Eric Dollard

[David G Dawson]

Questions

Questions;

1) The NETis network, a "Guillemen Line"

2) Filaments are always assumed, not drawn, so connect Filament 6.3 VAC

3) What is CSI? Useful spellings please.

4) The Cosmic detector tube is a Geiger/Muller tube, only cathode is shown, show diagram so I can see it. Bell armature MUST break circuit to extinguish the OA4G.

5) Inductances are milliHenry valued chokes for commutation purposes.

6) 240 V /380 Y is stupid, Tesla hates it.

Questions (4) and (6) will be answered in great length soon. The Vril Compendium of Vassilatos is an encylcopedia of pre-Einstein science now taken off library shelves. It is a good source of ray information. See Tesla radiant matter patent

Eric,
Thankyou.
3) CSI is your 'Crystal Set Initiative'.
4) Will post some pics of my Geiger/Muller Tube - they are 21" long and would expect here that 'bigger is better'?
Was close as was going to use a Photoelectric Cell but the Dish Antenna was handy.
Will post diagram pic.

What would be the cycle time here as it would be more efficient to be able to time a small trip circuit to reset the armature and would have it going to a data recording device like your earthquake detecting equipment?

Understand the others.
Have tried to source Vril Compendium information but is not freely available as you say.

Did you have a 'what to expect' from powering the CSI ('Crystal Set Initiative') using the 'Tesla Transformer Pulse Generator' (TTPG)?
Think that was the question 3).
I am about to fire this up but was waiting for your response and would appreciate your comments here as others, I am sure, are also waiting for a result under power so they can plan ahead.
Appreciate your assistance.
I am assuming you received my previous pictures and will send again via that medium.

Smokey

[rickinva]

Don't believe I have referenced 'The Measuring System Of The Gods' (Wayne Thompson) to you as yet but might pay to visit so you can learn why the Math never turns out quite as expected:
. . .

I accurately cut out a circle and rotated it along a straight line and came out with exactly 3.24.
Betting the Teacher himself (nice guy) didn't know either and had accepted it as a constant.

Smokey

Dear David:

Interesting. When you say you "accurately" cut out a circle, did you cut it out on the "outside" of the line that was drawn to make the circle, or, "inside" the circle's circumference line, or ON the line. (After all, the accuracy of the measurement of the radius used and where the circle's circumference was cut out would make a difference, if they didn't correspond and thereby not give an exact and correct answer.

(I further assume all this "measuring" and "cutting" and "rolling along a straight line" and then "remeasuring" was done under a very powerful microscope; since, if your radius measurement for the circumference used, was off a little, then your error would be off by over 3 times that amount.

I (holding a BSA in Mathematics) find your claim most interesting, since in 1962 while studying "Elementary Number Theory", under Dr. Daniel Shanks (who was one of the two men who originally calculated Pi to the first 100,000 places, using the then most powerful IMB main frame available) used one of the several infinite series formulas for Pi and his calculations do not agree with yours. Also, we had to prove in class, mathematically, why Pi could not be a "rational" number (a number that could be obtained in decimal form by dividing two integers and your Pi is "324 divided by 100", a "rational number".). Did you take Calculus? (where the formulas for Pi are derived).

Rick

[Sputins]

How does Lightning work Mr Wizard?

Hi Eric.

An observation / question.

Recently there was a very large electrical storm over my local area, many lightning strikes to the ground and above overhead in the sky. One unplugged the phone line and computer to avoid transients from destroying these. Many times during this storm, the house hold power lights especially, would go dim, or flash off immediately as the lightning cracked overhead. The household lights then returned to normal operation once the lightning crack subsided...Until the next crack.

Now is this phenomena, of the house hold power interuption due to the lightning, not hitting the power lines themselves as such but rather from the discharge of the lightning itself, the dielectric saturation. Where the dielectric lines of flux are sucked in with such intensity that cause the lighting or flash discharge (of the Earths giant parallel plate capacitor). The lightning in turn sucking in the dielectric lines of force (or amperes) from the local power lines supply, interrupting the local and house hold power? Is this is what's going on?

In the 1986 video where you have a voltage multiplier, you explain this dielectric saturation and dieletric lines of force being sucked in to the point of saturation, and a current flow being possible (not electrons) and you also say “Now as Tesla found when they (flux lines) hit the discharge, they bounce back out circle around the planet, go back into the discharge and you get the so called standing waves”.

Could you please elaborate a little bit more on how lightning works from the Mr Wizard point of view? If indeed the Earth is a giant parallel plate capacitor, is this Earth capacitor being charged electrically (Longitudinally) from the Sun?

[Farmhand]

If I could just add one observation similar to Sputins, I noticed with the crystal
radio that a fast hissing (crackle) preceeds the flash of the lightning and the
disturbance on the scope. I assumed it is caused by the "leader" reaching up
to form the path for the strike. Any thought's on that ?
Sorry for the interruption.

Cheers

[t-rex]

[madhatter]

Apologies if this is already posted! I was attempting to get some Idea of what a resonant impulse wave might construct like .. This link popped out of google Longitudinal Waves | Reciprocal System v2 Forum
It referenced E.P.Ds video. and seems in full agreement with all he says. Its somewhat over my head but I thought you guys might enjoy it.

good find, fascinating read and what's interesting to note is that what he's talking about flies in the face of conventional physics for electricity but not for quantum or QED. quantum physics is not about the limit of C, it's really just the physics of the really small. there are many unanswered questions in quantum physics, simple because the interactions and predictive math for the standard model fails and is also the same for SR, which is firmly based on the limit of C.

I'd venture that his responses are based from the string theory camp, multiple dimensions etc.. setting aside string theory the reason for the need of bringing in the dimensions is the mathematics doesn't make any sense unless you split up the time & space, but that's due to the math matrix keeping the scalar and vector forms in a forced 3d.

I'll try and explain how I interpret Eric's argument in regards to conventional physics. basic algebra and calculus are tools to model the measurement results of experiments in order to produce predictive results without constant complex experimentation. however what must be kept in mind and is usually not, the measurements are fictitious. I'll explain, what is current? voltage? they are mathematical inventions, the gauge or needle moves to read what? a force, that force is then scaled to match the mathematical result.

here's where the problem arises, students are taught using math to invent the world around them. the math becomes science and the cart gets ahead of the horse. the true physical world is so complex it's not possible to model it with an all encompassing equation, so it's discreetly broken down. that introduces a few problems. this is where the gauge of needing a fixed reference comes into to tie everything back together and viola we get the limit of C drilled into our heads.

for most things in macro size the mathematics are close enough in tolerance that this is not a real issue as there is no need to invoke relativity, hence the speed of light isn't a factor. quantum which is where electricity resides is not going to work out well using the macro system. but that's what's being done, it's being forced to fit by use of special relativity, a no good attempt at bridging the two worlds.

then we end up with phenomenon that can't be explained because the system in place is not correct,so it's dismissed. the turning point was the 1927 solvay conference. for academia to stand back and go oops' we made a mistake and the last 85yrs have been a waste is never going to happen, the religion of science is far to entrenched.

this really will require a completely new mathematical model and system to move forward. using the math and science we have now to do this makes it twice as hard if not impossible.

Eric, if I'm incorrect anywhere in my understanding of your view please feel free to correct it.

[madhatter]

I should have advised that the basic Harmonic formula for pi is:

'the number of times the radius of a circle fits into the circumference of that same circle'

and the answer is 3.24 and not 22/7, 3.14etc.
This is the Harmonic pi and not the artificial one on your calculator.
Same as Natural and Artificial electricity.
This is simple Fraud and messing with your basic Math and just the same as having so many operators to measure different phenomena that people simply get confused and don't know where they are at.
I clearly remember my English Lieutenant Navy electronics instructor (who was very good) going through the formulas and changing them all as we came to each different section.
I still have that book here today with all my notation 'corrections'.
Made me think at that time that a 'something' was going on.

Smokey

I'm not following, Pi is not a measurable unit. it's a ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter. and yes I know that an irrational number is one that can not be expressed as a ratio, hence maybe why it's confusing to say it's a ratio of a circles attributes.

a measured distance is never exact, can't be, impossible really. to know your measurement is to know your tolerance of error. any measured distance between two points is an irrational number, thus Pi will always be an irrational number.

nothing secretive about it, just basic calculus here.

[techzombie]

good find, fascinating read and what's interesting to note is that what he's talking about flies in the face of conventional physics for electricity but not for quantum or QED. quantum physics is not about the limit of C, it's really just the physics of the really small. there are many unanswered questions in quantum physics, simple because the interactions and predictive math for the standard model fails and is also the same for SR, which is firmly based on the limit of C.

I'd venture that his responses are based from the string theory camp, multiple dimensions etc.. setting aside string theory the reason for the need of bringing in the dimensions is the mathematics doesn't make any sense unless you split up the time & space, but that's due to the math matrix keeping the scalar and vector forms in a forced 3d.

I'll try and explain how I interpret Eric's argument in regards to conventional physics. basic algebra and calculus are tools to model the measurement results of experiments in order to produce predictive results without constant complex experimentation. however what must be kept in mind and is usually not, the measurements are fictitious. I'll explain, what is current? voltage? they are mathematical inventions, the gauge or needle moves to read what? a force, that force is then scaled to match the mathematical result.

here's where the problem arises, students are taught using math to invent the world around them. the math becomes science and the cart gets ahead of the horse. the true physical world is so complex it's not possible to model it with an all encompassing equation, so it's discreetly broken down. that introduces a few problems. this is where the gauge of needing a fixed reference comes into to tie everything back together and viola we get the limit of C drilled into our heads.

for most things in macro size the mathematics are close enough in tolerance that this is not a real issue as there is no need to invoke relativity, hence the speed of light isn't a factor. quantum which is where electricity resides is not going to work out well using the macro system. but that's what's being done, it's being forced to fit by use of special relativity, a no good attempt at bridging the two worlds.

then we end up with phenomenon that can't be explained because the system in place is not correct,so it's dismissed. the turning point was the 1927 solvay conference. for academia to stand back and go oops' we made a mistake and the last 85yrs have been a waste is never going to happen, the religion of science is far to entrenched.

this really will require a completely new mathematical model and system to move forward. using the math and science we have now to do this makes it twice as hard if not impossible.

Eric, if I'm incorrect anywhere in my understanding of your view please feel free to correct it.

quantum physics was just another bandaid tacked onto the massive disinformation campaign that became physics. Einstein was just another pillar to keep the house of pseudo scientific cards from falling. Einstein, Copernicus, Darwin and a string of lessor known clowns have all been created to keep the truth from us. Physics, quantum physics, Helio-centrism and evolution are all different facets of the same deception. This is how I see it, we must abandon this junk completely.

I am curious as to how Eric's findings judge Tesla's "free energy receiver"
NIKOLA TESLA'S FREE ENERGY RECEIVER

Just a polished metal plate that intercepted solar rays and somehow turned it into energy. The patent shows a clear ground connection. This device, if it does indeed work, and let us assume that it does, uses capacitance to synthesis energy.

Eric, what are your thoughts here? Is this possible and how ?

[7redorbs]

Amateur writes book about Dollard, Tesla & Leedskalnin. Gravity, Cosmic Rays & Energy

Hi Eric,

I'm so happy to see you are still helping the fine folks here still trying to replicate your work. I keep on saying to myself we just need to work together.

I want to tell you I have written a book about cosmic rays, your work, Tesla's, Steinmetz' and Leedskalnins and some of my own thoughts about faster than light speeds, curving light, and so-called electrons turning 180 degrees. I am printing this book in very small numbers (about 33 copies in total). It is not a book for anyone.

It costs me a fortune to print them, $71, but I'm selling them for a little more than that. I just wanted to let you know that of the profit I make I will donate 20% to you. Is it best this should be directed to your lone pine radio donation account, or should it go elsewhere? I actually gave up work for 12 months to do this book and work and left a promising career in defense to write about it, I cannot really afford to live but I want no part in the corporate lie any more. I stand for all the things that Eric does and more.

To those that are interested in the book it can be found at Solomon Books . It is worth noting I wrote the book, I put put up the store, the website, and I arranged the book printing. I did it all, in the name of Eric, Tesla, Leedskalnin, Steinmetz and other square root heroes. Whilst I remain convinced that the secrets of electricity, cosmic rays , conservative orbits of energy and gravity remain simple, I want my book and my work to stand testament to the men that made it possible.

Thanks eric, thanks to all. I know what it is like not to be listened to, and I hope that all people here will not be too quick to be silent to their neighbors, this work has the power to destroy economy. Indeed if the periodic table can be defined by motion alone, and all conductors ability to convey energy by the perpetual motion of the so-called valent electron conditions inside them when un-electrified, then,a very rude awakening is required to modern scientific theory, and faster than light waves must be given their rightful place among humanity.

I hope I make myself and my intentions clear, as I truly believe I may have failed before. I like Eric have some understanding what that can feel like, it is not good at all, I believe the work - if we are ever allowed to finish it without interference, can speak for itself and that is exactly what I have set out to do.

We have seen the egyptians idea of gravity evolve into the greek idea of things finding their natural place, which succeeded for 2000 years until newton, and his theory of gravity and Newtonian forces seceded after some several hundred years to Einstein, and it is only a matter of time until Einstein himself will secede to the greater mathematician, the greater scientist. And the very idea that Einstein could be an exception rather than an example of the rule, like the Newton's and the Greek's and the Egyptians,will be disgusting to any forward thinking man whom have studied history and the virtues of the difference between the inductive and inventive theories in the evolution of the sciences. I believe though it remains historically and technically clear to an engineer that Tesla was the man that Einstein replaced. Tesla's theories were readily provable and ratified, and there was no real reason that Einstein's work would be favored other than the favor which he held in regard to the limitation of the virtue of his idea's in regard to the perceived limitation of velocity to the constant ratio of the speed of light. Remarkably so much so the replacement of Tesla that the inventor of radio himself, Dr. Nikola Tesla gave the speed of propagation to be 1.57 times faster than the speed of light. Repeat the inventor of radio gave the speed of propagation of the wave to be 1.57x faster than light. You have to admit, if this is true, then that is definitely a mark of worth in something one might be writing a book about. As this has most unremarkably been entirely erased from history.

And that is about all I have to say on the matter, I had written quite a lot more about the property of conductor valency in an un-electrified wire being a result of perpetually orbiting "electrons" in the metal, but I unfortunately posted the form and I lost what I had typed, I would call the "electron valency" recirculating "individual south pole particles", sorry I have not elaborated too much, more to come, promise

Best,
A

[David G Dawson]

Tesla Earth Resonance Confirmation

Tesla Confirmation of Earth Resonance:

From Bruce Cathie's 'The Energy Grid - Harmonic 695 - The Pulse Of The Universe'

Chapter 12 Tesla - The Forgotten Genius:
"He discovered that a rate of 150,000 oscillations a second, which produced electrical pulsations with a wavelength of 2000 meters, was necessary to produce the effects he required in the transmission of usable power through the earth.


If we convert the wavelength of 2000 meters to a minute of arc, or nautical mile equivalent on the earth’s surface the result is 1.0792237. The experimental value was therefore very close to 1.08 minutes of arc, or one twenty thousandth of the circumference of the earth. 21600 minutes divided by 1.08.


The exact number of cycles to obtain a 1.08 minute wavelength would be 149892.18 per second. This would tune the transmitter in harmony with the world grid system."


ME: Tesla's operating frequency would then be 149892.18/(pi/2) = 95,424.3 Khz but it was said that his operating frequency was 'about 60,000 Khz' but this may have been a blind to hide the truth.

If you remember I went through all of this back in the old Eric Dollard Energetic Forum at Post # 398 but received little comprehension and suggested that Tesla may not have had the equipment capability but I now don't believe that would be correct after seeing confirmation of my own very first analysis of his frequencies from Bruce Cathie.

If he was using 60 Khz that would be on the wrong side of the 95 Khz core frequency and needed to be on the high side at 149.9 kHz.

Do the calculations yourself:

95424.3 x (pi/2) =
95424.3 / (pi/2) =

This is back to my plus/minus Math working from the core frequency where I believe Eric is incorrect and is at the 60 Khz level and NOT at the 149.9 Khz level.

How long before somebody here is able to wake up to what I am saying?
If you think lucidly about this you will see less turns in the wire and NOT what Eric has calculated in having more turns.

The frequency I gave in that Post was 148.7 Khz working from 96.85 Khz (second harmonic) - this is exact from his Colorado Springs Notes including the 'second harmonic' words - 1.3 Khz error from Earth Resonance, not bad for a guess.

I got serially poopoohed for presenting this information and nobody has even attempted to comprehend this multiply/divide of pi/2 which can be taken two ways into either a minus or a plus situation - one wrong, one right.

I hope somebody here has taken the time to read the above book as Bruce's last Chapter is called 'Wake Up Earth'!


My Extra Coil is designed to the multiply theory and perhaps that may be the simple reason why it is working.


Smokey

[t-rex]

0A4G Neon Detector Tube

1) The 0A4-G cold cathode tube is a small power trigatron. Once the tube is triggered the tube can only be extinguished by interupting the main current flow. This is the reason for the "circuit breaking contact" in the 0A4_G cathode circuit. The armature of the bell can be fitted to this pair of contacts. Bell actuation must break the circuit, making ready for the detection of a new impulse.

Note a circuit modification in the diagram, in order to limit the discharge current through the tube by the 8 microfarad electrolytic condenser. A resistance of 100 to 200 Ohms, and an inductance of a few milliHenries should be placed in series with this condenser. The resulting series combination of 8 microFarads, a few hundred Ohms, and a few milliHenry is the Pulse Forming Network, PFN.

To begin testing the trigger ability of the 0A4G circuit, the receptor tube is replaced by a small mica condenser and a small pair of contacts such as a bell push button. Arrange to charge and discharge this mica condenser as shown in figure one. Try different sizes of mica condensers, from 10 picoFarad to 10,000 picoFarad and observe the best size for triggering the 0A4G. Hereby exists the opportunity to perfect the breaker contact, and also find the right bell condenser, 2 microFarad is a good start. This is a TESLA TECHNOLOGY DEVICE so the use of any microchips or solid state components is prohibited. A Geiger tube that rings a bell, a basic demonstration device.

2) It is unfortunate how many people who engage in this sort of work do not care to learn first about what is going on, but are seeking only stimulus. I have no use for such personal disorders. Questions are asked forgetting the answer has already been given. I have provided all the references, material types and components, as wells as a unified theory of electrical behavior.

One particular aspect has not been presented however. This is the matter of Crookes, and the cathodes utilized by Nikola Tesla and Philo Farnsworth. These cathodes are not thermionic, that is they do not require high heat in order to "emit" corposcular entities. Many different entities are wrongly lumped into an electron. Without going into detail or theory the specific objective here and now is to consider the Cosmic Ray Detector. This pre-supposes that the 0A4G circuit is working properly.

The cold cathode is the object of study, the hot cathode, or thermionic emitter, is well worked out.

3) Where thermionic emission is that brought about by the violent agitation of molecular dimension, "boiling" off "electrons", cold cathodes work on a process of secondary emission and field emission. Both can be equated to a "photo-electric" process, where a corpuscular entity of some form impacts the cathode dislodging a quantity of so called electronic corpuscular entities. The cosmic ray can constitute such a primary corpuscular entity.

Three basic form of cold cathode tubes exist. The first is the gas tube, such as the 0A4G. These are the most common. Here it is that positive corpuscular entities are formed by ionization of the surrounding gas. Upon being drawn to the cathode and impacting it, electronic corpuscules are prodigiously released. The second type is the photo tube. This tube cathode emits electronic corpuscules upon impact of radiant entities, usually given as photons. It is considered by Einstein that a one to one exchange exists, one photon in, one electron out. Farnsworth operated his photo cathodes in a different manner, emitted electrons now are the result of impacting electrons rather than impacting photons. This is called secondary emission. Farnsworth observed that one impacting electron gave rise to several emitted electrons. This gave rise to current regeneration, a new type of amplification. Finally, the third type of emission is field emission. This is found in spark gap tubes such as the 1B22. Most of these tubes contain gas, which converts the field emission into a positive corpuscular avalanche. Field emission is brought about through generation of a concentrated electrostatic flux. The lines of flux are stretched very tight (high potential) and this in turn tears loose the holdfast for the line of flux, the line snapping it through space like a spring. The holdfast is considered to be an electron. Field emission works best in a complete vacuum. It should be noted that Crookes and Tesla cathodes gave rise to field emission in a different manner. Here the cathode emits by internal repulsion rather than by external attraction. The emitted corpuscular entity is thrown, or projected, from the cathode material. This now carries a line of flux outward, expanding rather than contracting. Hence the ability for "Tesla Rays" to charge condensers through space. It is best to call these CATHODE RAYS to distinguish them from thermionic electrons.

4) It is important to consider the differences between hot cathode and cold cathode electron tubes. In both types it is ALWAYS the cathode that glows. This is the identifying feature of the cathode in both. However, the physical form of each is opposite. In the thermionic tube the cathode is always the rod, or wire, central structure, this heated to incandescence. The anode, or plate, is an enclosing co-axial structure of a large radius of curvature. It is exactly the opposite in the Cold Cathode Tube, here now it is the anode that is the rod or wire as a central structure and the cathode is of a large radius of curvature. This is either a photo emissive surface, or it is surrounded in a positive corpuscular plasma sheath in an ionic glow characteristic of the gas.

It is that this distinction between cathode and anode can become misleading in schematic representation. Figure 2 is the thermionic representation of a vacuum diode such as the 1B3, or 1X2 rectifier tube. Figure 3 is the cold cathode representation of a photo diode such as the 930 or 931 photo tube. Figure 4 is the common misleading schematic representation of the 0A2, 0B2, etc cold cathode gas diode. Note the proper representation in figure 5. Both are often used!

5) Actual experimental cold cathode tubes for use with the 0A4G can now be considered. The first is the Geiger-Mueller tube. The G.M. tube is a special form of spark gap tube, similar to the 1B22. In fact many G.M. tubes bear the 1B-- number. In the GM tube it is important that the gas de-ionize quickly and completely after breakdown. This "breakdown" of the gas is initiated by the passage of a corpuscule of radiant matter. The gas in a GM tube is often alcohol. This alcohol is impaired by the repetition of breakdowns leading to short tube life. It is thus of the utmost importance that the capacitance across the tube discharge be absolutely minimized. Here the stray capacitance of a co-axial cable leading to the tube can shorten its life. Thus the tube operates best if in its own circuit as a component.

The second tube type to be applied to the 0A4G is the gas and vacuum photo diodes. Their rated values are published, the 900 series of universal vacuum tubes, UV. This rated positive potential is applied to the anode of the photo diode and the photo cathode is connected to the trigger anode of the 0A4G. For stability, a very minute leakage conductance, that is, a very high resistance, is connected from the 0A4G trigger anode to its cathode, as an electrostatic drain. 10 to 100 MegaOhm resistors made up of smaller units in a series string is a good drain. Such would be 5 each, 5 MegaOhm resistors in series, 25 MegaOhm total.

6) The photo cathode of the vacuum photo diode can work as a cathode ray emitter. Here the anode of the photo tube is not utilized, and it remains unconnected, floating. Now the photo cathode is brought to an exceedingly high electro static potential, these propelling cathode rays. The cathode is made at this potential by a high voltage condenser charge to this potential. The condenser is now in series with the photo cathode and the trigger anode. Obviously the positive terminal of the condenser connects to the trigger anode and the negative terminal of the condenser to the photo cathode. Diagrams will follow

73 DE N6KPH

[GSM]

Just a polished metal plate that intercepted solar rays and somehow turned it into energy. The patent shows a clear ground connection. This device, if it does indeed work, and let us assume that it does, uses capacitance to synthesis energy.

UVC in sunlight releases electrons from sheet tin or zinc within ionicly conducting atmosphere, this generates a free charge on the metal wrt ground.
Repeatedly short to ground to pulse direct current or reactively induce alternating electric current.

This would tie in with Fig 6 above if the trigger was part of a circuit repeatedly discharging the capacitor, though any metal charge collector would need to be open to the atmosphere, unless a tube would also would have a charge differential within it supplied by another electrode, like a Geiger-Muller tube or OA4-G, and whereby charge motion energy would not be 'free'.

Question. Had Tesla discovered some frequency at which ionic conduction could be vibrated/ resonated within/ against the atmoshere ?

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

[GSM]

Note to T-Rex.

The 2C22 used within the regenerative receiver countained radioactive material, and this is where any additional energy came from.
Additional electrons were released within the tube and did not escape it. Also, depending upon construction and materials, especially of any modern 'equivalent', the tube has potential to become quickly 'poisoned' and rendered inactive.
The electron charge was transduced therein, and any additional current flow through the tube electrodes developed wrt and via external circuitry, free space reactivity or ground !

This is another situation where a Geiger Counter should be used lest associated harmful ionising radiation also emanates.

Cheers ........ Graham.

[David G Dawson]

pi explained

I have deleted a Post I made with regards pi as I believe there to be errors in the Post and will attempt a recovery by finding out greater detail than what I had presented.
Getting a suspicion that there is reference to the 'Harmonic pi' 3.24 just because the numbers are closely fitting to the normal pi 3.14.
Later on this.

Thanks.

Smokey

[dR-Green]

Phase two begins

In this experiment there is NO primary condenser, NO secondary condenser, and NO extra coil terminal. Secondary and extra coil are connected in series.

First resonance peak: 3101 kc
Second resonance peak: 4594 kc



Apart from this simple test practically all of today has been spent playing with meters. At this point in time every test method gives slightly different results. The potential probe used was an analogue meter on the 2.5V AC range, one end connected to the ground plane and the other a wire point on a stick. The other potential probe was the LEDs. The current probe was the ARRL probe, and a 7.5cm diameter loop of 22 SWG (0.56mm) on the end of a stick connected to the oscilloscope (input B). Input A is connected to the oscillator/primary for the phase test. Spent too long on meters to be able to record all the data today so that will be done tomorrow, including free resonance test of each coil (again). Ideally that should have been done today as variations have been noticed over time.

Notes: 4594 kc: According to the 7.5cm loop, peak current (highest voltage on scope) is around 50% along the secondary. This is NOT detected by the ARRL probe at all.

3101 kc: Same current peak approx 50% along secondary with the loop. As the loop approaches the top of secondary the oscillator voltage starts to drop, reaching a minimum of 200mV when the loop is at the bottom of the extra coil, and recovers to 350mV towards the top of the coil, from the original 1.4V.

Conclusion: "Concatenated" frequency too low; Extra coil has wire length extended to compensate for 119% direct connection velocity = no good. Phase will be recorded tomorrow for the record.

-----

Secondary = 13.079 metres
Extra coil = 24.256 metres
Considered as a continuous wire length Total = 37.335 metres
Luminal frequency = 2007.449 kc

Measured frequency = 3101 kc
Ratio = 154.4%

-----

Previous "free resonance" tests of concatenated coils with no tuning:

Review of "New Extra Coil" (#1), referring to July 28 2012 experiment:

Secondary = 13.079 metres
Extra coil = 16.47 metres
Considered as a continuous wire length Total = 29.549 metres
Luminal frequency = 2536.401 kc

Measured frequency = 3455 kc
Ratio = 136%

-----

Review of "New Extra Coil #2", referring to August 20 2012 experiment:

Secondary = 13.079 metres
Extra coil = 25.323 metres
Considered as a continuous wire length Total = 38.402 metres
Luminal frequency = 1951.672 kc

Measured frequency = 3023 kc
Ratio = 154.9%

-----

Assuming that these lower resonance peaks are the correct mode of operation, both coils quarter wave, then even with the shortest extra coil wire length tested so far and with no tuning capacitance whatsoever the frequency is still too low. Interesting that the "effective luminal frequency" of the total wire length to actual measured frequency ratio is lower with the first "New Extra Coil". If it was 154% as the other two extra coils then it would be above the intended frequency.