Re: (Fwd) RE: Longitudinal Waves

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

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

I am amused by your discussion about scopes.I am not now,but I was a QA
inspector for the USAF/beau of std.and I find the modern concept that a
digital reproduction af a real analog signal is some how with out fault. The
fact that one is a reproduction in itself says it is not a true real time
representatiom, but anly a facsimile to represent something real with
limitations that must be consitered in any valid use of test equipment.
     Robert  H
> From: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
> Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 21:05:24 -0700
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: RE: (Fwd) RE: Longitudinal Waves
> Resent-From: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 21:42:04 -0700
> 
> Original poster: "Malcolm Watts by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>"
> <m.j.watts-at-massey.ac.nz>
> 
> Hi Dave,
> The answer to your question below is quite simple, but first:
> 
> On 15 Feb 2002, at 18:41, Tesla list wrote:
> 
>> Original poster: "David Thomson by way of Terry Fritz
> <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <dave-at-volantis-dot-org>
>> 
>> Hi Pete,
>> 
>> Your explanation is helpful.  At what point of the cycle is new energy
>> added?  We know there are losses in the system, so at some point the energy
>> has to be replaced, correct?
>> 
>> I'm going to jump ahead of your answer, because I can't see how energy would
>> be efficiently added gradually through the entire cycle, it must be added as
>> a pulse at a given time.
> 
> The fact that you don't see how does not mean that it doesn't happen.
> In fact the energy exchange is a continuous process with the tiniest
> of time delays between the pusher and pushed.
> 
>> Most likely, just a guess, this energy will be added shortly after the
>> magnetic field begins to collapse in either one or both places in the cycle.
>> 
>> If the energy is added in just one point of the cycle, then due to the
>> gradual decay in the sine wave (resistance) there will be a slightly higher
>> voltage in the cycle just after the added pulse than just before the added
>> pulse.
>> 
>> Am I correct?
>> 
>> Whether my assumption is correct or not, that is what I had intended to
>> convey the first time.
>> 
>> Now when I see a perfect sine wave floating across the screen, and I know
>> due to the laws of nature that there must be resistance in the circuit, I
>> should be seeing a slight bump somewhere in the sine wave.  But I don't see
>> it.  Was it smoothed out by the oscilloscope?
> 
> The answer to that last question is as I've said previously; your
> suspicions about the oscilloscope are wrong.
> 
> Are the "laws" established laws, verified and agreed as having
> been verified by the scientific community? If not and they do not
> agree with observation (or vice versa), which would you be the first
> to suspect?
> 
> Regards,
> Malcolm
>> <snip>
> 
> 
>