Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter "Replications"

[Farmhand]

Just tested my design. I used a BD139 transistor, and I can light a fluorescent tube of 4W nicely with it while drawing about 170 mA at about 10.5 V from the PS, but I don't seem to able to get any current out of the coil as I was aiming for, even though I haven't tried to charge a cap trough a diode bridge yet.

What is interesting is that I get pretty high (BEMF) spikes at the coil connection to collector of the transistor, about 40V high and with a frequency of about 5 MHz, while at the coil connection to the couple cap to the base of the transistor, I get a more sine-like wave, with the same frequency, of course.

I think this spike is important for getting the high voltage needed for lighting a fluorescent, because it contains many higher harmonics because of the sharp rising edge.

But still: back to the drawing board, I'm afraid, cause we already know how to light a fluorescent with these kinds of circuits.

You have a result that can only be good. The current thing is portrayed by Don and others a little in a kind of contradictory way. For instance I see that current is the result(or byproduct) of energy trying to equalise from a higher potential to a lower one through a resistance, so the current measured is representative of losses which occur because of the flow of energy which is not what is measured as "current" but it is current.

Theoretically in my mind If there were no resistance the energy would flow but from higher potential to lower potential instantly and equalise but no "measured faux current" would be measured and no heat would be produced.

However I digress, I think to see big current through a load if the source of high potential is HF then good HF caps will be needed as pointed out by many I think Boguslaw said it recently somewhere.

So the contradiction is with what Don Smith says for instance is that he say's to wind the coils center tapped for the current and voltage then he says that the ouput current will be relative to the capacitance x frequency x voltage and so forth I think there more to it than that and he does outline all the factors and calculations, but the capacitance is important in the system.

So with very little capacitance there would of course be very little current.
Maybe the way the L2 coil is wound it will charge caps better I can't say for sure only my feelings.

It may be possible to work further along the design Puharich used in his water fuel cell:

He used this to get his fuel cell into acoustic resonance, by modulating his oscillator with a signal matching the resonance frequency of his WFC. So, if you can get a WFC in resonance using modulation, it should be possible to also get a low frequency electric resonant circuit into resonance using the high voltage from a HF transformer as described above. Puharich's modulator does not look too complicated to build:

I thought in this direction before, but I never came to build it:
Article:Free Electric Energy in Theory and Practice - PESWiki

But have to think about this more. You probably need to make the resonance circuit with coils as well as capacitors, so you get a low resonance frequency, while the caps can deliver/store the charge carriers to get a decent current trough your transformer primary.

Will sleep over it the coming night...

Hahaha there is that drawing with the human head in it again that is just wild. Is that a behavior modification device ? Just kidding.

Yes I think you're last paragraph might be saying what I said above. not sure. But don't be put off by not seeing current immediately, if you can charge caps the current will come out of them, you can count on that, discharge even a small uf cap from 780 volts and see the current flow. Hear it too.

Cheers

[gravityblock]

Compression Waves

Below is a quote from William Beaty in an article titled, "Tesla's Big Mistake?". Notice how he says the only thing which acts like a "longitudinal" wave is the density of free electrons in the wire. The electron's mass and momentum is changing during the quantum transitions as shown in my previous post, and this creates a compression or longitudinal wave. Also note how he says, the "thin coil will support slowly-moving electromagnetic waves". This doesn't support Dollard's claim of these longitudinal waves propagating at 1.57 times the speed of light. My previous post also showed how Dollard may have miscalculated due to wrong assumptions. Of course, my assumptions may be wrong also. We need to question everything, regardless of where the information may be coming from.

This only can work because the long, thin coil will support slowly-moving electromagnetic waves, and the electron-sea within the metal of this coil behaves as if it's become compressible.

....
........
The EM fields are transverse. And the only thing which acts like a "longitudinal" wave is the density of free electrons in the wire.

GB

[Farmhand]

Below is a quote from William Beaty in an article titled, "Tesla's Big Mistake?". Notice how he says the only thing which acts like a "longitudinal" wave is the density of free electrons in the wire. The electron's mass and momentum is changing during the quantum transitions as shown in my previous post, and this creates a compression or longitudinal wave. Also note how he says, the "thin coil will support slowly-moving electromagnetic waves". This doesn't support Dollard's claim of these longitudinal waves propagating at 1.57 times the speed of light. My previous post also showed how Dollard may have miscalculated due to wrong assumptions. Of course, my assumptions may be wrong also. We need to question everything, regardless of where the information may be coming from.





GB

Hi GB, I agree we should question everything, I'll leave the questioning of the calculations to others though I can see you're point. I am not qualified to comment directly on that. I will also say that we are all human and anyone can make a mistake or oversight, anyone, no exceptions. As much as we would like to think Tesla and others were perfect they were not and could not be 100% correct about everything.

But I can see contradictions and so here is another. This Meyl guy uses the term "Scalar Wave's", so that means to me Eric would call him an idiot.

Well maybe he wouldn't. I can understand why a scalar or a scalar potential can not be a scalar wave, because as soon as a scalar or scalar potential (whatever) is tapped for energy and energy flows there are waves. If no energy flows there is no wave.

http://www.k-meyl.de/go/Primaerliter...y-Transfer.pdf

This is very confusing to try to learn when all these terms are used willy nilly like that.

Ok so take this diagram for instance. And then looking at the photo of the two gorrilla's about to collide. To me it seems the inertial plane runs through the gorrila's horazontally at about thier centre line at the centre of thier mass. When they collide the energy flow from the gorrila's (disregarding thier up and down movements on approach) was a straight line "longitudinal" even though they actually went up and down a bit "transverse". Then when they collide the energy that is dissapated will be dissapated radially in a shockwave won't it "radiant energy" and as transverse waves through or along certain media.

Can anyone explain the energy disapation from the Gorrilla impact better than that, surely most here can. A real world visible example and associated visualisation might help us understand.

Diagram
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=32a91...1320&sc=photos
Gorrilla's
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=32a91...1307&sc=photos

Cheers

[7imix]

I would like to know what method Dollard used to calculated it to be pi/2 * c.

It's in the video "transverse and longitudinal electric waves." It's calculated based on finding the resonant frequency of a directly driven transmission line (he uses coaxial cable) and an air core oscillator, a small tesla coil.

Dollard also mentions that Wheatstone experimentally determined the speed of a condenser discharge to be pi/2 * c. This is mentioned on wheatstone's Wikipedia page.

I also had a retired engineer who worked at a large defense contractor in the 80s tell me that they experimentally determined the same thing by running a wire around a city block, hooking a high frequency oscilloscope up with one probe measuring one end and another measuring the other, and discharging a capacitor into one end of the open cable.

Your post is interesting, but it's not clear to me what position you are advocating?

[boguslaw]

I thought Tesla explained why there was Pi/2 * c ? It is not true speed but apparent and minimum speed also.

True longitudinal wave flow at speed of light through the center of Earth while apparent flow is on surface.

[7imix]

I thought Tesla explained why there was Pi/2 * c ? It is not true speed but apparent and minimum speed also.

True longitudinal wave flow at speed of light through the center of Earth while apparent flow is on surface.

Dollard mentions something similar in the video. He says the transverse waves are traveling along the wire of the oscillating secondary, but the energy transfer moves longitudinally up the coil, resulting in an accelerated wave.

Do you know where tesla explained this?

[boguslaw]

Dollard mentions something similar in the video. He says the transverse waves are traveling along the wire of the oscillating secondary, but the energy transfer moves longitudinally up the coil, resulting in an accelerated wave.

Do you know where tesla explained this?

I don't remember but there was in article from 1909 or maybe 1919 ? Sorry, can't find it now but I think lamare has it on hand.
Mathematically Tesla said that V=V0*cos(a) and that means wave propagated via Earth like via very thick copper rod while wave affects also the surface with apparent speed much higher then real internal speed of light.

I'm not sure if I understood correctly but if you move wave through Earth and measure effect on equator then while internally wave flow with a speed of c and distance is r , then on surface during the same time distance is 2*Pi*r/4 = Pi*r/2, when you compute speed it seems to have Pi/2 *c at equator.

[Farmhand]

Hi all, got some 4000v 3300pF caps, 360 of em. about $1.00 each from Latvia, maybe they will work ok.

Box
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=32a91...1321&sc=photos
Tray.
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=32a91...1322&sc=photos

Now as for the velocity discussion, I am open to any argument that maks sense but I can't really contribute much except general thinking on the matter.

But I get the impression that a displacement current would be very fast. And that possibly there is no such thing as a longitudinal waveform. What does a longitudinal waveform look like ? Exactly. A straight line ?

Also it seems to me that all energy flows more or less in straight lines as compared to the voltage waveform but as the waveform fluctuates in amplitude (waves) so does the current fluctuate in magnitude (pulsations), if there is a load. If there is no load there is no real energy flow and therefore no current.

If we visualise the earth as a conductor and the current paths are straight then of course the energy is travelling in a straight line by direct pressure or displacement, the voltage waveform is at the device's (all of them in the system) and it is the fluctuating potential of the voltage waveform which allows the energy to flow in straight lines as pulsations.

Tesla also used exciters at the receiver as well to combine with the signal from the transmitter at time's for certain reasons maybe not always.

We should be carefull not to confuse the communications aspect of the system with the power transmission aspect as they are acheived in slightly different ways.

From this document
Transmission of Electrical Energy Without Wires

Communications

Thus the entire earth will be converted into a huge brain, as it were, capable of response in every one of its parts.

Since a single plant of but one hundred horse-power can operate hundreds of millions of instruments, the system will have a virtually infinite working capacity, and it must needs immensely facilitate and cheapen the transmission of intelligence.

This work is now far advanced, and though the results may be tardy, they are sure to come.

Power Transmission

Meanwhile, the transmission of energy on an industrial scale is not being neglected. The Canathan Niagara Power Company have offered me a splendid inducement, and next to achieving success for the sake of the art, it will give me the greatest satisfaction to make their concession financially profitable to them.

In this first power plant, which I have been designing for a long time, I propose to distribute ten thousand horse-power under a tension of one hundred million volts, which I am now able to produce and handle with safety.

Note the huge difference in horse power between the two. Different facilities and different frequencies and different power levels, maybe the same facility use at different times could be used for demonstrations.

Cheers

[gravityblock]

Apparent and real speed.

I don't remember but there was in article from 1909 or maybe 1919 ? Sorry, can't find it now but I think lamare has it on hand.
Mathematically Tesla said that V=V0*cos(a) and that means wave propagated via Earth like via very thick copper rod while wave affects also the surface with apparent speed much higher then real internal speed of light.

I'm not sure if I understood correctly but if you move wave through Earth and measure effect on equator then while internally wave flow with a speed of c and distance is r , then on surface during the same time distance is 2*Pi*r/4 = Pi*r/2, when you compute speed it seems to have Pi/2 *c at equator.

Boguslaw, I think your right about the apparent speed being much higher then the real internal speed of light. In fact, Tesla even refers to this apparent speed to both be infinite and also much slower than the speed of light. The apparent speed is only an illusion or an effect based on trigonometry.



Below is a quote from Tesla, in the publication titled, "Nikola Tesla On His Work With Alternating Currents". The text in red are comments made by me, and does not appear in the original text.

"To give you an idea, I have prepared a diagram [Fig. 81] illustrating an analogue which will clearly show how the current passes through the globe. You know that in a solar eclipse the moon comes between the sun and the earth, and that its shadow is projected upon the earth's surface. Evidently, in a given moment, the shadow will just touch at a mathematical point, the earth, assuming it to be a sphere. Let us imagine that my transmitter is located at this point, and that the current generated by it now passes through the earth. It does not pass through the earth in the ordinary acceptance of the term, it only penetrates to a certain depth according to the frequency. Most of it goes on the surface, but with frequencies such as I employ, it will dive a few miles below. It can be mathematically shown that it is immaterial how it passes; the aggregate effect of these currents is as if the whole current passes from the transmitter, which I call the pole, to the opposite point, which I call the antipode.

Assume, then, that here is the transmitter, and imagine that this is the surface of the sea, and that now comes the shadow of the moon and touches, on a mathematical point, the calm ocean. You can readily see that as the surface of the water, owing to the enormous radius of the earth, is nearly a plane, that point where the shadow falls will immediately, on the slightest motion of the shadow downward, enlarge the circle at a terrific rate, and it can be shown mathematically that this rate is infinite. In other words, this half-circle on this side will fly over the globe as the shadow goes down; will first start at infinite velocity to enlarge, and then slower and slower and slower, and as the moon's shadow goes further and further and further, it will get slower and slower until, finally, when the three bodies are on the plane of the ecliptic , right in line one with the other in the same plane, then that shadow will pass over the globe with its true velocity in space. Exactly that same thing happens in the application of my system, and I will show this next.



This [Fig. 82] illustrates, on a larger scale, the earth. Here is my transmitter -- mine or anybody's transmitter -- because my system is the system of the day. The only difference is in the way I apply it. They, the radio engineers, want to apply my system one way; I want to apply it in another way. This is the circuit energizing the antenna. As the vibratory energy flows (vibratory means mechanical or sound waves as will be shown in my next post using Tesla's own words), two things happen: There is electromagnetic energy radiated and a current passes into the earth. The first goes out in the form of rays, which have definite properties. These rays propagate with the velocity of light, 300,000 kilometers per second. This energy is exactly like a hot stove. If you will imagine that the cylinder antenna is hot -- and indeed it is heated by the current -- it would radiate out energy of exactly the same kind as it does now. If the system is applied in the sense I want to apply it, this energy is absolutely lost, in all cases most of it is lost. While this electromagnetic energy throbs (this throbbing is again in reference to vibrations by the electromagnetic energy), a current passes into the globe. Now, there is a vast difference between these two, the electromagnetic and current energies. That energy which goes out in the form of rays, is, as I have indicated here [on the diagram of Fig. 82], unrecoverable, hopelessly lost. You can operate a little instrument by catching a billionth part of it but, except this, all goes out into space never to return. This other energy, however, of the current in the globe, is stored and completely recoverable. Theoretically, it does not take much effort to maintain the earth in electrical vibration. I have, in fact, worked out a plant of 10,000 horse-power which would operate with no bigger loss than 1 percent of the whole power applied; that is, with the exception of the frictional energy that is consumed in the rotation of the engines and the heating of the conductors, I would not lose more than 1 percent. In other words, if I have a 10,000 horsepower plant, it would take only 100 horsepower to keep the earth vibrating so long as there is no energy taken out at any other place.

There is another difference. The electromagnetic energy travels with the speed of light, but see how the current flows. At the first moment, this current propagates exactly like the shadow of the moon at the earth's surface. It starts with infinite velocity from that point, but its speed rapidly diminishes; it flows slower and slower until it reaches the equator, 6,000 miles from the transmitter. At that point, the current flows with the speed of light -- that is, 300,000 kilometers per second. But, if you consider the resultant current through the globe along the axis of symmetry of propagation, the resultant current flows continuously with the same velocity of light. Whether this current passing through the center of the earth to the opposite side is real, or whether it is merely an effect of these surface currents, makes absolutely no difference. To understand the concept, one must imagine that the current from the transmitter flows straight to the opposite point of the globe."

Skipping a few paragraphs, we find the below quote from Tesla on Page 54

At the transmitter, the cosecant is infinite; therefore, the velocity is infinite. At a distance of 6,000 miles, the cosecant is unity; therefore, the velocity is equal to that of light. This law I have expressed in a patent by the statement that the projections of all zones on the axis of symmetry are of the same length, which means, in other words, as is known from rules of trigonometry, that the areas of all the zones must also be equal. It says that although the waves travel with different velocities from point to point, nevertheless each half wave always includes the same area. This is a simple law, not unlike the one which has been expressed by Kepler with reference to the areas swept over by the radii vectors.

[gravityblock]

Tesla's earth currents are longitudinal sound waves!

Your post is interesting, but it's not clear to me what position you are advocating?

Everybody is confusing the "earth currents" in which Tesla refers to, with these faster than light longitudinal waves which is advocated by Dollard and others, IMO. These longitudinal waves are nothing more than the mechanical or sound waves produced by the electromagnetic energy. This electromagnetic energy is used to produce mechanical vibrations which is stored within the earth, instead of allowing it to radiate and escape into space where it is useless. According to Tesla on page 46 of "Nikola Tesla on His Work with alternating currents", by proper design and choice of wavelengths, you can arrange it so that you get, for instance, 5 percent in these electromagnetic waves and 95 percent in the current that goes through the earth. Or, you can get, as these "radio men", 95 percent in the energy of electromagnetic waves and only 5 percent in the energy of the current. Tesla suppresses the electromagnetic waves by producing mechanical vibrations which can be stored in the earth, just like a singing bowl holds the mechanical vibrations for a relatively long time.

Red text below are my comments, and do not appear in the original text.

Remember, now, that the water is incompressible, that the bag is perfectly elastic, that there are no hysteretic losses in the bag due to these expansions and contractions (vibrations); and remember also, that there is a vacuum, in infinite space, so that the energy cannot be lost in waves of sound (Tesla has just linked the vibrations produced in or at the surface of the earth to longitudinal sound waves. I have already shown in post #105 how these longitudinal waves are propagating at the normal speed of sound in dry air at sea level. I used Znidarsic's transitional velocity to reduce Dollard's 1.57c to the speed of sound in air. I've also referenced how the apparent speed of these longitudinal waves is only based on a trigonometry effect, and provided reference to Tesla saying the speed of these waves also appear much slower than the speed of light, which is also inline with William Beaty's "slowly-moving electromagnetic waves" in his article on "Tesla's Big Mistake?". ). Then, if I put at a distant point another little pump, and tune it to the rhythmical pulses of the pump at the central plant, I will excite strong vibrations and will recover power from them, sufficient to operate a receiver. But, if I have no pump there to receive these oscillations, if there is nowhere a place where this elastic energy is transferred into frictional energy (we always use in our devices frictional energy -- everything is lost through friction), then there is no loss, and if I have a plant of 1,000 horsepower and I operate it to full capacity, that plant does not take power, it runs idle, exactly as the plant at Niagara. If I do not put any motors or any lamps on the circuit, the plant runs idle. There is a 5,000 horsepower turbine going, but no power is supplied to the turbine except such power as is necessary to overcome the frictional losses (only a very small amount of power is required to keep the vibrations from dampening, just like in a singing bowl). Now the vast difference between the scheme of radio engineers and my scheme is this. If you generate electromagnetic waves with a plant of 1,000 horsepower, you are using 1,000 horsepower right along -- whether there is any receiving being done or not. You have to supply this 1,000 horsepower, exactly as you have to supply coal to keep your stove going, or else no heat goes out. That is the vast difference. In my case, I conserve the energy; in the other case, the energy is all lost (Tesla conserves the energy by storing it in the form of long lasting vibrations in or at the surface of the earth, instead of continuously having to deliver power regardless if there is any receiving being done) .

The radio men who came after me had the problem before them of making a bell sound, and they immersed it in mercury. Now, you know mercury is heavy. When they struck their bell, the mercury did not permit it to vibrate long because it took away all the energy. I put my bell in a vacuum and make it vibrate for hours. I have designed circuits in connection with an enterprise in 1898 for transmission of energy which, once started, would vibrate three years, and even after that the oscillations could still be detected (longitudinal sound waves are produced by these vibrations).

[7imix]

Great post, gravityblock. The link you posted to scribd doesn't work, though.

[gravityblock]

Great post, gravityblock. The link you posted to scribd doesn't work, though.

Thanks. The link isn't working for me at the moment either, but I'm also getting the same screen with other document links on scribd. Here's an alternative link to the document.

[Edit:] If anyone has the full text to the above publication, then please let me know.

Thanks,

GB

[Farmhand]

Yes GB, they are good posts, the energy is resonated back and forth between the transmitter and the receiver through the earth if no power is drawn from the receiver, all that is needed is to overcome any losses, the energy remains in the system and is active. When power is drawn from a receiver more energy needs to be furnished by the generator to the transmitter.

If the system is tuned to the Earths vibration the vibratory energy of the planet can also be "tapped". In fact if a tuned receiver was built to resonate at the Earths natural frequency it would only need to be excited a bit to ring in tune with the earth for a long time, I imagine. And energy could be taken from it.

Using a wire in place of the earth only really remove's the Earth frequency energy from the equasion. Tesla says below 20 000 Hz will work so harmonics of 11.79 or 11.97 or whatever it is up to 20 Khz should also work with a very good ground. Depending on the frequency depends on how deep the vibrations go and so with lower frequencies is better efficiency on a few levels, eg. also with radiations from the top terminals.

I think with my setup how it is now with rough terminals that leak a fair bit I am seeing about 50 % radiation from the terminals and 50% current back and forth between transmitter and receiver, this amount swings both ways depending on different factors, if there is no load taken from the receiver the resonant rise causes a higher voltage on the terminals and so allows more radiation for the given relative surface curvature. Also if the frequency is higher there is always more radiations.

This is how I see it generally.

To see gains we must connect through the earth with harmonics of the earths frequency below 20 Khz and achieve very little losses from the terminals. The system must be operated in resonance.

Cheers

[Farmhand]

And adding to my last comment I think it's obvious that the more voltage the better.

Here's a couple of sketch's I just made up.
THis is my thinking about the back and forth. The bouncing ball in the thought bubble just represents the current. Which in my mind bounces back and forth between the top terminals of the transmitter/ receiver. when it passes the coil "A" in the receiver, energy can be taken from the oscillating current in system from the coil "A".
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=32a91...1323&sc=photos

The receivers if resonating with the transmitter will become transmitters as well. The line's and arrows in this sketch are all going through the center only for simplicity, (i'm not saying that is actually the case).
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=32a91...1324&sc=photos

With energy resonating in or between all the transmitter receivers operating at the same frequency. Some harmonic of the Earths frequency below 20 Khz.

Cheers

[Farmhand]

As for velocities, only relative velocities can be calculated. Velocity is always related to time as far as I can tell and time is not a constant or at least time being a constant is a dodgy one. I think velocities in this area are somewhat irrelevant to the layman, unless it becomes very low, that is a lot less than the speed of light. I don't think faster than light speed is neccessary unless for interstellar travel. I won't deny it's possibility though, in fact I believe it.

Cheers