RE: conical secondaries (fwd)

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2007 09:17:20 -0500
From: David Thomson <dwt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: 'Tesla list' <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: conical secondaries (fwd)

Hi Matt,

> Probably the best way to test my observations  would be to 
> build three coils, each with the same wire length, wire gage, 
> and same number of turns for each of a flat spiral, 
> solenoid, and conical  coil.  
>  
> Aren't observations corroborated and theories tested? 

I would think so.

> With 
> the three geometries, the inductance will be very different 
> and hence the operating frequencies AND the voltage gains. 

The issue here is coil geometry, not equivalent inductances.  We are
concerned as to whether a conical coil has different properties from a flat
spiral or solenoid geometry.  If the inductances and self capacitances are
different for each equivalent geometry, then that proves the geometries are
different in operating characteristics.

What would be the scientific rationale for forcing coil geometries to match
specific inductance values if we were looking for the inductance differences
(and hence operational characteristics) in the geometries?  

> It can be shown that, for equal lengths  of equal size wire, the 
> inductance of a maximized spiral exceeds that of a  maximized 
> solenoid by a factor of 1.011 x T, where T is the number of 
> turns per  inch.[1] This means that the spiral would have the 
> highest terminal voltage, the  cone next and the solenoid 
> lowest under conditions of max inductance, which  seemd contradictory.

So what you are saying is that secondary coil geometry DOES make a
difference in the output of a Tesla coil?  Thank you.

> The best cone design would be
> a height equal to the base diameter, or nearly  so.
>  
> Is there any basis for knowing, a priori, that this  cone 
> with a base  angle of 63.44 degrees is "best"?

It is best in the sense that it is a perfect cone, not that it has any
particularly advantageous uses as a secondary coil.  The issue here, again,
is to compare flat spirals, cones, and solenoids.  A cone that is too flat
or to slender will approach the geometries of a flat spiral or solenoid
coil.  

As a matter of interest, I happen to own one of Tesla's double coned
secondary coils.  Both cones are exactly 6" in height and 6" in diameter.
Tesla, it appears, was interested in this geometry, too.

> BTW, my observations are based upon the two different manifestations of
> sparks I observed and spoke of earlier.  A flat spiral coil produces a
> thick, white arc indicating maximized current.  A solenoid coil produces a
> thin purple spark, indicating maximized potential.  
>  
> Aren't conclusions based on observations rather than 
> observations based on  
> observations? In journalism, history, English, etc., it's common to  
> interchange or confuse conclusions with observations for 
> literary or  dramatic effect. 
> Science tries harder not to do so.
>  
> "A flat, spiral coil produces a thick, white arc," is an observation.
>   "...indicating maximized current." is a conclusion.
> likewise,"  A solenoid coil produces a thin purple spark," is 
> an  observation
>  "...indicating maximized potential." is a conclusion.

I would have presented the math that followed my observations and led to my
conclusion, but this has been determined to be off-topic for this list, if
you recall.  This Tesla list gets highly agitated when alternate theories to
the Standard Model and Classical Physics are presented.  So it is fair to
simply leave it that I had observed two manifestations of charges.  Also,
others on this list were able to replicate these two different
manifestations of charge in various other setups.

Just because you and others choose to ignore the physics that quantifies two
different manifestations of charges does not mean they do not exist.
Apparently, others on this list also recognize that flat spiral coils
produce a thick white spark and tall solenoid coils produce a thin purple
spark.  But, let's not go there as it is unnecessary for the project at
hand.  

I predict a conical coil wound from the same amount of wire as a solenoid
coil will produce a brighter streamer at about the same length (maybe a
little shorter) as a solenoid coil will.  This would indicate a conical coil
stores more power than a helical coil.

> The  solenoid coil is too narrow at the base to accommodate a 
> flat  spiral
> maximized current, and a flat spiral has no height at the terminal  to
> accommodate a solenoid maximized potential.  The conical coil 
>  accommodates
> the high current and high potential both, thus allowing more  
> power to be
> stored in the coil per coil size.
> 
> The hypotheses should always be stated in the subjunctive, not in  
> declaratives. Assuming the first two statements are correct, 
> ie. that the  conical 
> voltage IS higher than a flat spiral's and a conical's  
> current IS higher than a 
> solenoid's, to assert that therefore
>  
> V(cone) X I(cone) > V(solenoid) X I(Solenoid)
> or that
> V(cone) X I(cone) > V(spiral) X I(spiral)
>  
> is IIRC, an invalid extended syllogism. The assertion MAY be  
> true, but 
> obviously doesn't have to be.

I guess that is the power of a prediction, then, isn't it?  I am stating
quite clearly that it MUST be true a conical coil stores more power than a
flat spiral or solenoid coil of equivalent size.  The logic for this
prediction rests in the transition of the electron from one geometrical
charge manifestation to the other.  However, I have calculated the best
geometry for best secondary performance to be a coil of the trumpet shape as
discussed by others in this thread, as I have shown in my book.  The trumpet
shape arises as the result of a cylindrical damped wave.

> Also, last time I looked, Energy could be stored, not Power.  
> Power is a 
> rate, dE/dt, and time derivatives don't store well.

That's odd, the last time I looked, energy was a rate, too:

E = hv

If energy can be stored, power can.  But by "store" I'm not talking about
turning off the system and having a static amount of power remaining in the
coil, I'm referring to the dynamic capacity of the coil to contain the power
while it is operating.  The increased capacity for power is due to the lower
impedance the electrons will experience when changing from current
(magnetic) mode to potential (electric) mode.

Dave