Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".

[gyulasun]

I just re-performed "Tesla Coil's" bifilar nail experiment and got his 2x the strength results. Two problems: one; Lash winding and Two; Failure to energize the SBC are reasons I suspect that caused the other experimental failures. 

Precise and tight wire wraps are essential in this experiment. This is how Tesla earned a patent for an electromagnet coil. He had to demonstrate a practical advantage to his U.S. Patent examiners. Also, the SBC won't work cold! It has to be "Energized". I charged both the SBC and the single wire coil with 12 volts, and tested their field strengths with 6 volts. After energizing the SBC, it lifted two paper clips from the table surface, where the single wire coil would only attach one to the face.

"Lorentz" explained how this additional magnetic strength results from electron interaction in the SBC.

Hi synchro1

See this link to the Tesla patent in question: http://www.tfcbooks.com/patents/0512340.htm

And see the 'No Model' notice on the original patent paper. It means that the inventor did not show any model or setup etc on his invention when he applied for the patent. 

Please tell me where you got your info that Tesla had to demonstrate his coil to the patent examiners.

Can you show a photo on your electromagnet coil please?  Would like to see your coil holding the clips or whatever you used for the comparison.

Gyula

[synchro1]

"Did you "Energize" the SBC coil with High Voltage shock?"  LOL, no I did not. Can you show some link or reference to this subject or describe it a bit more?

Mags

Danial McFarland Cook was granted a Canadian Patent for a "Battery" that consisted of two SBC's in series. This L.L. tank generated power like a capacitor as the resonance drained away. Naturally, the "Cook Battery", basically two SBC's has to be charged to run like any other battery. Tesla notes his SBC has 250.000 times the voltage differential as a single wrap. The SBC is inert like empty capacitor plates untill it's charged. It runs down over time, but generates it's own power and is technically a battery. A strong electric shock brings the SBC coil to full high voltage power. Charging has no effect on the single wire model.

[synchro1]

I'm trying to track my still photographer down right now. My laptop stopped working to upload videos.

The Tesla Patent has (no model) then directly beneath that a model number No: 512,340. Could that be an abreviation meaning number model?

[gyulasun]

I'm trying to track my still photographer down right now. My laptop stopped working to upload videos.

The Tesla Patent has (no model) then directly beneath that a model number No: 512,340. Could that be an abreviation meaning number model?

No.  The No: 512,340 is the patent number. You can see the 'No Model' notice in the main heading of the patent once again, under the figures:
                                                             COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS.

SPECIFICATION forming part of Letters Patent No. 512,340, dated January 9, 1894.

Application filed July 7, 1893.  Serial No. 479,804. (No model.)

[synchro1]

I just returned from the shop where I re-ran the experiment and captured nine still shots with my cell phone. The Tesla series wrap bifilar raises two long "trombone" steel paper clips, while the single wrap raises merely one. The single wire model dosen't even come close to attracting a second paper clip. Zero cling on the second clip, while the SBC cleanly raises two whole paper clips high over the test bench. Try charging the SBC like "Leedskalnin's" PMH first, then repeat the experiment with the SBC raised to full potential.

Where does the Earth's magnetic field come from if not the ground? Power comes from the ground because the molten iron core revolves faster then the crust acting as a huge dynamo. Tesla understood this and sought to electrify the Planet through it! This sounds preposterous to some blind cynics.