Re: Cyclotron effect

["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>

Rick: You are assuming that the electron flow is bi-directional after it
leaves the toroid while still in the original strike channel. I do not think
this is true. I beleave the returm path is not the same as the strike and
would not contribute to the strike shape. Just the same as a natural
lightning strike is not bi-directional, but made of diverse paths of current
   Robert  H       

> From: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
> Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 20:04:59 -0700
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: RE: Cyclotron effect
> Resent-From: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 20:45:49 -0700
> 
> Original poster: "Wall Richard Wayne by way of Terry Fritz
> <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <rwall-at-ix-dot-netcom-dot-com>
> 
> List,
> 
> The symmetry of SEB requires the spirals to continue in the same direction
> on alternate half cycles when both E and B reverse together.  So any
> experiment confirming same spiral direction confirms an SEB mechanism at
> the expense of plain old EM theory.  As proposed below.
> 
> Assuming electrons are the sole candidates for being affected (due
> to their lightness and relative mobility compared to the ionised
> atoms) we should see the spirals form in opposite directions on
> alternate half cycles, due to reversal of B. PN
> 
> 
> Rick
> 
>