Re: Any ideas on this proposition?

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <FutureT-at-aol-dot-com>

In a message dated 2/18/01 1:44:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, tesla-at-pupman-dot-com 
writes:

> I think the magnifier approach may be more applicable in the case of tube
>  coils.  The impedance matching seems easier and does not demand such a
>  tight coupling because the primary circuit operates at a higher voltage.
>  

Richie, Alex, all,

I've built a number of tube magnifiers, and although they worked well,
they did not outperform a standard tube coil.  An interesting circuit
for a tube coil is one recommended by DC Cox.  This involves using
a primary with many turns, and tapping it at some point.  Then 
another wire is connected to the primary at some different tap point
and the other end of the wire feeds the base of a resonator.  This
method eliminates the need for electromagnetic coupling, and can
match a wide range of impedances.  The tap points are moved 
around until the best tap points are found.  I've tried this method,
and did obtain about 10% longer sparks.  The resonator is 
connected to the primary circuit though, so I guess it may be
more dangerous.  When the sparks hit a ground, they seemed
to be sinking more current than normal.

Any comments on such a circuit?

John