RE: Charge stored in Dielectric? Not really - MISCONCEPTION

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

Original poster: "Luke" <Bluu-at-cox-dot-net> 

But wait he said one of the experiments was to do exactly as the classic
one but at say 500 volts.  If the energy is truly stored in the
dielectric it should work for any voltage level.

At 500 volts the corona affect he describes should be minimized.  When
this is done at 500 volts there is no charge left after reassembling.

Forget about the oil and trying to prevent that corona from leaking onto
the dielectric.  Why wouldn't it work at 500 volts if the charge was on
the dielectric?

Luke Galyan
Bluu-at-cox-dot-net

-----Original Message-----
From: Tesla list [mailto:tesla-at-pupman-dot-com]
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2004 1:37 PM
To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Charge stored in Dielectric? Not really - MISCONCEPTION

Original poster: robert & june heidlebaugh <rheidlebaugh-at-desertgate-dot-com>


Just an added thought. In Oil you have added a second high dialectric
with
active browniun movement to desperse and discharge the voltage charge. I
question the validity of your conclusion. In air with solid components
no
large movement is taking place, only a local movement within the
dialectric
surface this preventing the stored charge from being neutralized. An
example
is the formation of a lectric where the dialectric is charged as a
liquid
(wax) and then cooled to a solid before removing the charge voltage. The
charge is stored as a perminant electrostatic charge like an "
electrostatic
magnet" in effect.
       Robert   H
-- 


  > From: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
  > Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 20:12:56 -0700
  > To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
  > Subject: Charge stored in Dielectric?  Not really - MISCONCEPTION
  > Resent-From: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
  > Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 20:18:47 -0700
  >
  > Original poster: dhmccauley-at-spacecatlighting-dot-com
  >
  >> Original poster: "Dr. Resonance" <resonance-at-jvlnet-dot-com>
  >>
  >>
  >> A classic capacitor physics experiment.  Charge a Leyden jar.
Remove the
  >> plates completely and short them both together and to ground.
Reassemble
  >> the jar and it delivers it's normal spark.  Charge is stored in the
  >> dielectric.  The effect of the plates are completely eliminated in
this
  >> experiment.
  >>
  >> Dr. Resonance
  >
  > Actually, I've been doing a lot of research into this since I last
saw this
  > effect demonstrated at the Rochester Teslathon and have found this to
be a
  > misconception.
  > I've also tried of few of my own experiments to verify this and to
see what
  > was really going on.
  >
  > In the demonstration I saw, a capacitor comprised of a thin
dielectric
  > separated by two flat aluminum plates was charged via a small flyback
supply
  > to about 10-20kV.  The charging
  > supply was removed and then the capacitor carefully disassembled.
The
  > dielectric was removed and passed around the room for all to touch,
etc...
  > and then the capacitor was
  > re-assembled.  Upon re-assembling the capacitor, you could once again
draw a
  > big arc of it proving that the charge of the capacitor was still
there and
  > it is concluded that
  > the dielectric stores the charge all along.  To further prove this,
the
  > dielectric could be rolled up, mailed across the country, and
assembled in a
  > separate set of plates and once together,
  > again an arc could be reproduced again proving that the charge is
indeed
  > charged in the dielectric.
  >
  > However, this is not correct.
  >
  > What is actually happening is quite complex.  When the two plates of
the
  > capacitor are moved apart, the total capacitance of the plate
capacitor
  > drops and as a result, the potential
  > difference between the plates increases to enormous levels.  Because
of the
  > physical arrangement of the two plates, this potential cannot
increase
  > infinitely and instead it forms
  > corona along the outer metal edges of the plates and leaks the excess
charge
  > into the surrounding air.  This corona (which can be heard during
this
  > experiment) then allows
  > opposite electrical charges to be "sprayed" or "painted" onto both
sides of
  > the internal dielectric material.  So when you dissassemble this
capacitor,
  > this corona effect transfers a
  > large percentage of the separated charges from the aluminum plates
onto the
  > dielectric surfaces.  The energy is still there, but its stored as a
field
  > in the dielectric material.
  >
  > To further disprove this misconception, i did the two experiments
which were
  > recommended to me by an old timer friend of mine.
  > With a similar set-up, I did the following experiments.
  >
  > 1.  I repeated the standard experiment.  I had two plates, measuring
about
  > 6" x 6" and a thin dielectric.  I charged this plate capacitor up to
about
  > 15kVDC using a small
  > EMCO DC-DC High Voltage Power supply.  I completely dissassembled the
  > capacitor, removed the dielectric, re-assembled the capacitor, and
managed
  > to pull a
  > nice discharge from this capacitor.
  >
  > 2.  Now, to prove that the charge isn't stored in the dielectric and
is
  > actually created by the corona effect on the separation of the metal
plates,
  > I did the repeated the above
  > experiment in a basin of mineral oil.  When performed under oil, the
corona
  > would be minimal and no "spraying" effect would be present between
the
  > plates and the dielectric.
  > I repeated the experiment, charged the capacitor plates to 15kVDC,
  > dissassembled them, removed the dielectric, and then re-assembled
them.  I
  > tried discharging this
  > capacitor now, and there was absolutely nothing.  I repeated this a
few
  > times and still nothing.
  >
  > 3.  On the second version of the above experiment, I charged the
plates in
  > air and dis-assembled them in air.  I then put the capacitor together
under
  > oil, and voila, as I guessed,
  > I could pull a nice discharge from the capacitor.  On the reverse, I
charged
  > the capacitor under oil, dissassembled it under oil, and then
reassembled
  > the capacitor in air.  Again,
  > as I guessed, there was no discharge.
  >
  > 4.  On a final experiment, if the energy was indeed stored in the
dielectric
  > as the Common Misconception goes, then it should hold true no matter
what
  > the capacitor voltage
  > was.  So I repeated the experiments at a variety of low voltage
(100VDC,
  > 200VDC . . . to about 500VDC)  I charged the capacitors up.  Checked
the
  > voltage with a multimeter
  > to verify charge, and then dissassembled the capacitors. (Again, this
was
  > done in air)  The capacitors were put together and the multimeter was
used
  > again to check for any voltage.
  > Again, there was no voltage present in that newly assembled
capacitor.
  > Thinking maybe the internal impedance of the multimeter was
discharging the
  > capacitor before it could
  > take a reading, i switched to an electrostatic meter.  Again, the
experiment
  > was repeated, and nothing.
  >
  > So in light of all this, you can clearly see that the charge really
isn't
  > stored in the dielectric.  It just so happens that when performing
the
  > dissectable capacitor experiment at
  > high voltages that other effects are occuring causing the dielectric
to be
  > charged up by fringing corona fields created by the increased voltage
  > potential as the capacitor plates
  > are being separated.
  >
  > If anyone still doubts this, I challenge you to perform the
experiment under
  > oil.  If the charge is *indeed* stored in the dielectric, you will be
able
  > to reproduce this
  > dissectable capacitor experiment under oil.
  >
  >
  > Dan
  >
  >