Re: Superconducting magnifier

To: "'Tesla List'" <tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>
Subject: Re: Superconducting magnifier
From: Tesla List <tesla-at-stic-dot-net>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 22:35:06 -0600
Approved: tesla-at-stic-dot-net


From: 	Ted[SMTP:tedric-at-generation-dot-net]
Sent: 	Monday, November 10, 1997 2:23 PM
To: 	Tesla List
Subject: 	Re: Superconducting magnifier

Robert,

I guess you are right. I have not checked any references, but did ask three
persons in my college's chemistry department. Althought my chemistry teacher
said that liquid oxygen is an insulator, the rest both agreed it can be a
conductor. If possible, please provide more information on this subject,
maybe this can be useful in the future. Thanks in advance.


Ted

  
>From: 	Robert W. Stephens[SMTP:rwstephens-at-headwaters-dot-com]
>Reply To: 	rwstephens-at-headwaters-dot-com
>Sent: 	Sunday, November 09, 1997 8:05 PM
>To: 	Tesla List
>Subject: 	Re: Superconducting magnifier
>
>> 
>> From: 	Ted[SMTP:tedric-at-generation-dot-net]
>> Sent: 	Sunday, November 09, 1997 3:19 AM
>> To: 	Tesla List
>> Subject: 	Re: Superconducting magnifier
>> 
>> >From: 	Jim Lux[SMTP:jimlux-at-earthlink-dot-net]
>> >Sent: 	Tuesday, November 04, 1997 10:13 AM
>> >To: 	Tesla List
>> >Subject: 	Re: Superconducting magnifier
> <snip>
>
>Ted wrote: 
> 
>> Right now, I am pondering over this: "Liquid oxygen is magnetic and is an
>> insulator (no eddy current). Will using liquid oxygen as core material
>> improve the coupling? And what about using an oudin coil to power an extra
>> coil?"
>> 
>> 
>> Ted
>
>Ted, 
>
>My memory tells me that LOX is a darned good conductor of 
>electricity.
>
>rwstephens
>
>
>
>