Re: TC Electrostatics (fwd)

Tesla List wrote:
> >From lod-at-pacbell-dot-net Sat Dec  7 08:44:09 1996
> Date: Fri, 06 Dec 1996 22:39:21 -0800
> From: lod-at-pacbell-dot-net
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Re: TC Electrostatics (fwd)
> Richard Hull wrote:
> > > [snip]
> > > >There's also
> > > >strong empirical evidence that disruptive (but not CW) coils
> > > >electrostatically "charge up" operators in a similar fashion, so there
> > > >also appears to be some interaction(s) associated with the higher peaks,
> > > >relatively low duty cycle, or damped wavetrains. But just how does this
> > > >all fit together?? This is really interesting stuff!!
> [snip]
> > > > Just thinking out loud,
> > > >
> > > > Dan
> >
> > Dan,
> >
> > I have published several scenarios similar to the one you depict above
> > and it is most likely the causitive agent in this process.  You neglected
> > coulombic acceleration from the discharger and the resulting failure to
> > sweep up all the original ions.  Furthermore,  one charge polarity
> > mechanism might prove to be more efficient than another.
> >
> > The charging and acceleration by coulombic forces would be greatest with
> > a point attached to a massive terminal load. (which is what we have seen
> > and verified.)  In addition, The pulses in the ring cycle are diminishing
> > in amplitude with time.  It would stand to reason that the first pulse,
> > where most of the energy of the cap is expended, would determine the
> > charge polarity.  This has yet to be definitively shown, but will be
> > thoroughly tested out in the near future.  Look for my Tesla
> > electrostatics article in an upcoming TCBA NEWS.
> >
> > Richard Hull, TCBOR
> Your theory of the DC component of the highly damped output waveform charging
> the test plate is an intriguing one, but I can't see how the output waveform
> can have a net long-term polarity (seconds), given that the primary ckt is driven
> by a AC source, and therefore operates in each polarity mode half of the time.
> Still, there may be some form of imbalance at work in the charging of the pri
> cap by the HVAC xfmr resulting in a net DC component, although my coil uses
> a pure DC primary drive, and I have not noticed any charging action on nearby
> objects (things may have been charging, but I wasn't looking for that effect).
> I'll look for it when I run the coil in January, using a Keithley 616 and a
> mini-ESVM made by Sensitive Research.
> One quick thing to try, if you still have your experiment set up -- reverse the
> leads on the primary, and see if the induced charge on the test plate changes sign.
> -GL


Last Question first.  I have done this and the sign changed but was 
grossly reduced in magnitude at range over the original negative charge. 
 I was limited here by the fact that the supply was originally ground 
referenced.  I feel my attempts to reverse the system were not balanced, 
and therefore not valid in the strictest scientific sense.  I am trying 
to get good quantitative data, but am currently making an isolated supply 
which I can count on.  This is also a key point in the H2 thyratron 
experiments where a critically controlled single ping can give highly 
accurate and quatitative results.  This will be developed as an inside 
project this winter.  I will know the answer!!!!!!

Now, the primary circuit doesn't enter into the picture at all except 
perhaps as a polarity determining factor!  Further, I think that only the 
1/4 wave system (or some odd multiple) will perform as advertised.

The DC output from the spark excited TC (whether AC or DC excited via 
spark/capacitive discharge) is a real fact of life and not a topic for 
debate.  Only the mechanism of production is open for disucssion!  I am 
saying that the very fact that we have a decaying wave allows the system 
to be monopolar as a DC electrostatic source!  Each alternation within 
the resonator has less energy than the last.


The first hot blast from the primary system forces energy into the 
resonator referenced to ground.  This energy is of a monopolar form as 
the first sign within the sinewave's first pulse occurs.  Whatever ions, 
electrons, chargeclusters, or whatever you might be happy with, are 
emitted (usally from a point), they are accelerated away by coulombic 
forces and these forces alone!  At the end of the first alternation the 
polarity of the output terminal slowly reverses and builds up to a 
maximum energy and voltage level a good deal less than the last 
alternation. (damped wave) Meanwhile the original charges have a kinetic 
energy "Ke" and a velocity "v" and the bulk of the original charged 
matter is at a distance "d" from the terminal.  The new, weaker charge 
will try to anull the prior output.  Agreed?  This will be accomplished 
by  attempting to sweep up and neutralize all the opposite signed 
However, the coulombic force exerted on these rapidly fleaing particles 
is tremendously reduced now due to their remoteness or distance (inversed 
square law portion of coulombs law.)  The naturally reduced energy of the 
current pulse coupled with the reduced force at range on the fleaing 
particles tend to not allow one (or the other) of the signed outputs to 
sweep up the bulk of the prior emitted charges.  The scenrio is now 
repeated with each weaker cycle, until the damped oscillation in the 
secondary dies out.  Thus a single polarity electrostatic ion wave is 
launched along with the stock electromagnetic RF component.  I really 
believe, with only qualitative data on hand, that one polarity (the 
negative one) is the predominant mechanism active here.  This much, I do 
have data for, but must give the positive method an unbiased equal 
opportunity with rigid controls in place.

It would stand to reason that one mechanism might tend to predominate 
based on the physics of ion/particle/cluster production.

The DC supply which is absolutely unreferenced is a must have item.  The 
H2 thyratron will rule out long term ion cloud formation.  The 
electrometer and a claibrated receiving capacitance "of large surface 
area" is a must. 
Tesla's original distinction in difference between the equivalent 
capacitance of micro thin wires (radio antenna) which attain there large 
capacities via electric field line concentration and that of huge 
elevated, large area, isotrpoic capacities which attain their capacity 
via interaction with space itself, is no trivial extension.  I feel this 
is the salient point in the exercise.  On is intrensically 
electromagnetic and the other electrostatic.  Naturally, I will keep all 
posted.  Richard Wall has recently posted on his findings as well.

Finally, all coilers worth there salt have experienced the hard shock 
which occurs just outside the spark radius of of small systems when 
holding a metallic object.  As the sparks just lap at the tip of the 
object, each hit yields a sharp shock.  You were at a DC potential 
(charged up isotropically via emitted ions) while not in contact with the 
spark which found its ground path back through the coil. (you were 
discharged)  As you approch the terminal and the discharge is continuous, 
all sensation of shock ceases as you are now part of the resonant circuit 
via a plasma connection and the RF passes harmlessly over the skin.  You 
are no longer isolated as a capacity and can't accept a DC charge via the 
"ion bridge".

Finally, try this with a small coil.  take a piece of .0005" mylar strip 
and place it next to a metal plate about 1" away and insulated from same.
if the plate is placed just out of spark range and itself insulated, the 
mylar immediately slams into the plate on power up showing DC charging of 
the plate.  Or you could just use a simple electroscope attached to it.

Hope this helps in understanding where I am coming from on this matter.  
More later.

Richard Hull, TCBOR