[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Tesla myths corrected - Best text? (fwd)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 08:35:52 +0800
From: Peter Terren <pterren@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Tesla myths corrected - Best text? (fwd)
"It is expected that when the fully developed system is in place it will be
possible to extract exactly the amount of energy that is available from the
generators minus the global transmission line losses, which should amount
to
about 75 kilowatts."
You make me laugh. Is this your figure or Tesla's?
Consider
1 Just having a sphere charged to 1MV such as a large VDG generator takes
the whole of the power generated by the VDG (otherwise the voltage would
rise higher) This might already be many watts due to corona leakage and
conduction down the supports. Consider now 100MV. This is the voltage of
natural lightning (range 10 - 120MV) but the losses will go up more than
exponentially. Consider the relativistic effects understood in recent years
which allow this voltage to jump many kilometers under the initiation of
cosmic ray events. Purely maintaining a terminal at 100MV is just not
conceivable with current technology without creating kilometers long arcs
that will short circuit the system until it recharges. Maintaining this at
ground level let alone kilometers high without gigawatts of losses seems
ludicrous.
2 That was DC. Now consider 6Hz AC with the massive (kilometer scale
inductor to resonate at 6kHz) rated for 100MV and consider the losses in the
magnetic field and in the capacitance to Earth.
3 Assuming that you could charge the non conductive "rareified atmosphere"
at 8km do you consider that there might be losses between the huge capacitor
plates (atmosphere vs Earth) resonating at 6Hz. Do you consider that there
might be dielectic losses involving the atmosphere? What about simple short
circuits? Sprites are electrical discharges that occur at low ionosphere
level reach up to 90km
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprite_%28lightning%29
These are happening spontaneously indicating that charge is accumulating and
discharging all the time at ionospheric level.
At lower levels the pattern of discharge is "blue jets" and nearer ground
level is natural lightning.
So you have added these losses and come to 75kW? I think it is nearer 80 -
85kW myself.
Peter
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:44:55 -0600
> From: Gary Peterson <g.peterson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: Tesla myths corrected - Best text? (fwd)
>
> Peter wrote:
>> I understand how . . . [E]arth can have a low resistance . . . 1 ohm . .
>> .
>> may be quite reasonable.
>
> That is a good start.
>
>> . . . shoot 1MV . . .
>
> Not 1 megavolt, rather 12 to 15 megavolts or 100 megavolts for the
> earth-resonance based system.
>
> . . . into the plasma ionosphere . . .
>
> Not the ionosphere, rather the rarified region of Earth's atmosphere
> starting at an elevation of about 8 kilometers (5 miles).
>
>> . . . What you won't do is impedance match that to 200 low voltage 50W
>> light globes . . .
>
> But the 200 light bulbs story is seemingly a myth. . . .
>
>> . . . from some trivially small antenna . . .
>
> The elevated terminal of the receiving station is constructed so as to be
> the correct size-exactly-for the entire system to be in tune.
>
>> and expect to extract 10kW.
>
> It is expected that when the fully developed system is in place it will be
> possible to extract exactly the amount of energy that is available from
> the
> generators minus the global transmission line losses, which should amount
> to
> about 75 kilowatts.
>
> "This [ Fig. 82, www.teslaradio.com/images/14-082-3.gif ] illustrates,
> on a larger scale, the earth. Here is my transmitter-mine or anybody's
> transmitter-because my system is the system of the day. The only
> difference
> is in the way I apply it. They, the radio engineers, want to apply my
> system one way; I want to apply it in another way.
>
> "This is the circuit energizing the antenna. As the vibratory energy
> flows, two things happen: There is electromagnetic energy radiated and a
> current passes into the earth. The first goes out in the form of rays,
> which have definite properties. These rays propagate with the velocity of
> light, 300,000 kilometers per second. This energy is exactly like a hot
> stove. If you will imagine that the cylinder antenna is hot-and indeed it
> is heated by the current-it would radiate out energy of exactly the same
> kind as it does now. If the system is applied in the sense I want to
> apply
> it, this energy is absolutely lost, in all cases most of it is lost.
> While
> this electromagnetic energy throbs, a current passes into the globe.
>
> "Now, there is a vast difference between these two, the
> electromagnetic
> and current energies. That energy which goes out in the form of rays, is,
> as I have indicated here [on the diagram of Fig. 82], unrecoverable,
> hopelessly lost. You can operate a little instrument by catching a
> billionth part of it but, except this, all goes out into space never to
> return. This other energy, however, of the current in the globe, is
> stored
> and completely recoverable. Theoretically, it does not take much effort
> to
> maintain the earth in electrical vibration. I have, in fact, worked out a
> plant of 10,000 horse-power which would operate with no bigger loss than 1
> percent of the whole power applied; that is, with the exception of the
> frictional energy that is consumed in the rotation of the engines and the
> heating of the conductors, I would not lose more than 1 percent. In other
> words, if I have a 10,000 horsepower plant, it would take only 100
> horsepower to keep the earth vibrating so long as there is no energy taken
> out at any other place.
>
> "There is another difference. The electromagnetic energy travels with
> the speed of light, but see how the current flows. At the first moment,
> this current propagates exactly like the shadow of the moon at the earth's
> surface. It starts with infinite velocity from that point, but its speed
> rapidly diminishes; it flows slower and slower until it reaches the
> equator,
> 6,000 miles from the transmitter. At that point, the current flows with
> the
> speed of light-that is, 300,000 kilometers per second. But, if you
> consider
> the resultant current through the globe along the axis of symmetry of
> propagation, the resultant current flows continuously with the same
> velocity
> of light.
>
> "Whether this current passing through the center of the earth to the
> opposite side is real, or whether it is merely an effect of these surface
> currents, makes absolutely no difference. To understand the concept, one
> must imagine that the current from the transmitter flows straight to the
> opposite point of the globe.
>
> "There is where I answer the attacks which have been made on me. For
> instance, Dr. Pupin has ridiculed the Tesla system. He says,
>
> "The energy goes only in all directions."
>
> "It does not. It goes only in one direction. He is deceived by the size
> and shape of the earth. Looking at the horizon, he imagines how the
> currents flow in all directions, but if he would only for a moment think
> that this earth is like a copper wire and the transmitter on the top of
> the
> same, he would immediately realize that the current only flows along the
> axis of the propagation.
>
> "The mode of propagation can be expressed by a very simple
> mathematical
> law, which is, the current at any point flows with a velocity
> proportionate
> to the cosecant of the angle which a radius from that point includes with
> the axis of symmetry of wave propagation. At the transmitter, the
> cosecant
> is infinite; therefore, the velocity is infinite. At a distance of 6,000
> miles, the cosecant is unity; therefore, the velocity is equal to that of
> light. This law I have expressed in a patent by the statement that the
> projections of all zones on the axis of symmetry are of the same length,
> which means, in other words, as is known from rules of trigonometry, that
> the areas of all the zones must also be equal. It says that although the
> waves travel with different velocities from point to point, nevertheless
> each half wave always includes the same area. This is a simple law, not
> unlike the one which has been expressed by Kepler with reference to the
> areas swept over by the radii vectors.
>
> "I hope that I have been clear in this exposition-in bringing to your
> attention that what I show here is the system of the day, and is my
> system-only the radio engineers use my apparatus to produce too much of
> this
> electromagnetic energy here, instead of concentrating all their attention
> on
> designing an apparatus which will impress a current upon the earth and not
> waste the power of the plant in an uneconomical process." [Nikola Tesla
> On
> His Work With Alternating Currents and Their Application to Wireless
> Telegraphy, Telephony and Transmission of Power, Leland I. Anderson,
> Editor,
> Twenty First Century Books, 1992, pp. 140-141.]
>
> Best regards,
> Gary
>
> Gary Peterson
> Twenty First Century Books
> P.O. Box 2001
> Breckenridge, CO 80424-2001
> g.peterson@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Phone: 970-453-9293 Fax: 970-453-6692
> www.teslaradio.com
> www.teslabooks.com
> www.teslascience.org
>
>
>> From: Peter Terren <pterren@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Subject: Re: Tesla myths corrected - Best text? (fwd)
>>
>> I understand how an earth can have a low resistance since the effective
>> volume of current flow goes up with the cube of distance. That is my
>> return line in my example. The 1 ohm that you quoted may be quite
>> reasonable. Sure, you could (extremely hypothetically) shoot 1MV into
>> the
>> plasma ionosphere as well and get a similar "earth-in-the-sky" effect.
>> What you won't do is impedance match that to 200 low voltage 50W light
>> globes from some trivially small antenna and expect to extract 10kW. (I
>> noted my mistake in saying this was 1kW)
>>
>> Peter
>> http://tesladownunder.com
>
>
>