[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: DRSS-XXX?
- From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 21:55:43 -0600
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Old-return-path: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Resent-date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 21:58:27 -0600 (MDT)
- Resent-from: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Resent-message-id: <CTCVQ.A.fJD.e7dYCB@poodle>
- Resent-sender: tesla-request@xxxxxxxxxx
Original poster: "Paul B. Brodie" <pbbrodie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I concur with Derek!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2005 3:32 PM
Subject: RE: DRSS-XXX?
> Original poster: "Derek Woodroffe" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Matt D, All,
> "At some point in evolution, The DRSSWXYZ-TC Resonant Transformer System
> will no longer be called a Tesla Coil."
> Why ???
> A radio is still called a radio?
> A vacuum cleaner is still called a vacuum cleaner?
> Both work in very different ways to how they used to.
> These things are not called by names because of how they work. It's what
> they do that matters. The "output" of a SGTC and a DRSSTC are the same, they
> are still transformers, and they still rely on principles that tesla himself
> would understand. All that has happened is that we have found a few
> replacements for a spark gap with modern technology.
> The rest of the control and innovation is mainly to stop the modern
> technology that replaced this spark gap from exploding. Is it a huge leap in
> technology to make a device function as a spark gap and to be complex as a
> modern DRSSTC? Some improvement!!
> I suggest a new breed, not species..