Peter, whatever happened with Eric P. Dollard?

[t-rex]

T-Rex,
Tesla used litz wire in many instances. One reason is due to skin effect. Might not the other reason be that the multiple stranded dielectric insulated litz wire increases the inter-winding capacitance giving the ability to shorten the length to width ratio and create self-resonant conditions?

Orion

Generally you do not want to create inter-winding capacitance, that lowers the impedance and lowers the voltage and in some cases lowers the magnification factor. In the extra coil you want the lowest capacity possible. That's why Tesla used coils of equal width and height. If anything litz wire decrease capacitance. It creates less flat plate area.

[Logical American]

Attempting to resolve Dimensional Inhomogenities

NOTE: In attempting to understand the new material presented, I backed up (as one person suggested) and read all the posts from the beginning of the thread and have carefully collated some equations as they are serially presented. There are important questions to be addressed, in attempting to satisfy Fourier's principle of dimensional homogenity for the equations and qualities presented.

Furthermore, I just now found out that new posts have arrived, before this post could be presented, I don't know what to do about that, as it is frustrating to establish a serial thread here.
------------------------------------------

Heaviside Equation:

(1) (R*G + X*B) + i*(X*G - R*B) = propagation constant^2

Note: This is a complex product of (R+iX)*(G-iB) or (X-iR)*(B+iG)

Physical Quality Dimensional Units
--------------------------------------------------
R = Resistance in Ohms ?
G = Conductance in Siemans 1/?
X = Reactances Henrys/second ?/sec
B = Susceptance Farads/second ?/sec

R*G is scalar or DC component (dimensional units in R and G are reciprocal)
X*B is longitudinal or AC component
X*G is transverse or OC component (forward moving)
R*B is transverse or OC component (backward moving)

A post says that male is dielectric field in counterspace (/cm) and female is magnetic field (cm^2)

(we have mismatch of units, one is /cm the other cm^2, so which is in error?)

(2) Dielectricity * Magnetism = Total Electricity Q

What is the product * mean here? dot product? cross product? complex product? as it is not yet well defined in the dimensions.

A post defines Q as Planck as watt*sec^2 not as NIST (conventional) joule-sec.

Energy is the usage of Q/second = watt*sec which is our standard understanding

(3) E = dQ/dt in conventional terms where Q is total electricity (not charge!)

1 Planck/sec = 1 watt-sec (answering the question of how many Plancks/sec are in a watt-sec)

The dielectric field density must equalize the magnetic field density to equalize forces.

But forces is a term introduced but not defined, nor is its relationship to either field density shown, just implied.

Is this a physical force? field force? measured by weight units? Ambiguous and undefined at the moment.

Important idea: Counterspace or Reciprocal Space (fractal space) 1/n

i.e. 1/cm is less counterspace than 1/nanometer per unit length

A post supplies a familiar analogy, stopping a car with F = m*a and it specifically says that a is dV/dt (which it is)

(4) F = m*a = m * dV/dt (where F is force, m is mass, and a is acceleration)

Then the analogy is presented that dQ/dt = W (energy)

(5) W = dQ/dt (but what happened to mass or space?, by analogy to (4) )

We appear to have something missing in (5) in regard to space being acted upon by the change in total electricity during a time interval. What is it?

A post criticizes the time integral of W dt = Q.

The neglecting of C (the constant of Integration) is problematic here, perhaps detrimentally so, because C might well be some amount of total electricity. Furthermore integration is totally unable to say anything about the original quantities to start with, so it appears valid to differentiate, not integrate, in order to not lose anything valuable under consideration.

A post states that it only takes 2 quantities to specify the volume of a cylinder: height and circumference.

Was diameter or radius meant here, not circumference?

Mathematicians note that the formula is

(6) Volume of a cylinder = height * area = height * Pi * radius^2

This has dimensions of length^3, since height is length and radius^2 = length^2, so we cannot escape 3 dimensions.

A post then states that:

(6) Psi (dielectric induction) * Phi (magnetic induction) = Q (Planck) watt-sec^2

(we still need to define * operator here, and formalize the units for Psi and Phi)

A post argues 4 basic units for Electrical Engineering:

1. Time t dimensions:1
2. Space s dimenions:3
3. Dielectricity Psi dimensions:? 1/length
4. Magnetism Phi dimensions:? length^2

We need to resolve ambiguity on 3. and 4. for length so they mutually cancel on their product (whatever that is)

(7a) d(Psi)/dt = I (amperes) displacement current flow (not conduction current)

(7b) d(Phi)/dt = V (volts) electromotive conduction volts (not electrostatic)

It is stated:

(8) Phi/Psi = Z (impedance) in Ohms (E/I = Z)

and Inversely

(9) Psi/Phi = Y (admittance) in Siemans (I/E = Y)

Two distinct I currents and two distinct V voltages are mentioned.

Important Question:

Define I displacement current and I conduction current?
Define V electrostatic field and V electromotive difference?

I believe that it is very important to properly define these two types of physical qualities. Can this be done at this time?

It is restated:

1 Psi * 1 Phi = 1 Q Plank watt-sec^2

What are the dimensional units for Psi and Phi ?? Do they have dimensionality of watt^(1/2)*second ?

And again, in regard to watts, that it is

W = dQ/dt (joule or energy)

We need relationship of watt to joule defined. Later on we find watts cannot be = joules as the dimensions do not match. NIST defines watt as joules/sec so watt-sec^2 = joules*seconds

Does Planck have dimensions of joules*seconds? There appears to be ambiguity in using the term joules and watt-sec^2. Can this be resolved for everyones' understanding?

A post defines:

Coulomb (charge) Psi = Q/Phi
Weber (induction) Phi = Q/Psi

What are our units here?

Can we mathematically say that

dQ/d(Phi) = Psi (instantaneously)
dQ/d(Psi) = Phi (instantaneously)

so that

E = d(Phi)/dt (as above) unit: volt
I = d(Psi)/dt (as above) unit: ampere

However the two types of voltage and current are still ideas, not formally defined.

A post resummarizes:

Group 1 (primary)
---------------------
Q Planck (watt-sec^2)
Psi Coulombs ( ?/sec )
Phi Webers ( ?/sec )
W joules (joules ?? watts? ) (This has to be watts, not joules)

Group 2 (derived)
---------------------------------
E Volts ( ??/sec ) or d(Phi)/dt
I Amperes ( ??/sec ) or d(Psi/)dt

What about the two types of E and the two types of I ?? Can we
define them properly?

(This seems to be hinting that we need complex numbers to adequately
describe what is going on)

joules/sec = watts (so there is a mistake equating joules = watts above)

It is pointed out that humans overlay space with dimensions. (usually 3)

Positive Space

length = cm^1
area = cm^2
volume = cm^3
hypervolume = cm^4
N-volume = cm^N

Reciprocal (Counter) Space

span = cm^(-1)
density = cm^(-2) (density is usually thought as volumetric)
concentration = cm^(-3)
diffusivity ? = cm^(-4)
N-diffusivity ? = cm^(-N)

A post gives:

l^3 * Q = Planck cm^3
l^2 * Psi = Coulomb / cm^2 (so l^2 cannot be right, it has to be l^(-2) )

I stopped at September 30, 2011 12:19 pm posting, as there are questions that I have above that need to be addressed, because of the confusion in dimensional homogenity. Can they be addressed?

Later on I suppose a discussion of mass (kg or grams) might be brought in, but it is okay to ignore mass for now, since none of the material above, except for implied force right after equation (3) above is mentioned.

NIST carries the base units (qualities):

1. length (m/cm)
2. mass (kg,gm)
3. time (sec)
4. electric current (Ampere)
5. temperature (K deg)
6. amount of substance (moles)
7. light intensity (candelas)

For now, I will leave discussion of mass aside, and we notice already that item 4. electric current is in trouble, because it avoids the discussion of what type of flow it is, displacement current, or conduction current, which are totally dissimilar.

We probably don't need to talk about temperature, nor Avogadro's constant, and light intensity is probably energy projected onto an area, so it probably is not as base unit and should be removed. After all, we do have materials absorbing energy in other frequency bands than light.

- Randall

[OrionLightShip]

This post is in response to Kokomojo post #646

A good coil to use is the flat spiral shown on the "Tesla Longitudinal Electricity" video.

The coil is now resonant to it's own internal electro-static capacity. The price to pay for the high ground current is an extreme potential, e, at the open end of the coil.

T-Rex,
Tesla used litz wire in many instances. One reason is due to skin effect. Might not the other reason be that the multiple stranded dielectric insulated litz wire increases the inter-winding capacitance giving the ability to shorten the length to width ratio and create self-resonant conditions?

Orion

[Kokomoj0]

Awesome, thank you!

If this is not redundant as I will need to give everything you said a good think through, (several times), I have another question, you may have answered it I am not sure at this point.

My main interest is in building the Magnifying transmitter and reciever and doing tests on it to confirm or deny the claim that it takes in extra energy. That is my main goal, however I may now have 2!

It would be great fun to be able to measure more power coming out than put in. I believe to do that one must ideally completely null the TEM side.

That said what I am really looking for in the final analysis is tips on how to remove all tem transmission completely from the system and only transmit LMD. Maybe you have given me enough information that I should have picked up on it already and fail to see it at this point, if so please simply ignore this.

[t-rex]

Make Your Own Tesla Telluric Transmission System

This post is in response to Kokomojo post #646

A good coil to use is the flat spiral shown on the "Tesla Longitudinal Electricity" video. It's on the 160 meter HAM band. Remember that you must have a government license to transmit R.F. energy.
The "primary" coil is the magnetizing coil. It connects with a constant potential, thus the few turns the better, one is best. Surface area is equal on all windings and also equal to the surface areaa on the condenser. Basically all component coilsand the condenser should be the same weight. Max magneto motive force (m.m.f.) is what we want here in the primary. The "extra" coil is the constant current, maximum potential is what we want here, on the sphere, sphere capacity small.
It is important to note these coils are no longer to be thought of as just reactance coils, now they are transmission lines, and operate by the laws of transmission lines.

Hence given is the constant potential primary, a lumped LC circuit of very large b to a ratio ( a is the power factor and b is the induction factor- see Heaviside equation) , also there is the constant current extra coil, a distributed transmission structure in the form of a coil. Copper weight is the same. Also note b/a is the magnification factor of the circuit.
Hereby, the "secondary coil" is a transmission structure connecting the constant current extra coil to the constant potential primary coil. Hence the "Secondary coil" has an impedance and is a quarter wave resonant so as to match the constant current coil to the constant potential coil. That is the radio engineers description of a Tesla Magnifying Transmitter. No new theories or mystical unknowns, a basic transmission line calculation only. Simple. But, you better have an A.M. braodcast station ground for this system to operate.

So let's use an A.M. station as an example. 1600 on your A.M. dial. It has a quarter wave tower, a star ground plane consisting of 120 radial wires each a quarter wave long. A matching unit connects this to a 5 kw transmitter, the "alternator" of 1.6 megacycles AC.

Now lets shorten the tower, a "loading coil" must now go in series and resonate with the shortened tower. The ground current has increased. We keep doing this, shorter tower, bigger coil. Finally no tower, giant coil, high ground current. The coil is now resonant to it's own internal electro-static capacity. The price to pay for the high ground current is an extreme potential, e, at the open end of the coil. This is why the "mushroom" hood, or just a sphere. This extreme potential energizes the Resla "Ray" Tube for atomic work, not radio work. The ground end of out "Loading Coil" is the output NOT the mushroom cap. No one gets this. So we have converted 1600 on your AM dial to a Tesla Telluric Broadcast. No hidden secrets, no profound mysteries, just simple A.C. Ohms Law and a HAM radio license. "Theory of Wireless Power" gives all the coil calculations for impedance and propagation time. but the "tables" have errors. The basic formula is ok. "Condensed Intro to Tesla Tesla Transformer" gives a more specific theoretical description of the Tesla Transmission structures, including impulse modes. This paper is more for the radio engineer. Tesla gives a complete description, with photos and calculations, of his system in "Colorado SpringsNotes." Also the unit at my RCA laboratory is on the cover of "Condensed Intro to Tesla Transformers." No shortage of experimentally confirmed information on this topic, even by Tesla himself.

[t-rex]

Mechanical and Electrical Forces Part 4 of 4

This is not the result expected which would be thought to be

(46) Ohm

What of this discrepancy? Is the previous line of reasoning invalid? Only concrete Physical Experiment can give the facts. Math can lead you down many paths, images of its own expression.

Returning to equation (34), and substituting the relation

Planck per Second, or Joule,

It is

(47)

And for

(48) ,

That is, the natural impedance of the Aether is equal to the characteristic impedance of the metallic – dielectric geometry. In this case the factor a is unity and thus

(49)

Or

Considering that the following relation exist

Henry, or Mu – Centimeter

And

Farad, or Epsilon – Centimeter

It is then, if



It is L & C themselves contain mu and epsilon which makes the factor a a versor operator, giving the final relation for equal and opposite forces to be simply given as

(50) , Ohm

Where Z is the characteristic impedance of the metallic – dielectric geometry, or here the two wire line, and then it is,

(51) , Ohm

Thusfar we have experimentally engaged in the determination of forces without invoking volumetric space differential, or integral equations. Here utilized was no more than school boy algebra and physics. This is the direct Heuristic approach to reasoning about electric forces. It can be seen that concrete solutions can be obtained by this reasoning. But none can replace experimental verifications. As a post-script the following would be very helpful. What is needed is the magnetic and dielectric field diagrams for the “D.C. lines example” for the following

Dielectric field for equal and opposite voltage plus or minus 500KV,

And for,

Equal voltage on both lines of plus 1000KV

Likewise, for the magnetic field

Equal and opposite current in both lines plus or minus 1000 amp.

And for

Equal current in both lines of plus 1000 amp.

If someone can do this, many important facts can be gained.

73 – DE N6KPH, SK

[t-rex]

Mechanical and Electrical Forces Part 3 of 4

The force cancellation is given by,

(33) , Ohm

For equal and opposite forces.

Next consider the A.C. relations for equal and opposite forces,

, or

(34) , or

(35) , or

(36) ,

It is then

(37) , Ohm.

(37a) , Ohm

Hence, as with the D.C. relations, it is given,

(38) , Ohm

(39) , Ohm

Where it is defined,

(40) , Siemens

And

(41) , Ohm – Siemens

And as with D.C. it is hereby,

(42) , Ohm

The condition for equal and opposite forces.

Finally since it is given that,

(43) , per Siemens, or Ohm

The ratio a follows

(44) .

Thus a is a distortion factor existing between the natural impedance of the Aether and the characteristic impedance of the magnetic geometry. Thru this line of reasoning it is not the natural Aether impedance, nor the characteristic geometry, that directly gives equal forces. It is however given by the natural impedance of the Aether as modified by the distortion factor a, that is

(45) Ohm

[t-rex]

Mechanical and Electrical Forces Part 2 of 4

Consider the D.C condition for equal and opposite forces. It is dimensionally given by

(11) (Mu per Henry) – Ampere – Weber.

Equals

(12) (Epsilon per Farad) – Volt – Coulomb.

(11)

(12) , and

(13)

The dimensional relation we are seeking is

(13) Volt per Ampere,

That is how many Volts compared to how many Amperes results in force cancellation.

It is however,

(14) Volt per Ampere, or Ohm.

Hence our problem is based upon a relation of Impedance. In the D.C. case, it is

(15) Z = Ohm

And the A.C. case, it is

(16) Z = Henry per Second.

These factors considered it is that,

Volt per Ampere,

Is the product of three distinct dimensional ratios,

(17) Mu per Epsilon

(18) Farad per Henry

(19) Weber per Coulomb

(20) , Ohms

This is the natural impedance of the Aether in its unbounded form.

The ratio (18) is given as

(21)

This is the characteristic admittance of the metallic – dielectric geometry bounding the Aether, mu – epsilon.

And the ratio (19) is given as

(22)

This is the natural impedance of the proportion between the magnetic induction and the dielectric induction as determined by the metallic – dielectric geometry. In this case then given is,

(23) , Unit Numeric

Or

(24) , Siemens – Ohm

Hereby the product of facto (18) and (19) give

(25) , Siemens

The characteristic admittance of the metallic – dielectric geometry. The factor (17) is

(26) , Ohm square

Combining (25) and (26) gives the expression

(27) , Ohm

Hence for equal and opposite forces as by equations (17), (18) & (19) the product is hence

(28) , Ohm

Where it is

(29) , Numeric

a is the impedance operator.

For the E.M. condition it is known that the ratio of Mu to Epsilon is a constant

(30) , Ohm

As is the product a constant

(31) , Centimeter per Second

Calling this constant,

(32) R = 377, Ohm

[t-rex]

Mechanical and Electrical Forces Part 1 of 4

Since we have established a concrete system of dimensional relations this now can be applied to the case of equal and opposite mechanical forces on a two wire T.E.M. transmission line. This will be derived by dimensional synthesis, a particular line of reasoning that has been developed by this series of writings. It must be remembered that both Oliver Heaviside and Ernst Guillimen considered mathematics an experimental science from which to forge engineering tools.

The dimensional relations for force can be arrived at two different ways. The one given in the past writing is the A.C. way, hence the planck. The other is the D.C. way, this follows

I, Magnetic Force:

(1) Weber – Ampere – (Mu per Henry)

Or

(2) Weber – Ampere per Centimeter

(1)

(2)

Where it is given Mu per Henry, or per Centimeter.


II, Dielectric Force:

(3) Coulomb – Volt – (Epsilon per Farad),

Or

(4) Coulomb – Volt per Centimeter

(3)

(4)


This pair of dimensional relations relates to the magnetic force and the dielectric force as dimensionally distinct from each other. This is to say that no interaction between the magnetic field and the dielectric field of induction, no Plancks. It is static, hence D.C.

In alternate expression is the A.C. force relationships.

Let I be the displacement current in Coulomb per Second, and E be the E.M.F. in Webers per Second. The relation for magnetic force is now given

(5) (Mu per Henry) Weber – Coulomb per Second.

Or

(6) (Mu per Henry) Planck per Second.

(5)

(6)

Equation 6 reduces to

(7) Joules per Centimeter,

Where the versor is in the direction of E.M. propagation, that is, centimeters down the line.

The dielectric force is given by,

(8) (Epsilon per Farad) - Coulomb – Weber per second,

Or

(9) (Epsilon per Farad) – Planck per second,

And

(10) (Joules per Centimeter)

And the same versor direction as the magnetic.

(8)

(8)

Hence

(9)

Or

(7)(10)

Equations (7) and (10) give the same dimensional relation for magnetic and dielectric force.

[t-rex]

The following transmission will be broken into four parts due to a restriction in number of pictures per post.

[jpolakow]

I'd just like to point out that Eric is actually posting to the forum by writing hand-written letters and sending them by mail to someone who does transcriptions onto the computer. This is his preferred method of communication, being from a different generation than many of us. As such, he is not likely to reply directly to the forum. As Eric is proposing a consistent system of units and algebra for manipulating them, we will just have to keep following up on all the posts and reference material so that we may each come to our own intuitive understanding of what he is trying to say.

Hi 7imix,
This was how the thread has been progressing so far- hand written letters that were mailed. However now I've been able to get Eric internet access so he can see your guys' responses in real time.

Just a few quick things that Eric would like to see you guys start doing(from Eric):
1. Stop using the notion of charge and Q. Use dielectric induction and the greek letter psi. Start using the units he derived. It makes him frustrated to have derived all the units- and then nobody uses them, reinforcing their misunderstanding. Forget everything you know and start over. Start using big E or little e for volts, depending on the context. Use the system of units he derived- there was a reason for him doing 40+ transmissions doing this.
2. Eric is very new to computers. He hates seeing links to things. So if you are going to reference other material, pictures, etc. try to post those things directly in the thread so people don't have to follow a link to see the material. When possible if the link referenced isn't too lengthy. If it's too lengthy try to take some kind of excerpt. It will be easier for him to see things that way, and you are more likely to get some kind of response from him. If there is a link to something you can pretty much assume Eric won't read it. For instance he is pleased with what Kokomojo did in post # 633

[Logical American]

Was Oliver Heaviside right? Independent Verification from Neural Science

It appears that he may have been right all along. This fascinating paper on how nerves conducts signals seems to vindicate Heaviside as being correct, as using the conventional theory shows empirical failure.

See [math-ph/9807015v3] A Modified Equation for Neural Conductance and Resonance A Modified Equation for Neural Conductance and Resonance by Dr. M. Robert Showalter (University of Wisconsin, Madison)

[7imix]

Hi guys. This is some great discussion going on, I'm glad to see others attempting to do the math and compare and contrast with "consensus reality" (which isn't so real)

I'd just like to point out that Eric is actually posting to the forum by writing hand-written letters and sending them by mail to someone who does transcriptions onto the computer. This is his preferred method of communication, being from a different generation than many of us. As such, he is not likely to reply directly to the forum. As Eric is proposing a consistent system of units and algebra for manipulating them, we will just have to keep following up on all the posts and reference material so that we may each come to our own intuitive understanding of what he is trying to say.

I am hoping that at some point in the near future we will get to designing actual experiments which we can perhaps calculate and measure using the new units being proposed. Basic, physical experiments which can be used to gain hands on experience with the behavior of the phenomena which are being described. Perhaps we will need new measurement tools as well, or at least we will need to use the "adapter" functions to convert from conventional units into Eric's form.

[Kokomoj0]

The biggest problem that I have is while we have excellent mathematical information, being an old antenna builder myself, I still do not grasp what is going on with the tesla MT (antenna) to the point to be able to simply sit down and design one from scratch with any kind of confidence it will perform as expected.

There are 3 maybe 4 coils and I am sure that each one has a very specific function and relationship to one another to operate in a system to become a LMD transmitter.

So I know what we want to accomplish as the end result but I do not know how to obtain it without intimately understanding the exact purposes and how each element within the transmitter is supposed to operate because for me at least it is not obvious in the math. That is to say that I have the cement, sand, and rock, but do not know that I need to mix 1 of each to obtain the proper mix.

Eric has done a wonderful job in his videos explaining much of this that has helped tremendously its when I try to visualize the circuit, standing waves, resonance, impulse response and how that can occur from the physical picture of the tower design escapes me.

It seems it has to be done the pancake style and no tight wound coils and operate in a nonradiative mode?

Its not really obvious how to maximize for simultaneous maxim decibel and resonance tuning at the same time either to get this individualization tesla talked about. I am left with the impression that maximum impulse would be obtained by maximizing series capacitance.

It sounds like we are supposed to be winding coils that do not radiate, where the first coil is a broadband input that requires large surface area to maximize the transfer of the pulse, then the second coil to impedance match and contain the ring around finally the tall one to self oscillate or be near self oscillation to keep the whole system alive and act sort of like a self priming pump.

Its all guesses for me probably because I have been so well indoctrinated and brain washed by the stiner system. Then again maybe some important distinction(s) slipped past me. Um ok didnt see Erics last post, looks pretty intense BRB.

[QuarterPole]

I don't think you need to be apologizing.

I failed to edit my post, so I just need to point out that "apologize" is not a appropriate word, in response to "I appreciate everyone's patience."

The appreciation is mutual.