[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Experimental results? RE: Stop the nonsense



Original poster: "Steve Greenfield by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <alienrelics-at-yahoo-dot-com>

Offer evidence. Like the person who has pictures of
coils with multiple meters and O'scopes connected.
Others have tables of measurements -with- the methods
used to measure them given.

How did you "ascertain" that one side stays negative
and the other positive? I've never seen any evidence
that radiation becomes donut shaped. Physical
explosions of stars, black holes, etc. aside, as they
are affected by their own magnetic fields, spin,
matter distribution, etc. Even so, those pictures you
had on your website of a supernova with ring structure
look like framegrabs from a Sci Fi movie. Please
provide links to a Nasa webpage.

What did you use to measure these things that you've
"ascertained"? All I saw was a plasma globe on your
website placed on your coil. Neat looking but I didn't
see anything in the pictures that was evidence of what
the captions claimed or why what you saw -was-
evidence of the conclusions you reached.

You seem to have a very loose definition of "second",
appearing to mean the first half cycle (ie, 180
degrees) of a sine wave when you say "during the first
second". Then there is your use of the word "moment".
What do you mean? What slice of time is that? Is that
Planck time, the smallest meaningful length of time?
Is that one second? Is it "a while" or "until later"?

Dave, you are not actually offering any evidence, just
conclusions, then dismissing those who are not true
believers.

Y'know, I just -knew- when this started that
eventually you would demand that -we- prove your
theory for you. This way if anyone fails to prove it
for you, you've made your $75 and can say they just
didn't do it correctly. Yes, I'm sure it is not easy
to wind. Perhaps the old method of um, what is it
called? A spiderweb coil?

Despite your reply to me stating that you aren't
claiming that this flat coil is 3 phase, and your
statement on your new list that it made no difference
if you used one or all three windings, you continue to
call it a "wye coil".

Peer review, my man, and reproducible results.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

This doughnut (toroid) thing... you wouldn't happen to
know a guy named Gary in Washington state, would you?

Steve Greenfield
I may be a Mad Scientist, but I'm not crazy

--- Tesla list <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com> wrote:
> Original poster: "David Thomson by way of Terry
> Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <dave-at-volantis-dot-org>
> 
> Hi Marc,
> 
> Thanks for the encouraging view.
> 
> I'll wind a 13" three wire wye coil for anybody for
> $75.  This is very
> reasonable considering the difficulty of winding a
> flat spiral.  Then you
> guys can do all the testing and measuring you want. 
> The schematics for
> using this coil are already posted on my web site. 
> I would just love to see
> someone get some meaningful data concerning flat
> spiral secondaries.  It
> would be great if all the characteristics of flat
> spiral secondaries can fit
> into current models of coils.
> 
> Personally, I've tried all the inductance formulas
> and none of them match
> the measured inductances of the coil.  I have gotten
> extremely high
> electrostatic voltages from these wye coils by
> putting a strong
> electrostatic capacitance on the terminal.  I have
> identified a clear
> electrostatic potential between the space below and
> the space above the flat
> spiral coil.  How many of you have a solenoid that
> shows a coil with one end
> continuously at a negative potential and the other
> end continuously at a
> positive potential (actually it might exist between
> the center of the
> solenoid and the space around the outside of the
> solenoid?  Maybe somebody
> could check this.)
> 
> The vector of energy in a flat spiral is clearly in
> one direction, from the
> outside toward the center.  As far as I know,
> solenoids are RF all the way
> through.
> 
> I'm with you Marc, I have shown the flat spiral coil
> has different
> properties than a solenoid coil.  OK, so these guys
> don't like my c^2
> theory.  Forget it.  Let them show me their theory
> based on actual
> measurements and observations.
> 
> Dave