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

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: William Beaty <billb@xxxxxxxxxx>

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Tesla list wrote:

> 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
>
> 	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.

Was this low value for loss associated with a leakage vertically across
the atmosphere (which would be constant whether there were any power
receivers in use?)  Or was it a percentage of lost energy in the waves
travelling between the transmitter and receiver?  Corum/Sutton seem to be
talking about the loss between transmitter and receiver being incredibly
low.


> 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.

Good point.  If the high-Q receiver also has to be phase-locked to the
higher Earth EM overtones, then phase-locking just the transmitter would
only let us strongly excite the ionosphere cavity but not receive that
available energy.


> 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.

True.

On the other hand, there's that Corum paper that say that low Q on the
transmission end is not such a big issue, since it's analogous to the
corona leakage and insulator conductivity on a continent-wide power grid.
I wonder how many hundred KW (or MW?) are today being thrown away
worldwide because AC lines have a bit of corona and insulators have a bit
of conductivity.  But this loss is set by system voltage, so it stays the
same whether there are millions of washing machines connected to the power
grid or not.


(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))))))))))))))))))
William J. Beaty                            SCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com                         http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-789-0775    unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci