[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

RE: Non-tech Question

Hi Ed,
RE: (2): (but not diathermy)
I had (have pieces) a medical device, Hyfrecator (sp?), that indeed was a
mini TC.
used for, maybe, Shock therapy ? 
(or maybe you won't consider this a TC cause objective was't to produce spark, 
but a shock current w/ potential enough to break down any skin resistance?)

Spark Gap, heavy solid enameled wire helical continuously moveable Primary
over a finer wire Secondary. 
(to vary "shock" intensity I believe)

Regards, Dale

-----Original Message-----
From: Tesla List [mailto:tesla-at-pupman-dot-com]
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2000 8:21 PM
To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Non-tech Question

Original Poster: "Ed Phillips" <evp-at-pacbell-dot-net> 

> here are a few applications / former uses for the tesla coil.
> 
> 1) It was the power supply for the first ever particle accelerator (the
> cyclotron)

	Sorry.  Wrong on two counts,  First of all the first particle
accelerators were probably at Cambridge during the 1920's.  Second, the
cyclotrons were excited by high-power RF oscillators, but definitely not
TC's.

> 2) Until developments in solid-state technology, tesla coils were used in
> medicine (diathermy, still used today).

	If you mean spark oscillators, true.  If you mean Tesla coils, wrong. 
At least by my definition, a Tesla coil is a device depending on
resonance to generate a very high voltge.  The spark diathermy machines
didnit do that at all.  The electrodes were usually excited by a
step-down winding on the single tank circuit excited by the spark.


> 3) Wireless transmission of electrical energy. Although Tesla's global
project
> is at best thought of as dubious, certainly small scale systems work. A
special
> lamp containing a resonant circuit will light without wires in the
vicinity of
> a TC induction field. 

	That's not "wireless power transmission", just inductive coupling of
resonant circuits.  If you read Tesla's stuff you'll find out that that
was not what he was talking about.  (Whether or not he did transmit "by
wireless".  I'm convinced he didn't but then the whole subject is much
more one of religion than science.)

> 
> Regards, Gavin, U.K.

Comments by Ed