[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: A Puzzle




From: 	Richard Wayne Wall[SMTP:rwall-at-ix-dot-netcom-dot-com]
Sent: 	Monday, September 08, 1997 4:50 PM
To: 	Tesla List
Subject: 	Re: A Puzzle

9/8/97

Bert wrote:

snip

>> As others on the list have pointed out, there are environmental  
>> factors outside and adjacent to the TC which influence spark 
>> formation.  These factors regulate formation of the ion channel.   
>> Electrostatic ionization of air molecules produces energetic charged 
>> particles and electrons which constitute the ion cloud.  Once 
>> formed, these charged particles may move under the influence of 
>> electrostatic fields.  Current is produced only by movement of 
>> charged mass particles.  This is a very important EM concept.  These 
>> currents are usually local and are in response to movement of 
>> charged masses due to local electrostatic gradients.  RWW

>I completely agree. 

Again, considerable progress is being made.   Bert's acceptance that 
current is produced only by movement of charged mass particles and that 
this is a very important EM concept is very important in describing 
discharges from a TC resonator.  Also, critical is recognition of the 
concept that electrostatic ionization of air molecules produces 
energetic charged particles and electrons which constitute an ion 
cloud.  Once formed, these charged particles may move under the 
influence of electrostatic forces.

A major remaining difficulty is that it "takes a heavy spike of
current to initiate a streamer or extend it".  It's as if after all 
ionization is admittedly initiated by power from the TC electrostatic 
fields, then suddenly current magically takes over and extends the 
streamer.  After all, it's readily admitted "distorted high voltage 
fields created between the streamer tips and space charge do the "dirty 
work" of ionizing the air in advance of the streamer".  Why then the 
sudden switch from ES power to a slug of current?  It's been clearly 
admitted that ES fields cause ionization and formation of charged 
particles and these same ES forces cause  movement of these charged 
mass particles.  Furthermore, current is produced only by movement of 
charged mass particles.  These particles, of course, are electrons 
and charged ionic particles, again produced by TC ES fields.  And, it's 
also admitted current doesn't cause the ionization.

Current is not a physical "thing" that possesses physical 
characteristics.  Current contains no power or energy per se.  Current 
is a dynamic description of events associated with electromagnetic 
energy flow.  Current is dynamic and is inextricably coupled to a 
varying electric field.  Current is dynamic and cannot exist without 
its electric field to which it always coupled.  Current cannot exist in 
a static condition, as electrostatic electrical energy may.  Current 
results from a moving charged mass and is an effect.   Current is not a 
cause or precursor and cannot exist alone in and of itself.  Current 
may not arise de nouveau and impart energy to a static charged mass.  
Current by itself cannot do work, transfer energy or provide power.  
Current is not the prime electrical mover.  

Charge is.

Current is a useful EM concept and certainly should not be discarded.  
However, it has strict descriptive limitations and defining 
characteristics.  As such, look a little deeper under your TC discharge 
current and discover where the power really comes from.

A "slug" of current, in and of itself, does not arise and support or 
extend a streamer or a TC power arc.   Current is always coupled to and 
powered by the electrostatic fields provided by the resonator's 
termination.  Only electrostatic fields arising from the terminaton 
power TC discharges.  

snip

>There's over 50+ years of experimental evidence confirming both 
>initial Townsend AND Streamer propagation mechanisms in long spark 
>formation.  Are you saying that this is an outmoded EM concept?

If the theory is that multiampere current is responsible for initiation 
and maintenance of TC resonator discharges, yes.  Long standing 
theories of experimental evidence are not at all impressive if they are 
incorrect.  All concepts eventually become outmoded if they are 
incorrect.  Replaced by more correct concepts and theory.  Repeat.

Bert, thank you for your keen and inquiring intellect and for keeping 
this discussion as a calm and even discourse.

RWW