RE Re: Spark Propadati

To: tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com
Subject: RE Re: Spark Propadati
From: Tesla List <tesla-at-stic-dot-net>
Date: Fri, 02 May 1997 23:56:24 -0500
Approved: tesla-at-stic-dot-net
Subject:      RE Re: Spark Propadati
       Date:  Thu, 01 May 1997 20:02:45 GMT
       From:  robert.michaels-at-online.sme-dot-org (Robert Michaels)
Organization: Society of Manufacturing Engineers
         To:  tesla-at-stic-dot-net



T>There are MANY diffrent ways to render air or any other gas
conductive,
T>or else we'd be using Cobalt-60 for our spark gaps !

        Amen, brother, amen.

                        - but -

                        - But -

                        - BUT -

        The context of the thread to which I was responding was the
        use of laser light to provide a conductive path (in free
        air).

        Laser light.

        Electromagnetic radiation.

        My post was strictly within that context.


T>It all pretty much boils down to high field strength or power density.

T>High field strength causes breakdown in arc gaps.

T>You can think of field strength OR power density in the case of
ionizing
T>radiation.

T>High power density causes breakdown in 'air sparks', where a laser
beam
T>is focused down to a point, causing a 'spark'.

        You may be referring to the use of =focused= beam from a
        =pulsed= and very powerful =Q-Switched= laser.  Such can cause a
        minute and instantaneous plasma in open air at the point
        of focus.

        This is a horse of a very different color from establishing
        a =lengthy= conductive path thru air along which a Tesla
        discharge may be guided - by the use of a laser or microwave
        =beam=:  The thread of the posts to which I was responding.

 [ ... ]

T>Now, likely, a 2 milliwatt He/Ne laser won't help quide an arc from a
T>Tesla coil, but if we never tried anything that modern theory said
won't

        You are in correspondence, sir, with the most avid experi-
        mentalist you are ever likely to encounter.

        However - the purpose of theory (among many purposes) is
        to guide one away from avenues of pursuit which are likely
        to consume resources and (irreplaceably valuable) time
        without being fruitful.

        And, guess what?

        That was =exactly= the purpose I had in my post!!

                There are after all only so many days, minutes and
                hours in a lifetime.  Only a precious few can be
                spent Tesla coiling.  If my words served to guide
                someone away from a pointless effort, were not
                those words well expended?

T>work, we'd still be stuck with old classical physics...

T>Daryl

        Modern quantum-mechanical and relativistic physics arose
        in order to explain observed phenomena which could not
        be satisfactorily explained otherwise.   They did not
        evolve as a result of helter-skelter attempts to break
        the rules of classical physics.

        =All= new physical principles are formulated =only= after
        experiments which adhere =meticulously= to existing
        precepts.  It is only thru this rigor that observations of
        of something new can assuredly be that (and not in fact
        a result of sloppy technique or poor methodology).

                          - - - - - - - -

        Dr. Tesla himself is exemplary in the points I was trying
        to make in my post:  He did the theory first, the math
        second, and the experimental work after that.  As we seek
        to honor his accomplishments, can we not also benefit
        our selves by honoring his methods?

                                        Tesla-ing on in --
                                        Detroit, USA

                                        Robert Michaels