[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A Puzzle
From: DR.RESONANCE[SMTP:DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net]
Sent: Sunday, September 07, 1997 4:56 PM
To: Tesla List
Subject: Re: A Puzzle
To: Greg L
The 2% I listed means within 2% of the measured value, ie, theory is close
to measured value. Sorry for the lack of description in the initial post.
DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net
----------
> From: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
> To: 'Tesla List' <tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>
> Subject: Re: A Puzzle
> Date: Sunday,September 07,1997 1:13 PM
>
>
> From: Greg Leyh[SMTP:lod-at-pacbell-dot-net]
> Sent: Sunday, September 07, 1997 5:35 AM
> To: Tesla List
> Subject: Re: A Puzzle
>
> DR.RESONANCE wrote:
>
>
> > To: Rich Wall
> >
> > Theory or not withstanding, it has come to within 2% of actual measured
> > value and that works well enough for our purposes. For exacting
research
> > work, I agree, it is not accurate enough.
>
>
> > > Unfortunately, your method is severely flawed. There was a long
thread
> > > on the the interconverability of electrostatic coulombs and EM
coulombs
> > > this last year. The original experimental method proposing to
connect
> > > the two is severely lacking. R. Hull has written elegant posts in
this
> > > regard. You may refer to the archives or perhaps Richard may choose
to
> > > comment on this old information.
> > >
> > > RWW
>
>
> 2%, and not 0.000...% ??? You guys are privy to some experimental data
> that I must have missed. Can either of you explain?
>
>
> -GL
>
>