Re: TC Secondary Currents - was ( Experimental Help - Terry?)

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

Original poster: "marc metlicka by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <mystuffs-at-orwell-dot-net>

Matt,
At the risk of insulting you and creating another enemy in life, i have
to ask you and others that, if the pupman list is to be used only for
the information on building and understanding tesla coils, not for wild
theories or ramblings, then where exactly does this post you have
presented fall? If Terry is "bending over backwards" allowing benefit of
the doubt postings, I believe this one must have "slipped a disk"?
I see personal experiences expressed? I see innuendo and insults
presented? I even see a touch of anger in this post, but i do not see
one word devoted to the construction or fine tuning of a working coil?
So actually this post is as much meaningless dribble as you intended to
place whatever point you were trying to make in.
  Of coarse Terry can choose to leave this on the cutting room floor,
but then i would guess it would be out of prejudice rather then
fairness, because after all it is just as useful to a coiler as your
post.
Take care,
Marc M.

Tesla list wrote:
> 
> Original poster: "by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>"
<Mddeming-at-aol-dot-com>
> 
> In a message dated 3/8/02 2:11:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> writes:
> 
> >
> > If you where a high school physics teacher, could you honestly
> > recommend pupman as a place for a student to find out about TCs?
> > --
> > Paul Nicholson
> > --
> 
> Hi Paul,
>        A physics teacher I was 35 years ago, and will be again next year.
> (pseudo-engineer in between) ;-) I would recommend the list for practical
> information on construction and tuning techniques, but, only to the sharpest
> students with the best tuned BS filters would I recommend much of the theory,
> and not without a lot of follow-up discussion in class.
>        The problem with peer review as I see it in this context, is that many
> of the fringe area investigators are peerless in their own opinions.
Terry has
> been bending over backwards to be generous with benefit-of-the-doubt and
to be
> non-authoritarian. (unless, of course, you use one of the 13 words that can't
> be said on prime-time TV) That is his call, and I have to respect him for
that
> as well as his many quality contributions to reality. As they said in the
'60s,
> to have free speech you have to tolerate a lot of cheap talk.
>        I had a problem in my own experience in industry, where a
co-worker, who
> was a licensed engineer, misapplied a system simulation program in such a way
> as to obtain a totally erroneous result. I went through a rigorous
mathematical
> and statistical analysis in which I clearly demonstrated the error and its
> potential for negative consequences and presented it first to him, then
to our
> supervisor and three levels of management up to and including senior VP.
> Unfortunately, neither he nor anyone in authority had the physics or
> mathematical background to understand that he had been proven wrong. (Company
> ended up paying $2M more in construction than needed.)
>        I think this points to one of the attractions of Tesla Coils and 19th
> century devices in general, and the attraction of fringe science
theories. They
> operate on a human scale. Between ~1860 and ~1960, electrical and electronic
> devices could "make sense" to the naked eye. You could build an oscillator,
> amplifier, power supply, etc., and trace through what was happening, how
> electrons were flowing. In the glow of filaments, you could almost
envision the
> cloud of electrons moving. Over the last 40 years, these things have become
> identical, tiny, featureless, black monoliths. Somehow it operates, but the
> innards for most people, are on an incomprehensible scale. The same is
true of
> physics in general. Up until early in the 20th century, almost any bright
high
> school graduate and surely anyone with a smattering of college could grasp
> enough Newtonian physics to have a good feel for how most of the things in
> their world operated. The frontiers ! of science and technology are now on a
> faster, grander and smaller scale than most people can grasp. The mathematics
> and physics concepts needed to truly understand what is happening is beyond
> most people. As I progressed through college, many of my classmates
switched to
> business courses or world literature rather than face the third semester of
> "Fields and Waves" along with the concurrent tensor calculus, multivariate
> analysis, abstract algebra, etc.
>        Is it any wonder that when someone comes along preaching "You
don't need
> to understand this, it's all fake and a conspiracy anyway; any idea you think
> up is just as respectable, unless and until you prove yourself wrong.", that
> they will attract a following like a messiah? For those feeling "the world is
> to much with us," overwhelmed by future shock and alienated by
nano-technology
> and Quantum mechanics, harkening back to a simpler age when anyone with a
> little "common sense" could discover something useful, provides a comfortable
> home. And fringe science fills that gap. This is not to say that it is
the only
> attraction of TCs, or that it is escapism for everyone, but it is a strong
> magnet for those who feel technologi! cally disenfranchised.
>        I believe that this may also explain the resurgence in popularity of
> paganism, herbalism, homeopathy, magnetic talismans, crystal power,
> chiropractic, copper bracelets, Creationism, UFOs free energy, etc.; simple
> answers in a too complex world become an emotional necessity.
>         Some approach the Colorado Springs Notes with the fervor of a
> fundamentalist with the Dead Sea Scrolls. (All the Truth we ever need to know
> is here, if we just interpret it properly) Probably less than four percent of
> those with a firm opinion have the background to understand what they are
> really for or against, and so arguments over fly-specks on the parchment
go on
> and on. So it is with the writings of "St. Nikola."
>        I don't have any answer to this problem, but I think this may be one
> answer to question of why we have the problem.
> 
> Yours in reason,
> 
> Matt D.
> G3-1085
> 
> 
>