Eric Dollard

[Aaron]

Sputins, please check your pm.

[Sputins]

Displacement Current : - “ Is the result of a capacitor either accumulating the charge or getting rid of its charge”. “Charge = displacement current multiplied by the time in which it acts”.

It is still yet to be determined if there is a magnetic field associated with it or not, experiments yet to be fully carried out. There may be a situation where there is no magnetic field.

This was all explained with the most recent conference call. With Aaron and Eric - Really good content here, (thanks Aaron)!

@ upgradd,
Thanks for the detailed reply.

I’ve briefly looked at the EH-antenna circuits, [not too deeply as to avoid confusion and mind contamination], while they are likely NFG in normal radio TEM transmission and receivers, the active line from the transmitter goes through a tuning coil, then the P coil, with a capacitive cylinder attached the end. So there will be some reflective-wave component from the terminal capacitance. With who-knows-what if any coupling going on to the other grounded cylinder.. So it’s not a normal transmission mode, neither completely Tesla (telluric) like, nor transverse like. It’s kind of a failure of both! If a similar EH [receiver] was constructed, it may pick up something, but the efficiency would be low.

[orgonaut314]

What I wanted to say too is that nobody understands the near field but it gets clearer when you realise that the electromagnetic radiation is freed from its boundaries in currents and charges when it is transmitted.

[orgonaut314]

In this article the displacement current is also criticised.
http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/displacement-current.pdf

Transmission lines where only understood with transversal electromagnetic waves so Maxwell was a genius it says. His displacement current led to the correct understanding of transmission lines and EM radiation.

But there is a problem with this as the electromagnetic wave along a cable has a front where the field changes very rapid. If there would be a magnetic field at this front created by the rapid changing field that is a displacement current than the wave would be ahead of itself. So it is very problematic to say changing fields cause fields.

The solution seems to be that the field causes the currents and charges. Than in fact Maxwell should have said. There are electromagnetic waves explaining transmission lines and giving Heaviside the tools to construct working transmission lines. These electromagnetic waves have boundaries on charges and currents. The wave itself is simple a dual thing with electric and magnetic parts.

Now what happens inside a capacitor is answered as it is just another transmission line. Read the article he explains better.

So no there is no extra magnetic field in a capacitor but for the field caused by the transversal electromagnetic wave.

So we do give Eric credit for opening our eyes that charges and currents ar no sources but boundaries as Maxwell did not get that yet.

Still noone sees the longitudional energy in a cap and when we look at the Tesla coil I think there are two transmission lines. One going vertical between the loops and one along the line. But Eric says the vertical transmission line carries a longitudional wave and not a transversal. That makes all the difference.

But electromagnetic theory is not as simple as they teach us. Even today we discover Maxwell to have build a fictional mathematical current because he got it the wrong way around. Lot of confusion everywhere.

[lamare]

Now Eric seems to say that this displacement current is in fact a longitudional compression in the electric fieldlines with no accompanying magnetic field?

So this means that Eric does not believe in Maxwells law of dielectric induction???

But he does say there is a transversal electromagnetic wave along the wires and that requires Maxwell dielectric induction? What does Eric say on electromagnetic waves?

I still don't get it after all this time.

Of course, I don't know for sure what Eric thinks, but it is correct that longitudinal waves do not have an accompanying magnetic field. The magnetic field actually is a rotational movement of the aether. So, whenever you have a magnetic field, you have some kind of vortex and/or rotation.

A very interesting phenomena is the so-called "near" and "far fields" around an antenna, which are not properly understood by main stream science:

Near and far field - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the quantum view of electromagnetic interactions, far-field effects are manifestations of real photons, whereas near-field effects are due to a mixture of real and virtual photons. Virtual photons composing near-field fluctuations and signals, have effects that are of far shorter range than those of real photons.

They have to invent virtual photons, which by definition do not exist, in order to straighten things out!

What I think really is going on is that the "near field" is a real, transverse surface wave, while the far field consists out of "particles" or "photons" which show that strange wave-particle duality phenomenon:

Wave–particle duality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wave–particle duality is the concept that every elementary particle or quantic entity exhibits the properties of not only particles, but also waves. It addresses the inability of the classical concepts "particle" or "wave" to fully describe the behavior of quantum-scale objects.

However, since we know these "photons" are electro-magnetic in nature and thus *must* contain some kind of vortex, we can attempt to visualise how these things actually look like, which may be something like this:

Now there is one problem with the current understanding of the electromagnetic fields, as described in the Maxwell equations in their currently accepted form.

For any kind of wave to propagate, one needs both inertia (modelled by the magnetic induction, or a coil) and elasticity (modelled by dielectrity, or a capacitor). So, for describing electromagnetic waves, we have a model for both components. However, the description of the inertia *only* contains the rotational form of the inherent inertia of the aether. And that is why it seems there cannot be longitudinal waves. No wave without inertia!

In other words: if we accept the existence of the aether as a real, gas/fluid like medium, we have a basis for describing longitudinal waves, BUT we don't have a proper model for describing the inertia needed for sustaining longitudinal waves, because our models *only* account for *one* kind of inertia, namely the magnetic field, which describes *only* the rotational component of the real inertia present in the aether.

As an analogy, the current theory is akin to allowing *only* gyroscopic mechanical oscillations, because of ignoring the possibility of translational movements, which are perfectly possible.

It is beyond me why such an obvious mistake has not been corrected, but the fact of the matter is that it isn't, which is why "science" has come up with the crazy ideas incorporated in "quantum mechanics", as I wrote about in this article:

Tuks Unsorted KieknWatTWordt Stuff - Questioning Quantum Mechanics

[orgonaut314]

Now Eric seems to say that this displacement current is in fact a longitudional compression in the electric fieldlines with no accompanying magnetic field?

So this means that Eric does not believe in Maxwells law of dielectric induction???

But he does say there is a transversal electromagnetic wave along the wires and that requires Maxwell dielectric induction? What does Eric say on electromagnetic waves?

I still don't get it after all this time.

[orgonaut314]

I think the discussion on the displacement current becomes very simple if we just as Maxwell did assume there is an aether that behave like a bounded charge in an insulator a dipole electric and magnetic.

If you look at Lenz law of magnetic induction you can see that the magnetic field induces a magnetic current in the aether and these magnetic dipoles that displace cause a circular electric force around the field that is the EMF.

In the capacitor the aether particles are the electric dipoles that displace causing a circular magnetic field in the capacitor.

So only particles are the origin of the field or the ends of the field lines and these particles are either aether particles or electrons protons etc.

It is not necessary to say that fields can be the origin of fields but it is ok if the field has a material reality. The electrons are than the endpoints of marterial fieldlines of aether particles.

I know the problem is that this Maxwell aether is supposed not to be there but that is Einstein crap. Miller has measured it again and again high up in the mountains not deep in concrete buildings. Clearly the aether is affected by heavy matter like concrete but when Miller measured high enough with canvas around the instruments in stead of concrete he measured an aether flow again and again. Even Einstein said that Miller was a problem. After Millers dead his results where wiped of the table by some commission saying that the statistics where not strong enough. Of cause everyone wanted to believe that Einstein was right than but Einstein himself was much less convinced.

Dayton Miller - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I hope we will witness the rectification of the biggest scientific error ever.

[upgradd]

Eh = Nfg

Sputins,

I've looked into this topic. And for what it's worth, from examining the available (published) literature on EH antennae, the basic theory behind its operation is that the E and H fields of *separate* circuits can interact to produce divergence of S (the Poyntine vector) at their crossing. This action is called PVS or Poytine Vector Synthesis. Ultimately this cannot work as it would violate conservation of energy due there being no divergence at either the E-field or H-field sources used to synthesize the hypothetical Poyntine vector that transmits RF energy into space. That is, each source remains reactive, while active energy, theoretically, leaves the transmitter due to PVS. Obviously this results in FE, since no load is seen by the signal source while energy is leaving the system.

Furthermore, any EH antenna that "functions" does so by antennae currents on the feed cables. When the antenna is properly isolated from the transmission line, i.e. by a balun, the antenna stops working. Thus the "structure" that you believe is radiating does nothing, and the part that shouldn't radiate is what actually does all the work.

Also, the debate against displacement current is a very complex one, that the article in question doesn't adequately address. You have polarization of material substances (dipole moment), you have plasmon resonances on the surface of metallic objects and you have the age old question of how charge moves in capacitor. Plasmons (the wave nature of charge, de Broglie matter waves) are what allow metals the ability to reflect light, by interacting with the E-field of the photon. Do they also function for the mysterious inner workins of a capacitor? Also the forest hidden by the trees is the Poyntine vector--the carrier of EM energy. The general equation is E * H = S, so if there isn't a magnetic field, due to charge movement, you shouldn't have any energy being moved. Finally, examine how a vacuum tube or particle beam works: Electrons or ionized particles are accelerated through x distance of vacuum. The particles produce a magnetic field proportional to their velocity and charge. However, when a vacuum capacitor passes the same amount of current, what travels through the vacuum between the two plates? A "displacement current," which approximates the space current of the tube example. Or some form of wave? If you place both a vacuum capacitor and a thermionic tube in a black box you couldn't tell the difference, insofar as far as getting an AC current to pass through. But one of them doesn't actually move those charges from one side to the other directly. So it could be that displacement current is real but simply doesn't have a magnetic field associated with it because no charges move through the distance of separation. Which means displacement currents are more like waves than any sort of "current". It's likely that the charge movements on each plate is due to surface plasmons reacting to the applied E-field.

Depending on how you analyze this, you can say that D is really just E after all, or alternately, define D as the charge oscillation of isolated conducting objects when an E-field is impressed, thus having no effect on vacuum and no currents or H-fields in areas that don't contain conductors. Simply put, no magnetic field should be associated with displacement currents in the space between conductors as no current filaments exist between these isolated conductors. The applied E-field induces surface charges to move which makes it "look" like a current passed between the plates.

Now, if you throw a slab of insulating material in between the vacuum capacitor's plates, you will then cause movement of bound charges (as lattice strain) in response to an applied E-field. In this case a magnetic field should exist as charges are in relative motion, though not necessarily in the direction of the resultant current. So in practice there are four phenomena associated with "currents": "Space currents," emitted charges (ions or electrons) that are accelerated across a distance of vacuum (as in thermionic tubes or particle accelerators). "Conduction currents" where "free" charges are easily able to move (through a lattice) in response to an applied E-field (as seen in metals). "Polarization currents" where "bound" charges cause slight movements and rotations (of a lattice) in response to an applied E-field (as seen in insulators and ionic compounds). And finally, true "displacement currents" where free charges on conductors separated by vacuum act in response to an applied E-field. The last two cases involve no conduction or space currents between the distance separating the conductors and only the polarization current produces a magnetic field in this space (due to the insulator's bound charges).

[Sputins]

Now and than I am thinking further on the Dollard/Tesla stuff and I remember I have read somewhere that it all comes down to what is happening inside a capacitor.

Now I am trying to get this more clear and your opinion on this. Is Eric saying that essential the energy transport from one plate to the other goes through counterspace and is not transversal electromagnetic?

The traditional view is that the Poynting vector fills the space between the plates but the Poynting vector is a transversal electromagnetic wave.

Eric said somewhere that we would have to do a measurement in the cap to know. I know that a lot of people tried that and they did find a circular magnetic field in a cap but the value was much smaller than calculated. No one has ever measured the predicted magnetic field. Only the shape is correct.

My opinion is that this magnetic field might be a small transversal component and that indeed the energy transports as a pulse through the electric fieldlines. Counterspace.

This article says the magnetic field is never measured inside a capacitor in 140 years. Other articles that measured with superconductive elements can only measure the dependence or shape of the field but not the real value, that value is always much lower than predicted.
http://www.antennex.com/shack/Apr07/dc_factfan.pdf

Is there some critic that can point me to an article where they did measure the magnetic field in accordance with Maxwells predictions? Also its value?

This overlooked detail of the magnetic field inside a cap might hold the falsification of traditional electromagnetics. How long will we ignore it as a measuring error?

Bill Miller, KT4YE: Displacement Current: Fact or Myth?
“Unfortunately, the misinterpretation of Maxwell’s equations is not just an academic error of consequence only to scholars. This error has led to at least two failed antenna designs: the CFA and the EH. And those projects have cost millions of wasted dollars, countless wasted hours, and the destruction of many professional reputations. - It is time for instructors everywhere to stop teaching an erroneous concept”.


Ted Hart, W5QJR: On E-H Antennas
“For more than 120 years all antennas have been Hertz antennas, except the Crossed Field Antenna. In the future all antennas will be EH Antennas.”

So one can find many internet links that discuss the Cross Field and EH antennas with many discussions for and against these types of antennas and proposed theory on their mode of operation etc.

http://ehant.qrz.ru/book.pdf


As I don’t really know about these antennas much and with conflicting arguments as to whether they even work or not, I wonder what Eric would say about these types of antennas? [NFG]?

[Geometric_Algebra]

Geometric,

6080 @ The National Valve Museum
...
One look at the specs tells you that the Plate current is really high in comparison to similar Tubes and the reason for this is the very low ohmic value like 280 ohms compared to others in the Megohms.
This hints at 'a something different' phenomena will occur in such a Tube and is not really an amplifier but the audiophiles have latched onto this one as being an excellent Tube for headphone use as I guess the sound would be pristine in nature.
...
Smokey

Yeah. I'll have to think about that and play around with the numbers for these tubes again. I don't know what is going on with the internal structures of the 6SN7/6080 style tubes, but I think the basic idea is to maximize the transconductance term and minimize the output resistive term, so not necessarily high gain but plenty of i/v.

[Geometric_Algebra]

My load is the varicap and the primary parallel. I once measured that to be some 500 ohm hen tuned.

Sounds good to me, but let's check. For your setup, what is the primary coil geometry and operating frequency you've designed for? From that we can compute the inductive reactance, and then the load impedance, and then play with the matching net.

[orgonaut314]

I did some guestimates on the base of an internal resistance of 6k for a 6sn7 and having two parallel that was 3k source impedance.

My load is the varicap and the primary parallel. I once measured that to be some 500 ohm when tuned.

That way I knew what kind of varicap and varicoil to use. I made the L and tuned the coil and both caps. After that I measured the varicoil and substituted a permanent smaller coil. 500 pF varicap and I think 200 uH coil but I don't remember will look it up. It as close to my guestimates

In the end I had a nice secondary radiator as the radiation was the thing to optimise.

But progress is slow as usual when will I ever make an extra coil?

[Geometric_Algebra]

Thanks that last letter has instructions on making an impedance matching transformer.

I was working on my pi filter and ended with a shunt coil and series condensator. That works good too.

Here you can calculate the vallues:
LC Impedance Matching Network Designer | SiversIMA

Yes. There's other goodies in there besides tube amps. You can tell Eric put a lot of time into those notes.

The PI and T match networks will give you more degrees of freedom in terms of matching input to output impedance, but the L net that you mention is less hassle to build.

Assuming you're treating the primary alone as your load impedance, what values of L and C did you calculate for your matching network? What is your primary impedance (calculated and measured)? What is your source impedance?

[David G Dawson]

Vacuum Tubes

Geometric,
Thankyou for the information on the Vacuum Tubes from Eric on the 6SN7/6080/6BL7/6BX7.
I should mention that both the 6BL7 and 6BX7 are TV vertical deflection oscillators and amplifiers and where I am working with the Steven Mark TPU with respect the RCA colour TV implosion.
A TV vertical deflection circuit operates at 60 hertz and is seperately generated and has nothing to do with the Mains 60 hertz and is also not synched to it.
The horizontal deflection is much higher in frequency at 15734 hertz for NTSC and 15625 hertz for PAL.
The 6080 was such a fine illustration of an unusually designed Tube that Yaesu used it as a PA in one of their transceivers and is also capable of pulse work:

6080 @ The National Valve Museum

Eric is very good at hinting at specific phenomena like 'out of the box' and similar but the only way to know the why is to build the systems he presents and will be following this one up.
I would like him to go into greater detail as to the what and why these schematics are so good like he does with the Math which is alien to most of us but guess we need to build to see for ourselves.
The 6AS7 I feel has an ability to either enhance/amplify harmonics or even to introduce their presence into the circuit.
One look at the specs tells you that the Plate current is really high in comparison to similar Tubes and the reason for this is the very low ohmic value like 280 ohms compared to others in the Megohms.
This hints at 'a something different' phenomena will occur in such a Tube and is not really an amplifier but the audiophiles have latched onto this one as being an excellent Tube for headphone use as I guess the sound would be pristine in nature.
The 6AS7 and 6080 are both 'cathode followers' which also hint at their abilities.
Eric mentions an aluminium chassis and will be doing so but using my rail idea.

Smokey

[7redorbs]

Always a privilege and a pleasure to talk to Eric and get his work out there

Aaron

Yeah of course! It's always a pleasure and a privilege to talk to Eric if he wants to talk, that would be cool. I always like to prepare some good questions, I think I might have quite a few more good ones!

Best Wishes,
Adam