Re: 7.1Hz, how the heck did Tesla succeed?

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: Ed Phillips <evp@xxxxxxxxxxx>

">As I understand it, the Q value of the Earth
>resonance is controversial, and Sutton/Spaniol claim that published values
>are wrong because they're the Q of the instruments used to measure the
>resonance (while the actual Q is higher but unknown.)  In order to see a
>resonance signal start building up, you'd have to hit the frequency
>exactly.  Also, Sutton/Spaniol note that the resonance frequency changes
>from moment to moment, causing a misperception that the Q is low when in
>fact it's high (but the peak moves around randomly which screws up the
>measurements.)"

	Controversial, perhaps, but certainly low.  If you "work out the
numbers" Tesla gives for loss, together with the capacitance of his
setup (spherical transmission line consisting of "conducting layer" and
earth's surface) you find that the Q (defined as ratio of energy stored
to energy dissipated) would have to have been in the tens of millions.
Such a high Q implies a bandwidth of 7/10^7 HZ, or over a hundred days
if I didn't slip a decimal point.  Since the height of the conducting
layer varies substantially even within a day the "topload capacitance"
it represents would change that fast, eliminating any possibility of
retuning of BOTH transmitter AND receiver.  One of the fundamental
problems with his proposed scheme, but not the only one.  I haven't seen
any words from him on this subject - has anyone else?  If the frequency
changed from minute to minute as these cats claim, the problem would
have been a hundred times harder.

Ed