Re: Hydrogen and Capacitance

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Hydrogen and Capacitance
From: "Ed Phillips" <evp-at-pacbell-dot-net> (by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>)
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 18:41:03 -0700
Approved: twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net
Delivered-To: fixup-tesla-at-pupman-dot-com-at-fixme

Tesla List wrote:
> 
> Original Poster: "Jim" <jim-at-jfwilliams-dot-net>
> 
> Sorry about the delay in responding, but It took me some time to find the
> reference to this use. (and sometimes I actually work!)
> 
> But in 'Colorado Springs Notes 1899-1900' Tesla was discussing how to
> increase the capacity of a surface.
> 
> " Suppose the surface was replaced with small spheres setting side by
> side.  Neglecting mutual screening action, the new capacity would be 'n'
> times one sphere.  As the sphere becomes smaller, the surface area
> increases and the capacity becomes larger.   To get the largest possible
> capacity, the spheres must be of the most minute size and can be
> increased by evacuating the spheres!  What Dr. Tesla also found in
> Colorado SPrings was that if the evacuated space was replaced with H2
> gas, the capacity actually increased!  (There is some speculation that
> the H2 in some circumstances can behave as a metal even though it is a
> gas)  Tesla considered this to be "a valuable use in the future".
> 
> ... more later .....
> 
> jim

	Unfortunately, for an isolated terminal such as in a TC, the "mutual
screening action" COMPLETELY negates the idea of increasing the
capacitance by increasing the total surface area.  In other words, bum
idea based on faulty physics.  Wonder if that was the reason for the
peculiar upper terminal at Wardenclyfe?  In many capacitors with liquid
as part of the system the use of porous electrodes to increase the
surface area and hence the capacitance does indeed work, but in this
case the effective terminal spacing is very small compared to the
dimensions of the pores.

Ed