RE: [ Re: Variable Capacitance and Inductance]]

["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 Dave,

	He ALSO made the SPECIFIC assertion that capacitance
	of an isolated capacitance INCREASED as it was
	elevated.  No One else, including some here, has
	observed this.

See my response to Malcolm.

>> 	Tesla asserted that he observed changes
>> 		LARGER IN SIZE
>> 	and
>> 		OPPOSITE IN DIRECTION
>> 	from everybody since (and some/all) before.

> And Tesla was correct.

	Citation please, of independent verification.

Math will work.

In Tesla's experiments for ascertaining the influence of elevation on
capacitance, he always tuned the coil to maximum potential.  As can be seen
on page 246 of CSN, as Tesla tuned for highest potential as told by the
longest possible spark length, the spark length increased with the height of
the ball.

This is reflected as:

    volt^2 k eo A
m = -------------
        joule

where m is the distance between the ball and the ground, volt is the peak
potential of the charged bodies, k is the dielectric constant, e0 is the
permittivity constant, A is the area of the ball in common with the ground,
and joule is the total energy in the oscillating system.

It is clearly seen above that as the voltage in increased, so is the
distance.  It would follow that if the distance is increase, the voltage is
increased.

Is that acceptable proof for you?

	I specifcally stick to facts, repeatable demopnstrable, testable facts.

Maybe you have the facts in your mind, but you don't put them in your
messages.  Almost everything you write is a vague, general statement
completely devoid of facts.  Lately you've been writing a bunch of CF stuff,
which is just as empty.  If you expect others to provide you with substance
in replies, you should provide it, too.

	Again:
	No doubt exists that external effects will cause
	measured (however measured) values to vary.  However
	the direction, magnitude and causes are well known, and
	in disagreement with (some of) Tesla's reported
	observations, sometimes substantially different.

Apparently it's not as well known to you.  You still apply static
capacitance principles to dynamic capacitance reality.  It doesn't work that
way.  Tesla was right and it shows in the math and his results.  This is not
to say Tesla is infallible.  He made a memory boo boo and forgot the exact
magnitude of his results.  Actually, if you had seen his handwriting, you
could understand how he may have simply misread his own notes.  But
regardless of how Tesla came up with 50% per foot, he was wrong, and his own
notes show it should have been 50% per 100 feet.  But that doesn't change
the results of his experiments.

> Once again, Dave.  You are being very general.
> Do you expect me to take your word for this?

	The web, libraries, and courses of all sorts are available.

You expect me to provide YOU with cites.  But you expect me to take courses
and go to libraries.  I have just educated you in this message on something
you obviously didn't know.  Extend the courtesy and do the same.

Dave