Re: Hertzian and non-Hertzian waves

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

Original poster: "Paul Nicholson by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <paul-at-abelian.demon.co.uk>

Hi All,

Having received a great deal of positive feedback for my notes
on this subject, both from list members and beyond, I've been
encouraged to rework the material a little.  I've added some stuff
and corrected a few problems.

The emphasis has changed slightly.  In particular, Gary Peterson
informs me that Tesla never used the term 'non-Hertzian', 
although his explanations usually stressed the non-use of Hertzian
waves.  Non-Hertzian must be a label that subsequent generations
have added to describe Tesla's proposals for the use of 'current
energy'.  Therefore I've abandoned any attempts to interpret this
term as a synonym for reactive near field.

I've also been looking at an article 'The True Wireless' from 1919.
In this popular article, Tesla attempts to explain the principles
of his power distribution plans.  In my revisions I've tried to
use this document to gain some insight into Tesla's flawed 
understanding of fields and charges.

The URL remains the same,

 http://www.abelian.demon.co.uk/tesla-notes/030802.html 

Many thanks to all who sent me lots of encouragement, and perhaps
I'll try to practice more of this non-technical, unrigorous,
hand-waving waffle.
--
Paul Nicholson
--