigid medium with conduits of these lines bound in the matter. if the poles were taken away, just for a thought experiment, the mass of the earth has roughly lined up in a pom pom like form. You know the ones you made as a kid with yarn. Now think about the medium of air. It still has particles of matter to it. These also line up but where the earth and atmosphere meet is a boundry condition much like in aluminum like I showed in it's structure. Now lets look at water and air. The same boundry is made with this very dense structure. the boundry is actually a density change of this grid of lines of force. When we have a boundry change of density it creates a skin like effect. The same process goes on between the layers of our atmosphere as well including our ionosphere (last real atmosphere). There are others but they are not dense enough for us to detect with the eyes.
Mass, boundries and density have a lot to do with this energy grid. Just to give you further clues.

We're on the same page. I've been studying tornado's on youtube. I have the strong suspicion that they are a result of an influx of aether from upper atmosphere to the earth. There's usually lighting strikes occurring too. I have no doubt that there is a aether getting caught up in water vortex's also. If water can be used to detect them then it seems like some must get influenced by the water motion and the formation of a differential between the upper and lower levels of the funnel.

[fzzzy]

Ok, I'm almost done with my stingo replication. It's not yet working, and there are a few things I don't understand.

I believe the car coil primary is connected to the + and - terminals, and the secondary is connected to the center and - terminals. Is that correct?

In the circuit diagram, it looks like the spark gap is coming off the coil secondary. However there appears to be another gap connected to + and a diode. What is this?

Thanks

[sucahyo]

I believe the car coil primary is connected to the + and - terminals, and the secondary is connected to the center and - terminals. Is that correct?

Mine common primary and secondary terminal is marked (-), but there are people who has the common terminal marked (+).

Maybe you can notice by seeing which terminal produce bigger spark.

In the circuit diagram, it looks like the spark gap is coming off the coil secondary. However there appears to be another gap connected to + and a diode. What is this?

Battery charger. You can use it to charge another battery without much heat.


BTW, you mount both transistor into a single heatsink. Are you sure they didn't short together?