Re: TC Electrostatics

Tesla List wrote:
> >From lod-at-pacbell-dot-net Wed Dec 11 22:29:08 1996
> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1996 20:47:40 -0800
> From: lod-at-pacbell-dot-net
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Re: TC Electrostatics
> Malcolm Watts wrote:
> >     Greg, I wouldn't expect any change from reversing primary coil
> > connections. If there is, we've got a live one I'd say (won't
> > speculate further till results are in).
> >
> > Malcolm
> Perhaps, but then why doesn't a CW coil produce an induced charge?
> I might as well try the experiment, since my coil uses HVDC for the
> prime power, and the supply is symmetrical about ground.  Besides,
> I need some reason to test out the primary ckt modifications.
> -GL

Greg, Malcolm, All,

I just took a day off and ran a number of quick tests in preparation for 
a long and more careful planned series, having now completed my HVDC 
supply.  *** note that I used no discharge point in the following tests, 
but just a large smooth toroidial load. (a point will always increase 
production)  At 30 watts, my micro coil produced negative voltage 
polarity on the remote 12" spherical collector connected to my Keithley 
electrometer and NEGATIVE ONLY!  Regardless of all connections.

I will be much more specific later on  after the more formal tests, but I 
have tried the following:

1. Regular connection of system with resonator base grounded and negative 
of supply grounded.

2. Regular connection with primary leads flipped.

3. Regular connection with power leads flipped  (Positive was grounded)

4. Flipped power leads and flipped primary connection.

5. Regular connection with the primary tank system ungrounded with all 
the above (1-4) connections repeated.

6.  Every connection above but purely with the positive HV lead feeding 
ground and the negative lead as hot (with and without grounding the 
primary system.

In all cases, negative voltage was immediately collected.

I got worried, so I charged a large sheet of mylar (from my disectable 
capacitor demo) and approached the collector and yes, one side was 
positive indicating, and the other side negative indicating, as read on 
the Keithley (never trust an instrument to the exclusion of common 
sense).  Thus, the Keithley doesn't appear to be in error. 

 The key factor here is that the  resonator base in the TC was always 
ground referenced!  The mylar sheet was not so referenced, by a metallic 
circuit connection.  I wonder if a giant metal, insulated, ground plane 
plate hooked to the positive of the supply, acting as a counterpoise, 
might not reverse the output?

Lotsa ideas, little time.

I have no quantitative data on the efficacy of transfer with these 
different connections!  One might think that one set of connections might 
supply better ion production than another.  I found it difficult to place 
the ball far enough away to not bury the needle, even on my highest 
range!  I will conduct a more thorough series of qauntitative experiments 
over my long vacation at X-mas. (DEC 20-JAN2).  I'll be off the list then 

Richard Hull, TCBOR