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


Original poster: Terry Fritz <teslalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>


The speed of light and 1/4 wave wire resonance was used by Tesla and pretty much everyone else for 90 years...

Unless one was listening to the vast but very recent discussions here in the past few years, to suddenly be told that it is not right, is a bit of a "shock"!!

We need to sort of cut those that have not "heard the news" a little slack and allow them to catch up on things. Bill Wysock, Richard Hull, DC Cox (?), Richard Quick, Duane Bylund, Nikola Tesla, the Corums... All have supported the older theories. We have to understand that those of us that might suggest they were all a bit wrong here and there, are going to meet with resistance!! Only John Couture ignored with lengths as a factor of the 1/4 wave speed of light in designing Tesla coils (before it was popular)...

I am sure "today" that these folks more or less agree with the recent findings, but there are vast numbers of folks out there that simply have are not aware that things have REALLY suddenly changed!!

So we need to help them to understand. They often look at us like we are fools to disagree with the "facts" of just a few years ago and often think "we" have no brain. They just don't know of the vast background and amount of work that has been done in the last "very few" years. They don't realize that we probably know more about the 1/4 wave ideas and such better than those that created it. They don't realize that we "HAVE" studied it in vast detail and picked out the flaws and errors and have "fixed" them... Instead of symposiums and quarterly journals, we took advantage of the "instant" communications of the Internet to bring hundreds of top Tesla coiling minds together to change the world of coiling in only a few years... Probably 70% of "todays" Tesla coiling theory was developed in the last "five" years... If you were not here, you missed it!!!

I try not to "just say" they are wrong, but teach, demonstrate, and explain the new techniques and knowledge. At first they will hesitate, but facts will grow on them in a little time ;-))

Just like those that suddenly join the list and tell us they have just made a great oil filled cap, there will be those that think they have a great new 1/4 wave coil idea... We are "both" shocked that the other's ideas are so weird... One side just does not understand why we seem "not to care" about oil caps and 1/4 wave wire lengths. We just don't understand why the are not using MMCs and GEOTC JAVA based web coil design applications...

We both underestimate the amount of time and effort the other has put into their view. We have worked on the new ideas very very hard, they have worked on the 1/4 wave stuff very very hard... The "collision" is never pleasant. We gain joy in seeing them learn and come up to speed, they are fascinated at how well things are "all figured out"!!

One simple test is to look at folk's "first coils". Those of us that made our first coils in the 1/4 wave theory days know how they all turned out... Today, people's first coils tend to be pretty stunning fire breathing dragons :-)))

Even Terry has a few 1/4C wave Tesla coils around :o)) But they are "old"... I have to admit, any Tesla coil that does not have IGBTs, seems very old to me now too... Just like we do not care about oil filled homemade caps and trying to figure out the wire length for a 100kHz coil as a function of C/(4*Fo), I find I no longer care about spark gaps, NSTs, and variacs... I laughed as I threw my "old musty" small coil drive system into the corner since it was "in the way" of my DRSSTC, and wondered if I would ever turn that old archaic "state of the art (2001)" thing on again...

The pace is relentless...



At 01:21 PM 3/27/2005, you wrote:
Can't this topic die already!!!  Everyone with a brain
knows Paul is rght. Everyone without a brain will
never be swayed. Are we OT yet???


--- Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Original poster: Paul Nicholson
> <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Jared wrote:
>  > you are misapplying transmission line theory.
> No I'm not.  You're ignoring all the evidence of