Re: just wondering (Schumann resonance)

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

Original poster: Mike <megavolts61-at-yahoo-dot-com> 

If these loss figures are ballpark, it blows all that "wireless death
ray"
cr*p out the water too: For instance, Tesla couldn't have caused the
Tunguska explosion ;) without causing an explosion 40dB bigger at his
transmitter site, and I think folks would have noticed New York missing
:)))

Steve C."

You'll bring down the wrath of the gods with that note, but it's
pretty
accurate and to the point, even the editorializing.  The Schumann
resonance bandwidths are so broad that the signals are hard to detect,
implying a very low Q and even higher losses than you speculate.

Ed
No wrath here, but a comment or two:
        First, yes for normal antennas,  the losses from attenuation would 
be great as Steve says, but perhaps with the right setup, a standing wave 
can be set up in the receiver to make up for it.
       I think Tesla had a different definition when talking about 
transmitting useful power.  I believe he meant more on the scale of 
powering a clock or radio receiver to the point of being able to hear the 
transmission without batteries needed.  I don't think he expected anyone to 
run a washing machine from his idea.   I'm sure he did think of powering a 
bit more than just that, but never really got that far.
       Tunguska?  probably an ice comet as the official explanation said.
       I believe Tesla did figure out how to use the ionosphere cavity to 
cause an electron avalanche effect and drew extra energy from 
there...something akin to the aurora borealis effect, where the energy was 
not dissapated instantly as with lightning. Perhaps this is the little 
'push' he spoke of when referring to adding to the resonance voltage output 
and perhaps he could make use of that...I don't know
        It would have been nice if Tesla had documented his thoughts better 
so we could have actually tested his theories rather than guessing
Mike