Re: (Fwd) RE: Longitudinal 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>


> The fact that nobody has explained precisely how the energy is added
> to the wave to keep it oscillating as a sine wave is what will keep
> me on my current theory.

	Random energy added to a resonant system (acoustic or electrical)
	tends to add to the resonant system.  This is well known and
	well understood.  Mutual inductance (transformer action)
	is a most usual and convenient and conventional way to accomplish
	this.

> I'm open to learning, and I realize most of you here are experts in your
> field.  I'll listen.  So far, nobody has explained to me in precise terms
> how the center of a flat spiral coil can have an electrostatic charge, the
> outer windings have a steady zero (or near zero) volts, and electric
> movement still takes place between the two.

	Does it?
	The measurements described are of a DC potential present IN THE
	AIR near the coil.

	Conventional physics (and commercial engineering) explain this
	nicely, and are (were...) in use.

	The coil may be at a DC potential relative to ground, if it is
	insulated from it, indeed it probably is.  The transformer action
	powers the could.  The ((stray) ionic rectifier rectifies it.
	So long as power is on, there will be a 'spray' of electrons
	(mostly) into the air, leading to readings as reported.  All quite
	conventional.  (One can take identical measurements near any
	HV DC source:  try putting a meter probe near the face of
	a TV set.  (ca 25kv on the inside....).

	Once the power is off, any insulation present (eg plastic
	formers, insulators, etc) will 'capture' the charge, and
	can hold it for surprisingly long periods: cf 'electret'.

	The difficulty, perhaps, is understanding the presence of
	a few KVDC, in the presence of 10s of thousands of KVAC. 
	
>>    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?

> Since when does a new theory have to be established law?

	The laws cover much.  Note that past/recent advances (eg 
	Einstein, etc) DUE agree with existing observations, rather than
	over turning them. 

> Look, longitudinal waves were not first conceived by me.  They have been
> reported extensively by one of the greatest electric geniuses of all time.
> "Established laws", as far as I know, don't recognize longitudinal waves as
> occurring in EMR.  Yet there is no problem describing longitudinal waves
> occurring as sound in the atmosphere or other fluids.  The scientific
> community cannot agree on the exact nature of light,

	It does.

> let alone the quarterwave length of coils,

	It does.

> or the DC component of a high voltage oscillator.

	cf above.  Well understood.

> All of these uncertainties have the potential of being
> clarified in my theory.  Should I abandon my theory just because
> it hasn't been proven?  What do you think I should do?

	That would be presumptions to say.

	_i_ would listen to what is known, see if that is what
	is being seen.

> I'll listen to any information relevant to the science of my theory,
> but I'm not merely going to accept an "it's not possible" answer just
> because someone not fully familiar with my theory has his doubts.

	best
	dwp

> This week I have some more experiments lined up to investigate the nature of
> the electrostatic charge in the flat spiral.  I built another 30"
> electrostatically sealed plate to place below the coil and balance the
> charge from the upper plate.  I'm going to do some research to see how I can
> conclusively prove there is a constant electrostatic charge in the plates
> with the materials and equipment I have on hand.  It can't be all that
> difficult.
 
> Also, I plan to test for the presence of longitudinal waves.  It would seem
> to follow that IF a flat spiral coil produces longitudinal waves, then
> another flat spiral coil should receive them if situated in the same plane.
> It would be highly unlikely that a zero volt wire at the edge of one flat
> spiral coil could transfer energy to the edge of an adjacent flat spiral
> coil through transverse RF.  So if energy is received by the receiving coil,
> there would be sufficient evidence to suggest longitudinal waves were
> present.  I'm not saying it would be conclusive, but it would be evidence in
> favor of it.  After that, it would be a matter of modulating and
> demodulating to transceive a signal.

	IF the setup excludes all EM.  THAT is VERY hard to do...
 
> Just give me one good reason why I shouldn't pursue longitudinal waves in a
> flat spiral secondary and a theory that would explain them.

	best
	dwp