Re: Just One Pop

• To: tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com
• Subject: Re: Just One Pop
• From: Tesla List <tesla-at-stic-dot-net>
• Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 01:36:12 -0500
• Approved: tesla-at-stic-dot-net

Subject: Re: Just One Pop
  Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 19:46:01 -0400 (EDT)
  From: FutureT-at-aol-dot-com
    To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com


> Would you be interested in testing your DC tube coils, particurally the 
> stacatto version?
 
 RWW
  >>

Richard,

Thanks for the info.  I try to follow the electrostatic goings on, but I
think I'll have to be mostly an observer at least for now.  I'll make a
speculative guess though; that the staccato tube coils would be similar
to
regular tube coils, because regular tube coils pulse 60 times per second
anyhow, which is pretty slow, and should give time for DC charging. 
Since
these coils are poor "chargers", I would think that the staccato version
which can pulse as slowly as desired wouldn't be much better.  I'm
basing
this viewpoint on the repetition rate that RH found to be optimum in the
disruptive coil.  I'm also assuming that RH's tube coil was a regular
tube
coil, not DC powered.  The staccato (pulsed) tube coils are fun though,
and
I'm surprised they're not more popular.   But enough of my speculations!

John Freau

• Prev: Re: safety note
• Next: Re: HV + laser beams
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread