[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A Puzzle
From: DR.RESONANCE[SMTP:DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net]
Sent: Monday, September 08, 1997 11:36 AM
To: Tesla List
Subject: Re: A Puzzle
To: Rich
Hope to clear up this matter. Direct current in a series circuit is the
same no matter where the measuring ammeter is placed. We measured the
ground current in series with the ground discharge terminal. This
measurement gives us an accurate indication of the spark channel current in
the discharge and agrees within 2% of the calculated value using the simple
equation I stated. It works and is a valid measurement. It also is in
agreement with the calculated value with the coulomb equation.
This is no way intended to be a statement of current measurement technique
with a resonance transformer which is a blend of ES and EM. I was hoping
to provide a simple answer to the query posted.
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 10:41 PM
>
>
> From: Richard Wayne Wall[SMTP:rwall-at-ix-dot-netcom-dot-com]
> Sent: Sunday, September 07, 1997 9:39 AM
> To: Tesla List
> Subject: Re: A Puzzle
>
> 9/7/97
>
> Dr. R wrote:
>
> >> >The peak current in amps can easily be determined by measuring the
> >> >total capacitance of the machine. Divide the in coulombs by the
> >> >time in sec (assume 1 microsec for most machines) and this gives
> >> >the total peak current in amperes.
>
> >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.
>
> No one can deny that a Van de Graf generator is an electrostatic device
> that collects electrostatic energy on its terminal. Your initial
> comment indicates a derived EM current using Coulombs from an
> electrostatic device. Now you indicate this derived value is within 2%
> of a measured value.
>
> There is a several order of magnitude error in the experimental
> comparison of EM vs ES Coulombic forces. Not a 2% error, nor exacting
> research work.
>
> This calls into question your method of measuring current in an air
> discharge of a Van de Graf generator.
>
> RWW
>
>
>
>