RE: Theory acceptance- Displacement current?

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: "Lau, Gary" <gary.lau@xxxxxx>

OK, I'll bite.  It the fact that you observed both thin purple and thick
white sparks simultaneously, the sole basis for believing that they are
uniquely different phenomenon, which requires a new version of quantum
mechanics to explain?  Is not that streamer currents are different,
resulting in differing plasma luminosity, sufficient?

Why is a flat secondary central to your theory?

Gary Lau
MA, USA

> Original poster: "David Thomson" <dwt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Hi Marco,
>
>  > The basic, simple and plain way to defend your new theories
>  > and gain new support is always the same. Provide a documented
>  > and repeatable experiment based on them and everybody will be
>  > satisfied (could it be more simple)?
>
> www.tesla-coil-builder.com/images/chiron01twosparks.jpg
>
> The theory that I developed came about by building a flat spiral
> secondary coil and placing a spherical top load on the center
> tap.  The ground tap of the secondary is connected to a sharp
> edged point.  In between the spherical top load and sharp pointed
> ground contact, I placed the butt of a fluorescent tube.  When
> the coil fired up, there was a thick white spark from the ground
> to the tube and a thin purple spark at the same time between the
> sphere and the tube.
>
> Certainly, the geometry of the contacts play an important role in
> the manifestation of the spark.  But there were two distinct
> manifestations of the spark, nonetheless.  To me, if there were
> truly two different manifestations of spark, then I should be
> able to quantify them and explain the quantum mechanics.  Not
> only did I succeed in quantifying the two different types of
> charge, but I ended up discovering the world's first Unified
> Force Theory.  Also, the theory quantifies why the geometry of
> the contacts is important to the formation of the spark.
>
> Now, maybe there is something wrong with my logic.  But when
> someone produces an experiment, discovers the quantification of
> the experiment, and then makes a monumental discovery in quantum
> physics, that should excite people.  But on this list it only
> raises animosity and gives old men (in their minds) a way to
> justify being cranky.  Ultimately, someone will say, "Feynman
> didn't teach that in physics class," or "Get a paper printed in
> Nature or Science and then come back to us," or "New theories are
> off topic for this list, go somewhere else."
>
> Now how can I get the experiment repeated by others, if I can't
> talk about it on the only list where there are so many
> independent coil builders?  I have no problem building it and
> repeating the experiment, even two years after the discovery.
>
> Now let's see if you are good on your word.  Since I now have a
> book printed (actually, I'm just about finished with the second
> edition), you can read the theory for yourself.  There are some
> on this list who are vaguely familiar with the theory, having
> recently proofed a paper that I'm preparing to submit to a
> physics journal.  You can read the book free online at Google
> Print by searching, "secrets of the aether" on Google.  Or, you
> can purchase a book or a 30 day ebook from the web site
> www.16pi2.com.  I'm not trying to get rich on the idea, although
> I can't afford to give away books that cost me $50 to print on a
> color laser printer.  Also, I don't see why I shouldn't be able
> to make an enterprise from the theory, since I'm the principle
> discoverer.  So I really don't want to hear any conspiracy
> theories about my motives.
>
> The fact is, I have performed an experiment.  The experiment led
> me to a new theory.  I developed the theory.  The theory is
> highly practical.  Perhaps it might please you to know that
> electrons are NOT made of cheese.  But let's see where this goes
> and how long it takes for the thread to be axed.
>
> Dave
>