[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

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

Original poster: Terry Fritz <teslalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Hi Bill,

At 09:40 PM 7/15/2005, you wrote: 
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Tesla list wrote:

> Original poster: Terry Fritz <teslalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> Modern analysis techniques can pick out sub uHz signals many 10's of dB
> down...  Full spectrum with known capture bandwidth...   Maybe the data is
> very old...  But "now days" they just take 0 to say 100kHz bandwidth data
> for a few weeks and feed it to a computer....  There is not much that can
> go wrong,

Really?  :)

What goes wrong is that the received signal is way down in the noise,
therefore exotic antenna techniques become useful.

That is exactly what spectral analysis does. It picks the periodic signal out of random noise... With such a low frequency, we can super over sample and the electronics is not messy like the GHz RF stuff. I worry that the active antenna's might make their own false signals or have poor frequency response unless done just right. We do need a pretty good antenna. A lot depends on the polarizations of the signal, E or B field, grounding, etc.... It is not simple, but it is certainly workable...


Another problem is that the bandwidth of a detector varies in inverse
proportion to sampling time, so a narrowband signal which wanders randomly
will be wrongly interpreted as a wideband signal .  Regardless of whether
the detection is performed live, or via sofware w/files, if (say) you
sample at 1Hz but only for 0.1 second, the instrument will have chopped
the signal and therefore falsely receives it as a wide band signal.

But... Were talking "7Hz" here. We could over sample at 1MHz for hours/days... We could over sample "insanely" at these frequencies... Sampling rate is just not an issue here like it is on 100GHz situations where we run out of electronics that can go fast enough. We can also sample of known time "bites" (or scan through them) and find the optimal sampling time to pick out the true fundamental frequencies. It is all just a computer number crunching thing that is so easy now days...

To
make narrowband measurements you have to make longterm measurements.  If
the signal frequency is changing, then you can't measure it with
narrowband filters unless you know just how it's changing.  That's why
spread spectrum comm is used: the frequency hopping is a *huge* problem
unless you know the code.

The FM part of our signal just looks like a spread signal a bit. That is super easy... Depending on what the numbers are, one could plot it over time... I am sure that has been done. If this signal is "jittering" at say 1000Hz, then it "is" broad band ;-) If it is like over minutes, that is fine...


> and exact Fo frequency "jumping around" is not problem at all...

Totally wrong because the jumping around, combined with the narrowband
filters, will chop the signal and add a wideband artifact.

There are no narrow band filters.... Spectral analysis just takes all the data and searches the whole band space... It will ALSO find the frequency spectrum of the jitter as side bands if it is a high speed jitter...

Or do you have
an explanation for how a spread spectrum signal which is deep down in the
noise can be easily received when you don't know the random sequence of
frequencies?

That is a "cell phone" thing... I don't think the Earth is using cell phone protocols ;-)) If it does, we just use a cell phone transmission tester ;-)) I would love to call Anritsu and see if the have any for the 7.1Hz band :o))) Cell phone signals are more than simple to pick up on a spectrum analyzer...

.....


> they would have had
> many problems :o))))  They needed to use some "real" instruments
> ;-))

....

They have to be carful to take the frequency and step response characteristics of the active antenna into account. If they do not, then they will see all kinds of signals that are "false". I assume they did this. I have not seen their papers, but I trust they explained how this was done or why they didn't have to.



>  Spectral analysis techniques are extremely well known,

Not true.  Sutton and Spaniol were VLF researchers at NASA, and that
particular paper is about techniques for increasing S/N ratio at the
receiver.  There are no magical "Spectral analysis techniques" which
eliminate noise, therefore it becomes important to reduce noise at the
reciever.

One problem is that the antennas for 7Hz need to be considerably long. I guess they are making them like three feet long with lots of wire and ferrites to pick up B fields rather than E-fields. That might be ok too... Be interesting to try a wide area network to link far distant antenna's all over the world together to make just one big antenna. Then the virtual ends of the antenna could be on opposite sides of the earth. A little basic stamp board could to the logic along with a GPS receiver and computer. You really just have to record the raw signals with accurate time stamps. At 7Hz, that is trivial to do...

.....

> I have never seen or heard of any
> credible evidence that Tesla accomplished this.  I have seen and heard vast
> amounts of "increadible" evidence however...

What incredible evidence do you mean?

If you know of vast amounts of evidence, even if it's "incredible" in your
opinion, I'd like to know about it.  (Or do you mean rumors and
anecdotes?)

You want to study the ELF submarine communications systems. They know more about ELF than anybody:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/docs/scmp/
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/c3i/fs_clam_lake_elf2003.pdf
http://coldwar-c4i.net/ELF/RepublicMI/index.html

You would want to do it all with Tesla coils. But knowing about there system would give a ton of useful info!! They would give tours at one time if you pulled all the right strings, but I imagine that is not an option now... Of course, stay away from transmitting on "their" frequencies!!!



Perhaps you missed the fact that an earth-resonance power transmitter
would have to be a Tesla coil, a hundreds- megavolts device at frequencies
far below 40KHz.  Rotating generators can't do it.

The largest coils in the world barely make 3 megavolts. The Russians have shot some 100+ meter arcs with different equipment but the voltage is still in the 3Mv region... If you "need" to generate 100's of Mv, you have a problem right away.

I think the GMHEICSLR coil has the lowest frequency I know of at about 9kHz:

http://www.powerlabs.org/gmheicslr.htm


> I do note that 40,000/60 = "666"....

Lol.  More rhetorical tricks.  Emotion-based "derogation."  "Attaching a
stigma" to somebody's claim, that's a good way to sway a non-technical
audience.


:o))))  I could not resist that one ;-))



According to Tesla, a vacuum tube at the top of a TC is supposed to emit
some sort of electrical stream which can be used to transmit energy to a
distant receiver.  This probably was simply an x-ray tube which creates a
weakly ionized path in air.  Then this path can be used as a
poorly-conductive AC power line (but at high voltage and low current we
can transfer significant power even through a high resistance.)


Ok, you can work on that.


> >Total speculation, obviously.   But not banned in theory!   :)
>
> Yes, total speculation...  It "could" be banned though!! >:o))

You think so?  Please tell me how it's banned.   (And explain those
quotation marks while you're at it.)

We normally do not get into the "energy without wires" side of coiling since it drags the list off topic and we are so tired of hearing about it. Your idea is a little different than usual, so I let it go.


I do seriously want reasoned criticism.  Give me genuine flaws and ditch
the rhetoric and "sneering" stuff.  I enjoy proper criticism, but any
emotional tactics I will reject after loudly pointing them out.

This is not directed to you, but in general, this is why "we are the way we are"....

Many times people have "great new ideas" but they never seems to have studied the "old ideas" first... I worry when the old ideas are discounted and when challenged, we find they didn't even try to understand them... I also worry when some new idea seems to "depend" on us "agreeing" with it... If it works, it does not matter what "we" think... We are far better at helping with the "technical Tesla coiling issues" than agreeing with the "great idea" it is for.

If someone wants to build a new Wardenclyffe coil, I am sure we can help with all kinds of "details and information" regarding how to actually build it. But if you want us to "tell" you how "well it will work" for transmitting power around the world, that is going to get messy. If we say it is just going to be an elaborate space heater and may transmit a signal "a mile", we get yelled at and hear "Tesla said this and Tesla said that"... If we go into Q, resonant theories, E&M theory, propagation,... we hear "that is old EM theory that just blinds all you eggheads that bothered learned all that silly stuff"... Recently, we are getting a lot of "you do science wrong" since you will not go to a lot of time and trouble to "prove me wrong"...

We have heard about a lot of theories and a lot of folks that want to transmit power just like Tesla "said" he did... It plays out like a broken record over and over... I sort of hate to tell these folks to just go to the end of that long line... They have not been proven right, yet... and we have not been proven wrong, yet... We have never been able to help them... We don't have the slightest idea how to do it and we have seen it fail for too many reasons... If you want to transmit power around the world with a Tesla coil, we are not the place to come. If you want your power transmission project to fail for the maximum number of reasons, we could probably help a lot with that ;o)))

It is also real nice if someone is actually building hardware rather than just talking about it...

>
> Folks have been powering Crook's tubes with those little hand held coils
> for ~~75 years.

Yes, and your point?  Sounds to me like yet more of the same derision, but
if you expand on what you meant, perhaps I'll change my opinion.

You can get X-ray tubes off E-bay or from any place that repairs X-ray equipment. The tubes are periodically replaced still working and go for that special low price (free) to a fun and responsible use. If you search around you should be able to find the really big ones!! DC Cox would have more info to since he has done it... Some are like a million+ volts, so you just hook them right up to a coil and fire away!!

> He was one of the first to note the dangers of X-rays.  He noted that he
> felt a sharp, stinging pain where it enter his body, and again at the place
> where it passed out...

No, IIRC that stuff about stinging pains was his description of his
disovery of the "death ray"  phenomenon, where he claims to have explored
the effect and eventually built a particle beam weapon which accelerated
tungsten dust-motes in a vacuum and passed them through an actively-pumped
hole in the side of the vacuum chamber.  This was in old conference
publications of ITS, and also the recent Tesla special on PBS described
the history.


I copied the X-ray pain quote directly from the PBS book...

The US military explored this weapon idea after laying hold
of Tesla's papers after his death, but nobody knows what happened to that
classified project.  There's a good chance that it didn't work.

Many governments looked at it, but none wanted it... From what we know if it, a nice big anti-aircraft gun was far better... Tesla first tried to sell it for a lot of money, but soon was not even able to give it away... Tesla was in deep contact with the US and other friendly militaries about it long before his death and they were very happy to talk with him about it. But there were no takers... The US probably copied all his papers before giving them to his Nephew... The originals are probably sitting on a shelf in Belgrade. The US "might" have kept them, so maybe they are sitting on a shelf in Virginia... But a lot of people have looked real hard here and the mass of paper in Belgrade has not been well cataloged yet... Tesla claimed he never wrote it down too, so maybe nothing exists of it other than the usual info that is floating around... It has been a popular subject since Reagan's "star wars" came up in the mysterious conspiracy theory circles.... Most directed Tesla coil arcs have involved lasers. I am not sure any of "us" have done it, but it has been done with big arcs. Sort of cool since the arcs is a perfectly straight line, but nothing too scientifically dramatic at all...

Cheers,

        Terry