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

[Fwd: "human" topload]

X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Message-ID: <39BED740.149BCFE5-at-orwell-dot-net>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:24:16 -0400
From: marc metlicka <mystuffs-at-orwell-dot-net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "John H. Couture" <couturejh-at-worldnet.att-dot-net>
Subject: Re: "human" topload
References: <4.1.20000912165823.00a4a520-at-pop.dnvr.uswest-dot-net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

this explanation also gives credit to my feelings of  the streamer
output compressing the e-field on the opposite sides of a toroid, thus
causing a new higher potential point that then breaks out a new
streamer. as i stated this field movement and intensity compression is,
what i feel to be the driving force for streamer shape and distribution
on the top load.
no one can argue that there are not outside influences on streamer shape
and distribution for if it was just the result of an ionized air path
then once the spark channel was developed, the discharge would follow
this already made path of least resistance, but we know this is not the
case. it seems funny how this idea was met with, at the least a scoff,
but how when it is reworded from other mouths it is excepted as truth?
thank you john for lending (even if unintentional) support to my theory!