RE: Terry's Test - Two Manifestations of Charge

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: "David Thomson" <dwt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

Hi Antonio,

> >Original poster: "David Thomson" <dwt@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Hi
Antonio, You
> >give a nice analysis, but unfortunately the analysis begins by
guessing
> >the very parameter I'm trying to objectively measure.
> >That doesn't help at all.
>
> It's well known since the XVIII century that breakdown
> voltage is almost completely a function of the shape of the
> terminals.

This almost sounds like knowledge.  But is it?  If they had the
means for measuring the potential across terminals 300 years ago,
why can't we do it just as easily today?  I'm kind of curious as
to which brand of voltmeter they used then.  My understanding is
that It was 1796 when Allessandro Volta finally was able to
measure the weakest of potentials with his electrometer.  The
potentials were caused by bringing two dissimilar metals into
contact.  I somehow doubt that in four years that the knowledge
to quantify the potentials between two gaps, as we are doing now,
was developed.

As for the shape of the terminals affecting the potential, this
is also what I predicted.

>From what I have seen so far, there is no quantifiable evidence
suggesting that there is only one manifestation of charge.  The
fact that I can quantify two distinct manifestations of charge,
and the fact that the data both supports and does not exclude the
possibility, is reason for me to continue with my pursuit.

> >Is there a way to measure electrostatic potential in between
sparks?
> >We should see a potential rise just before the spark breaks.
Maybe an
> >oscilloscope can inductively pick up the signals?
>
> A capacitive divider is relatively easy to implement and
calibrate.

Are you saying that we can connect a capacitor directly across
the gap, and then tee another capacitor to test equipment in
order to determine the relative potentials in the gaps?  So long
as we use the same values for both sides?

Dave