Re: Terry's New Plane Wave Antenna

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: "Dmitry (father dest)" <dest@xxxxxxxxxxx>

> Original poster: Terry Fritz <vardin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> Hi Dmitry,

>>No artifice performed upon the normal Tesla coil circuitry can yield a
>>negative charge collection process on a remote isolated capacity!"
>>
>>so yeah, Terry - "It is well known that coils tend to charge up the
>>surroundings
>>negatively" - it is well known only to you i guess? or R.Hull was totally
>>wrong again? :-D

> Richard's meter really did have some kind of problem.  But I don't
> think it would cause gross + - errors....  But this would:

these problems were BEFORE this quote - when he observed the negative
charge. Richard Wayne Wall was the person, who first get positive
readings and just because of him Hull did his experiments again.

> One problem is that the electrometer was made to run in a low field
> situation.

Hull used not only electrometer - the coulombmeter, and probably field
was not so strong as you may think of - he used a tc in 10-20w range, at
distances up to couple of tens of feet.

> So It might seem that if a Tesla coil spewed out negative ions it
> would charge the surrounds negative.  However, if it made an ion
> cloud "out there" as Marco suggest, the surroundings would be induced
> positive!!!

i disagree  - Hull has definetely segregated the induction and the
collection of charge in his experiments - he was not so stupid : )
besides, how do you think - what size of the "cloud" can be produced
from a 15w "coil" - like the lightning one? : )))
and btw - read this:

"It is a matter of timing!  As I have show, not all tesla coils or
even the same Tesla coil will produce E.S. charge!  You can choose to have
it or not.  It is totally a matter of power delivery methods and timing.
Put the power delivery pulses too close together and the E.S. disappears.
Weaken the power per pulse and it goes away.  In these latter cases, the
ions are sweep up in the first case and just not produced in sufficient
quantity in the second.  A tube coil suffers both maladies and even being a
true Tesla coil and putting out 10" arcs, no easily measured ions are
produced to accumulate charge at range.

Finally, a fan at 90 degrees wipes the charge out on all but the most
powerful of disruptive systems."

> It could go either way...  It could also charge an object to say
> -100kV and another object to -200kV to get a positive +100kV
> "between" them, using only negative ions...

hey - don`t try to fool yourself : )

"I got worried, so I charged a large sheet of mylar (from my disectable
capacitor demo) and approached the collector and yes, one side was
positive indicating, and the other side negative indicating, as read on
the Keithley (never trust an instrument to the exclusion of common
sense).  Thus, the Keithley doesn't appear to be in error."

and

"I verify the charge polarity with a charged 18th century
electroscope!  It agrees with the Keithley."

so : P

> Sounds like we might need some new experiments to resolve that since
> the old and present data is a little too messy to go from...

you tried read archives to? : )))

"we might need"
"we know"
"We need"
"We must"

who are "we"? i only know that *i* am not a part of "we" - i never was
it and i dunno want to be, coz it seems that these "we" are doing very
little since the end of good old 90th. why should i constantly ask
questions to force these "we" to think or to experiment? that`s really
stupid i think : )

p.s.

> Stork mentioned that Richard's meter was not working right.  A flake
> of dust inside it could have caused that error.  Or, a discharge may
> have damaged the amplifier capacitive input's insulators....  So much
> can go wrong....  And that is before and "scale" errors are considered!!!

Richard (as all of you "coilers") was a great surpluser and
scrounger, so everything may be possible : )))
but on the other side - he was a great experimentalist also, so he was
always checking all his equipment i think.

-----
Let the bass kick! =:-D