Re: Hertzian and non-Hertzian waves

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

Original poster: "davep by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <davep-at-quik-dot-com>

Tesla list wrote:

> Original poster: "Paul Nicholson by way of Terry Fritz
<twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <paul-at-abelian.demon.co.uk>
 
> Hi All,
 
> I've managed to work up some notes which describe what I think
> Tesla was referring to with the term non-Hertzian waves in his
> plans for wireless power distribution.
 
> I describe the process of radiation as understood by science, what
> the terms near field and far field mean, and how the radiation is
> altered when the radiator is enclosed in a cavity.   
 
> Somehow I did it with almost no math, which is a new one for me.
> But does any of it make sense to anyone?
 
>  http://www.abelian.demon.co.uk/tesla-notes/030802.html


	1) I still 'hear' Tesla claiming to 'broadcast' power
	(omnidirectional) and recovering huge chunks in
	one place.  If this is addressed, i missed it.

	2) I still 'hear' Tesla (at some times) claiming more
	power delivered to loads than supplied to the
	'transmitter'.

	related:
	3) At at least one point, Tesla says (roughly):
		Hertzian waves are line of sight.  What I
		use is detectable behind mountains, etc.
		Thus: these are different.

	I suggest this is simply missing the difference in
	refraction due to the difference in observations
	due to difference in wavelength.

-- 
	best
	dwp

...the net of a million lies...
	Vernor Vinge
There are Many Web Sites which Say Many Things.
	-me