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

Re: A Puzzle


From: 	John H. Couture[SMTP:couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net]
Sent: 	Tuesday, September 09, 1997 1:57 AM
To: 	Tesla List
Subject: 	Re: A Puzzle

At 03:41 AM 9/8/97 +0000, you wrote:
>
>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
>
  To all -

   The discussions on this subject are creating a lot of confusion. The
reason being is that the authors are loosing tract of the fundamental nature
of the electrical terms being used.

  For example, "colombic force" is found only on the "Tesla List" and not in
any standard electrical or physics text. The coulomb is a quantity of
electrons like a bushel is a quantity of apples.  "Coulombic force" or
"Bushel force"  makes no sense.
 In basic physics there is an electrical field force equation that is called
Coulomb's Law. 

     Force = K q1 x q2/ r^2    where q1 and q2 are coulombs of charge, r the
distance between the charges, and K is a constant depending on the units.

  The force is not a coulombic force but an electric field force in dynes or
newtons.

  There cannot be a "several order of magnitude error" in EM vs ES forces.
These are two completely different electrical forces and comparing them has
no significance.
   The EM forces are due to electrons (charges) in MOTION and the ES forces
are due to STATIC electrons (charges).

   One way to avoid using confusing statements is to include with the
statements the fundamental equations involved. Using equations with typical
TC examples is the best way to get your point understood.

  Electrical terminology is used so much on the Tesla List that there is
normally no problem in understanding what the author means. However, when it
comes to the unusual the authors should be more specific.  Note that the TC
can magnify power but not energy.  Also RMS, peak, and instantaneous
conditions must be mentioned when using volts, current, watts, etc.  Authors
must clearly understand and indicate these conditions.

 Note also that sparks and arcs are completely different electrical
phenomena. Spark production for the typical Tesla coil requires little
energy but large power. TC sparks also require large voltages but small
currents. Arcs can require low voltages but  can have large currents. Sparks
can turn to arcs but not the reverse. Arcs are possible in the vacuum of
space but not sparks.

  Comments welcomed

  John Couture        

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------

>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
>