Re: potential measurement (fwd)

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 23:40:18 -0500
From: resonance <resonance@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: potential measurement (fwd)





The moving air could interfere with the pulse formation, ie, the next pulse 
one second later.  I usually allow 120 seconds with still, non-moving air. 
Probably overdone I imagine one could fire every 15-20 sec and probably get 
good measurement results.  At 2 minutes we never have to worry about 
residuals.

Resonance Research Corp.
www.resonanceresearch.com


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 9:22 PM
Subject: Re: potential measurement (fwd)


>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 15:14:29 -0700
> From: Ed Phillips <evp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: potential measurement (fwd)
>
> 1 pulse/sec would not provide adequate residual clearing time.  Longer 
> time
> periods are required.
>
>
> Resonance Research Corp."
>
> I'd think an electric fan blowing past the terminals would sweep residual 
> ions away fast enough to allow such rates.
>
> Ed
>
>
>
>
>