RE: Vortices off tops of discharges

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

Original poster: "David Thomson by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <dave-at-volantis-dot-org>

Hi Mark,

>  Hmmm. The glass envelope may have stayed cold to the touch, but remember
that tells you nothing about the heat distribution _within_ the globe.

For the heat circulation you are referring to, there needs to be air flow
and the substance needs to be particulate.  We're talking about EM.  EM does
not flow with air movement in small, closed spaces.  Not that would produce
a tornado effect.

>  The globe _does_ get warm after running it a while, right?

No, there is no new warmth, at least discernable warmth, in the globe.
There is not even a subtle warmth.

I am hot on the trail for the explanation.  But because it involves my "new
physics" I will reserve my explanation until I'm done with the mathematics.
I just got my new MathCAD 2000 Pro in today and I have already begun
modeling the pulse.  If there is anybody here strong in math and MathCAD who
would like to help on this, please email me directly.

>It's converting some RF energy to light, after all.

Or is it?  What if it is a combination of forces like EM that has had a
portion of the wave "zeroed"?  The remaining "unzeroed" EM force is the
visible tornado shape?

>You just might have to get vacuum-friendly to do carborundum-button work.

You might be right on this.  I guess I can afford a $20 experiment just to
be certain, though.  I've got vacuum pump if needed.

>  There was a long discussion about which common plastics and casting
resins are polar during the infamous "electret" thread here. It's probably
available on the Pupman archives, but I wouldn't know where to look
specifically.

OOhhh!  I'll have to check that out.  I understood the preformed Plexiglas,
but it didn't sink in that acrylic resin could be set while under the
influence of an electrostatic field.

>I'd have expected the vortices (assuming you had the globe in place) to
remain oriented as they were the other way; the enclosed gas vortices should
still be swirling axis-vertical because the gas is under the influence of
gravity with resultant buoyancy differential for hot and cold gas.

I see what you are getting at.  OK, now I'll make it a point to setup the
coil to check for the tornado effect while in the horizontal position.

> Why you get layered (that's not the term you used, but I can't recall it)
vortices is beyond me. If it's due to local
irregularities in the instantaneous E-field, that might explain it. Do they
look similar with different runs of the
same coil, but different (number of layers, spacing, etc) with different
coils (running at different frequencies)? If
so, it may be an indirect indication of the frequency of the coil!

As I mentioned above, I believe I'm seeing interference between the
different vectors of the radiation.  No doubt, the EM is generating the
light.  My guess is that the ES is interfering with the phosphorescing
process of the radiation with the helium (or argon).  I believe I'm seeing
that portion of the EM field that is not being disturbed, or cancelled out.

>  What happens when you place the globe in the plane of the coil to the
side in either orientation? I'd expect the vortices (if any) to be very weak
since the available field intensity should be less.

I didn't think of that one, either.  I'll try it.

Currently my coils are dismantled and I'm setting up all my rack mount
equipment.  I'm getting to the point where I have a feel for the coil and
know what kinds of tests I need to do.  The next time Paul asks me to make a
certain measurement, I'll have a test bench ready for quick results.  I'll
also be winding some new coils with regular insulated wire.  I think the
magnet wire is an impediment to spiral coils.  I'm also going to try
ballasting my potential transformer and see what the extra power does.

Dave