Re: Wireless Transmission

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: robert heidlebaugh <rheidlebaugh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Mike: I like your presentation. Yow have explained the results of some old
research in ULF signals. These signals are like recording the energy waves
of gravity using two large masses, or two perminate magnetic fields
seperated by a space at frequencies well less than 1 Hz.
   Thank you      Robert   H
--


> From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 17:31:39 -0700
> To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Wireless Transmission
> Resent-From: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
> Resent-Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 17:31:33 -0700 (MST)
>
> Original poster: Ed Phillips <evp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> "Here are some links regarding Zenneck Waves, Scalar Waves. What I
> believe about them is not important, that you give the concepts fair
> reading,
> deciding one way or the other, or decision pending, is important. Move
> forward.
> http://www.tfcbooks.com/articles/tws4.htm
>
> http://www.tricountyi.net/~randerse/prodwav.htm
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement
>
> Regards,
> Mike"
>
> The so-called "Zenneck waves" are the common "ground waves" through
> which most AM broadcast stations reach their listeners.  A base-fed
> vertical antenna sitting on a ground plane will radiate with the maximum
> value of the vertical E field directed along the ground.  If the ground
> is an imperfect conductor (which is always the case, even for sea
> water), the wave will be bent "forward" along the earth's surface.
> Zenneck's classic "WIRELESS TELEGRAPHY" (my copy is the English
> translation) has a good explanation and also points out that the
> attenuation of such waves is such that they are very much weaker at a
> long distance than the radiated wave would be if the earth were a
> perfect conductor.  He gives values for losses as a function of
> frequency and ground conductivity.  Since, for the simple
> non-directional vertical antenna, the energy propagates equally in all
> directions, the power density varies inversely as the square of the
> distance, just as in free-space waves.  There's no free lunch here -
> propagation of such waves is very lossy and of no use at all for power
> distribution.
>
> Note that Tesla's transmitters, as described in considerable detail in
> his patents, are just what we call today "base-loaded vertical
> antennas", although of quite an inefficient design (vertical radiator
> too short compared to a wavelength).  They do indeed radiate energy and
> there are no magical low-loss "scalar waves" involved at all.  I read a
> lot of words about "scalar waves" but I've yet to see a description of
> how one would create or detect them.  Tesla's apparatus was very simple
> and if he told the whole truth in his patents (in other words, wasn't
> lying) his expected mode of propagation was to use the system earth (one
> side) and the "conducting layer" he created in the upper atmosphere.
> This would comprise a spherical transmission line, with all the losses
> associated with finite conductivity of the earth and much smaller finite
> conductivity of the ionized layer.  All kinds of problems with this
> system and it's no wonder no one has ever built one.  His "proof of
> design" experiment was to use a partially-evacuated tube to conduct
> current from one location to another and there is no doubt that worked,
> although with losses he apparently never measured. That gave him a
> point-to-point transmission path so he had only ohmic losses for the one
> path, not losses due to the dispersion of the current over a wide area.
>
> Ed
>
>