Re: darn the formula torpedoes

[FutureT-at-aol-dot-com (by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>)]

In a message dated 9/28/00 4:53:15 PM Pacific Daylight Time, tesla-at-pupman-dot-com 
writes:

> it's not the fact that it is a magnifier that makes it
>  more efficient, it is simply that certain parameters such as the
>  inductance and frequency have changed.  In fact this may be the
>  very reason why magifiers are sometimes believed to be more
>  efficient.  A two coil system can be built that has the same 
>  inductance and frequency as the magifier.... and it will give the
>  same results.  How do I know this? I have done the tests.  Anyone 
>  who wishes to prove this to themselves can do this same test.
>  

>  John Freau

Adding to my post:   In one magnifier test, I simply placed the
extra coil on top of the driver, (they were the same diameter),
to turn the magnifier into a classic coil, and the sparks got one
inch longer.  In other tests, I wound separate coils so that
the L of the combined sec and driver of the magnifier was the 
same as the sec L of a classic coil, and kept the power supply,
toroid, bps, etc the same and did a comparison.  It's all really
basic testing.  It is not really surprising that the magnifier did
not out-do the classic TC, because there's no real reason why
it should.  The webpage reference was given just for basic
comments, not for the test procedure.  These comparisons
might not control 100% perfectly for every variable, but they're
certainly good enough to show that the typical magnifier gives no
noticeable improvement in spark length.  

John Freau