Re:Secondary Resonance LC and Harmonics

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: Jared E Dwarshuis <jdwarshui@xxxxxxxxx>

Hi Chris

The only reasonably good method for testing theory is to see if it
makes accurate predictions. However having said this I must also
remark that theory testing is not always fool proof.

Two historic exceptions that come to mind are triangle trajectory and
epicycles. Before Newton's time war ships used triangle trajectory to
lob cannon balls at one another. The theory was that a cannon ball
went in a straight line and instantaneously lost its forward motion
plopping down on the ships deck. Thus the motion of the cannon ball
was that of a triangle.

Amazingly the model worked really well for sinking ships. But only
because both ships were at the same elevation. When cannon balls were
lobbed at fortifications on hill tops the model failed. The other
problem of course is that although the model may work in some
instances, it clearly does not model the observed path of the cannon
ball.

Ptolemy's epicycles were an elaborate mathematical model used to
describe the motion of the planets (around the earth), danged model
worked!.  As soon as they figured out that planets went around the sun
they dropped epicycles like a flaming turd.

So what am I saying? Yes you test theory  and you live with
uncertainty. When your model fails to make accurate predictions you
need to reappraise its merit.

We have made dozens of coil variations to test the robustness of our
theories. We have yet to build a coil that did not function right from
the drawing board. We are eager to see if anyone can build a coil that
disproves our theories.

Hi  Malcolm

Your emphasis is on operational advantage, i.e. producing the biggest
spark. Sure this is an admirable goal, but it is not the only game in
town. We are looking at the physics behind multiple node formation.
Try building a three wavelength coil with six active top end
capacitors without considering wire length ( I don't think that it is
even possible.)

We are in full agreement about top loading. For a given wire length
the inductance drops as the coil gets slender. To stay at the wire
length frequency the capacitance needs to be larger for a slender
coil.

The self capacitance also changes as a coil becomes slender but as we
stated, we were only examining inductance and not considering issues
of self capacitance.


Nicholson:

You cited mathematical errors, but were not specific. You claim that
we prey on  newbies and in the same breath you advocate velocity
factors that we have already demonstrated are untrue (proof by
contradiction) with our Capacitance to Free Space experiment.

I think that you have been lulled into believing that simple equations
could not possibly describe something as complicated as a resonant
coil. Yet simple equations; energy equations in particular, are the
cornerstones of physics.

 Jared Dwarshuis