Re: Tesla's large pancake coil (and Myth Busters)

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: Mddeming@xxxxxxx 

Original poster: William Beaty <billb@xxxxxxxxxx>

On Thu, 28 Sep 2006, Tesla list wrote:

> Many of the cover illustrations for "Popular Science" and
> "Popular Electronics" up to the 1960's were of devices that never
> became reality.
>      In general, if some illustration seems too amazing or too
> dangerous to make sense, it PROBABLY isn't real. A lot of amazing
> science is much more amazing than science.

Heh.  There's really no need to use biased language make the drawing seem
questionable.  It's already questionable! It's a drawing!  No doubt the
drawing contains many details which differ from a photograph made of the
same event.

Now here's some science, as opposed attempted Floccinaucinihilipilification*

   QUESTION:  If we actually build a large pancake-style TC secondary, and
   mount a sphere terminal on the end of a central rod, then does the
   discharge tend to occupy a fairly narrow cone which is directed
   outwards from the pancake coil?     Yes or no.

If nobody has experimentally determined the answer by building and
operating such a pancake-shaped secondary, then we have no business
pretending that we know the answer.

If we want to adopt a scientific attitude, then we're not supposed to
choose sides or to leap to unwarrented beliefs, instead we should remain
tenative in the face of the unknown, and as Faraday said, "Let the
experiment be made."

I was hoping that the experiment ALREADY was "made" by someone here, so
they'd give an answer.




* Ever hear of "Floccinaucinihilipilification?"  It's a symptom of
   anti-science thinking, and is a common tactic in law and politics.  It
   essentially means "Using rhetorical distortions to make something seem
   worthless."  It's common in non-science discussion.  Just use some
   derogatory language to describe your opponents' views.  And of course
   use glowing terms to describe your own.  The language of scientists
   seems odd in comparison, since ideally it lacks such distortions, so
   both the pro and con sides are treated equally.   For more, see:

   The clinical attitude
   http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/courses/inflogic/clinical.htm

(See Below:)



> In a message dated 9/28/06 2:28:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> tesla@xxxxxxxxxx writes:
> Original poster: William Beaty <billb@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
>
> I stumbled across this newspaper illustration on Tesla Mem. Society site:
>
>     A Demonstration Made at Tesla's Laboratory Yesterday
>     http://www.teslasociety.com/pictures/teslaarticle2.jpg
>
>
> Odd that the discharge goes *away* from the coil.   The coil's EM field
> must sculpt the discharge path, no?
>
>
> This appears to be the same device which hung in Wardencliffe:
>
>     Wardenclyffe: exhibition of various inventions
>     http://www.teslasociety.com/pictures/labpic.jpg
>
>
> In these other famous photos, the sphere-electrode is not installed:
>
>     http://www.teslasociety.com/posters/teslalab.jpg
>
>     http://www.teslasociety.com/pictures/teslapic.jpg
>
>
> Here's another artist's conception, again showing the discharge going away
> from the coil.   I wonder if the discharge path was so reliable that Tesla
> could actually sit as shown below?  Or is it just an "artist's
> conception?"
>
>     http://homepage.ntlworld.com/forgottenfutures/tesla/tesla_4.gif
>
>
>
>
> (((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (  (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  425-222-5066    unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci

In a message dated 9/30/06 8:17:45 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, 
tesla@xxxxxxxxxx writes:
Original poster: <davep@xxxxxxxx>

My recollection is that 'pancake' coils are shown in
photos taken at Colorado Springs lab.  I did not recheck...

As to 'science':
  I suggest: Not all experiments need be done.

A little thought will provide examples...

best
  dwp


Hi Dave, Bill, All,

    Dave, you're quite right. Experiments to verify something 
seemingly contradictory to the existing body of verified knowledge is 
probably (note I said probably) not the best way for most people to 
spend their resources. The number of possible experiments is 
infinite, the available resources are very finite.
    When I said earlier that unverifiable illustrations concerning 
an undeniable  genius inventor/showman, known to be given to enhanced 
pictures and increasing hyperbole with age were PROBABLY inaccurate 
that was healthy skepticism, not bias.  Just this evening on "Myth 
busters"  (Discovery Channel) they duplicated Tesla's "earthquake 
machine" and tried it on a full size abandoned steel bridge as well 
as an accurate 1/6 scale model of Tesla's lab. Their frequency 
stability and control were a hundred times finer than what Tesla 
could have achieved. While they did get a stronger resonance than 
they expected, it was still several orders of magnitude less than 
what Tesla claimed for his experiments. (YRMV)
    They seem to have the resources AND the inclination to carry out 
experiments on dubious claims. Perhaps they could be interested in an 
"All-Tesla" program.

A Logical Aside:

If person A is a Total Skeptic "I give credence only those things 
that have been verified and properly reviewed and duplicated" and
If person B is a Total Credulist "I accept as plausible everything 
that has not been positively disproved."
As time --> infinity, A's final conclusions must be the same as B's 
final conclusions.

So Logically, there will be complete agreement and harmony on TCML at 
the end of time
( i.e. When Hell freezes over)  ;^)))


A key element of "Floccinaucinihilipilification?" is to accuse those 
with whom you disagree or take personal umbrage, of anti-scientific bias.

Matt D