Re: Vortices off tops of discharges

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "rheidlebaugh by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <rheidlebaugh-at-zialink-dot-com>

My thoughts are away from heat. Whenever current flows a magnetic field
forms. This field moves the current path at a 90o vector. (right hand motor
rule) causing the current to rotate like the field inside a magnetron tube.
The current path is still toward its neutralization point so it followes a
helical path like a motor spins on a shaft.
  Robert  H 

> From: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
> Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 08:15:14 -0700
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: RE: Vortices off tops of discharges
> Resent-From: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 08:29:23 -0700
> 
> Original poster: "David Thomson by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>"
> <dave-at-volantis-dot-org>
> 
> Hi Mark,
> 
>> Hmmm. The glass envelope may have stayed cold to the touch, but remember
> that tells you nothing about the heat distribution _within_ the globe.
> 
> For the heat circulation you are referring to, there needs to be air flow
> and the substance needs to be particulate.  We're talking about EM.  EM does
> not flow with air movement in small, closed spaces.  Not that would produce
> a tornado effect.
> 
>> The globe _does_ get warm after running it a while, right?
> 
> No, there is no new warmth, at least discernable warmth, in the globe.
> There is not even a subtle warmth.
> 
> I am hot on the trail for the explanation.  But because it involves my "new
> physics" I will reserve my explanation until I'm done with the mathematics.
> I just got my new MathCAD 2000 Pro in today and I have already begun
> modeling the pulse.  If there is anybody here strong in math and MathCAD who
> would like to help on this, please email me directly.
> 
>> It's converting some RF energy to light, after all.
> 
> Or is it?  What if it is a combination of forces like EM that has had a
> portion of the wave "zeroed"?  The remaining "unzeroed" EM force is the
> visible tornado shape?
> 
>> You just might have to get vacuum-friendly to do carborundum-button work.
> 
> You might be right on this.  I guess I can afford a $20 experiment just to
> be certain, though.  I've got vacuum pump if needed.
> 
>> There was a long discussion about which common plastics and casting
> resins are polar during the infamous "electret" thread here. It's probably
> available on the Pupman archives, but I wouldn't know where to look
> specifically.
> 
> OOhhh!  I'll have to check that out.  I understood the preformed Plexiglas,
> but it didn't sink in that acrylic resin could be set while under the
> influence of an electrostatic field.
> 
>> I'd have expected the vortices (assuming you had the globe in place) to
> remain oriented as they were the other way; the enclosed gas vortices should
> still be swirling axis-vertical because the gas is under the influence of
> gravity with resultant buoyancy differential for hot and cold gas.
> 
> I see what you are getting at.  OK, now I'll make it a point to setup the
> coil to check for the tornado effect while in the horizontal position.
> 
>> Why you get layered (that's not the term you used, but I can't recall it)
> vortices is beyond me. If it's due to local
> irregularities in the instantaneous E-field, that might explain it. Do they
> look similar with different runs of the
> same coil, but different (number of layers, spacing, etc) with different
> coils (running at different frequencies)? If
> so, it may be an indirect indication of the frequency of the coil!
> 
> As I mentioned above, I believe I'm seeing interference between the
> different vectors of the radiation.  No doubt, the EM is generating the
> light.  My guess is that the ES is interfering with the phosphorescing
> process of the radiation with the helium (or argon).  I believe I'm seeing
> that portion of the EM field that is not being disturbed, or cancelled out.
> 
>> What happens when you place the globe in the plane of the coil to the
> side in either orientation? I'd expect the vortices (if any) to be very weak
> since the available field intensity should be less.
> 
> I didn't think of that one, either.  I'll try it.
> 
> Currently my coils are dismantled and I'm setting up all my rack mount
> equipment.  I'm getting to the point where I have a feel for the coil and
> know what kinds of tests I need to do.  The next time Paul asks me to make a
> certain measurement, I'll have a test bench ready for quick results.  I'll
> also be winding some new coils with regular insulated wire.  I think the
> magnet wire is an impediment to spiral coils.  I'm also going to try
> ballasting my potential transformer and see what the extra power does.
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
>