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

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: William Beaty <billb@xxxxxxxxxx>

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005, Tesla list wrote:

> Original poster: "Mike" <induction@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Yes, I told you that the 7.8 or 8 (not 7) Hz signal was heard on (AM) car
> radios tens of miles away as a tick sound with the impulse. Could have been
> on the phone.

Any guess as to the duty cycle?  The shorter the duty, the more the total
energy is spread out through higher harmonics.  A 7.8Hz square wave is
what we'd want.  If the harmonics up above 100Hz don't make it around the
Earth, then most of the energy from the "tick" is going to be wasted.

> But you can be sure this was ground wave, these were daytime transmissions;
> Also it was heard on empty (other than the broad band tick) frequencies, it
> never would have been heard well on an active frequency.
> Also the signal was strong close in but weak with distance, as it should
> be. All in all, what they really had was a "controlled" static crash, in
> ham terms.

But you'd have to detect it with a 7.8Hz receiver, and not just listen to
the broadband "tick" signal.   At AM radio frequencies there would be no
resonance effect at all, no?


> In trying to ring the cavity, this was the best that could be done in
> distance and followed all the standard distance loss laws like every other
> radio transmitter.
>
> Fired up by a known to this list PH.D with lots of fancy, manipulated math,
> Bob was convinced by him that, first, the x-rays would be so powerful that
> the path from the rectified coil / x-ray rectifier would ionize easily the
> air from the tube to the tower and even wire would not be needed, that the
> DC pulses would arc right in the x-ray paved path. Wrong.


The 7.8Hz pulser used x-rays?   Or is the xray tube a separate topic?

I'd expect that an xray-ionized path would be like a very dim corona
discharge, where the air was like a high-ohms resistor.  Send out your
watt as megavolts at microamps.


> Many like
> situations with same PH.D. Finally after 2 years, Bob took the numbers he
> was then questioning to several real experts, all of who laughed at the
> number manipulator's numbers. I am trying to be polite here.
> So, while he started out trying to prove out the theory, he ended up
> actually disproving it, or as close as anybody else has done with like
> equipment.

Am I wrong, or did he only prove that there are no resonances up in the AM
radio band?   He'd need a receiver that could measure VLF signals below
100Hz.

> Also, there were some questions about the cavity Q, I asked  Earle about
> this in some length. Cavity Q is from 5 to 3 and gets worse with harmonics,
> is pretty much not a cavity after the 5th harmonic of 7.8 / 8 Hz.

I recall that an Earth noise spectrum plot has peaks below 100Hz and then
starts downards.

> A big
> hairy lightning strike pulse might make it 3 times around, no more than 5.
> Mike



(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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