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

Re: Tesla's Energy Trans.

Hi Nick, ;-)
>Hi Terry,
><< Hi Nick,
> 
snip.......

>I agree that as an unsubstantiated claim this is a bit flimsy - unfortunately 
>as the book is so thoroughly researched it contains only a 'select 
>bibliography' therefore I have not found his referance for the Colorado 
>springs paper.

Darn!  I was hoping the author would have given a clue to where all this
came from (200 foot spark lengths).

snip...

>I would point out that on page 329 of the colorado springs notes tesla 
>mentions that he could achieve sparks of 50-55 feet in a straight line at 
>'not quite full power' - this is without earth resonant tuning of any sort 
>and with the coil still in developement.  It is reasonable to assume that the 
>magnification factor of the earth in resonance would be more than 4 - 
>therefore 200 fet does not look to unlikely.  As to your assertion that he 
>could not contain the voltages required to produced 200 foot arcs - As we see 
>with our coils every day It is perfectly possible to sustain 2 arcs at once, 
>often of very different lengths.  I would not underestimate Tesla - 
>unfortunately his habit of committing nothing to writing before it was 
>perfected in every way  meant that he said nothing at the Colorado Springs 
>stage, preferring to confirm his observations and then present a working 
>system to the world.

At the bottom of the next page (330), Tesla say's "These streamers were the
longest producible in the present building, with the roof closed (the roof
was always closed), measuring from 31-32 feet in a straight line from
origin to end.  Taking into account the curiously curved path the length
was probably more than twice this, so that taking the discharge from tip to
tip of these longest streamers, the actual path of the discharge through
the air was from say 124-128 feet!"  He then says with some improvements he
should be able to get 372 to 384 foot arcs from "end to end".

So he actually had 31-32 foot streamers as we would define them today.  He
then thought the actual streamers were twice that for 124 to 128 feet.
(That is four times, not twice, but maybe it was late ;-))  Then he
multiplied his actual lengths by 12 to get 372 to 384 feet (another slight
math miracle ;-)).  A 12 X increase in spark length implies 144 times the
input power.  If he was using 50kW then, he would need 7.2 Megawatts to get
to 372 to 384 feet (actual length).  I don't think he realized that every
time you double spark length you need 4 times to power input (he should
have known that though).  Perhaps this passage in the notes is were all
these giant spark length claims come from.  It appears that the "true"
length was 31-32 feet...  I think Tesla was dreaming a bit here of what he
wanted to do, not what he actually did...  So much of the Colorado Springs
notes is so detailed and factual, I think people didn't realize that Tesla
got a bit "carried away" here...

snip...

> 
> >There is also a detailed description of 200 incandesant bulbs being lit at 
>a 
> >range of 26 miles from the plant by a receiver.  The passage unfortunately 
> >does not give the wattage or cp rating of the bulbs so that no power figure 
> >can be calculated from this.
> 
> Where did this passage come from??  The author must have some evidence or
> proof of this??  I have not read this book but if it does have new
> information it would be very valuable.  If it simply repeats a bunch of the
> old "tall tails" about Tesla's experiments that really are not true then...

>I have wondered this as well about this biog - If the author cannot  provide 
>accurate refs then he has failed in his job.
>

I think this 26 mile light bulb thing must have been misquoted somewhere
and just became a "legend".  It is often sited as "proof" of the energy
transmission thing but it is not based in fact...

We all wish these giant spark length claims and such were true so we could
figure out how they were done and apply those "secrets" to our own coils.
However, when you dig into these claims, the only secrets to be found is
that they claims are false...

snip...

> Cheers,
> 
>    Terry
>    Fort Collins, Colorado
>  >>
>Happy New Year
>Nick Field
>

Happy New Year Nick and all.

	Terry