Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".

[jbignes5]

This is where i diverge from the mainstream.


Lets envision the medium as a fluid and the charged body as a boat. The boat has little resistance in the medium and accelerates through the medium. As the medium is displaced by the charged body it creates wakes in the medium. These wakes are what we call light. There is no shedding of anything from the particle. The light is the wakes of the medium as the displacement of the charged body moves through the medium. Light is just an after effect of the medium in motion and the cause is the excitation of the charged body within the medium. The medium is the ultimate conductor and imparts the excitation to the matter. This in turn propels the charged body trough the medium as it is gaining potential.


This is very evident if we understand that this process is still going on in a vacuum which is devoid of matter. The charged body in a vacuum is coming from  one electrode and going towards the other and is creating the glow in a much different method. The matter creates sort of sound waves in the medium of the vacuum. The wave are even and distributed though the whole device. The glow is the movement of the medium from one plate to another as a wave moves much like the wakes around an island. No charge is actually moved as in no charge is moved in a capacitor. Capacitors are converters of current to voltage only devices. That is why they are explosive in their discharge. I suspect that an Led device is the same. That is why they use very little real current. The only difference is that the gap between a led's atoms are much larger and the wakes around each atom amplify through interference patterns between each atom as they are being excited. Electrons do not exist and is only the misinterpretation of the wakes that are very shell like around each atom. When you amplify the potential field of excitation around the atom it amplifies the emissions of light and when the wakes are just right the heat we think comes from the atoms. The heat is the feedback of the waves to the atoms and is why the standing potential of a body in space has a set value as in my experiments in the crystal cells. We use only this potential difference or base potential to create a difference and then subsequently a current in the devices attached to the crystal cells. Removing the galvanic response is a tough problem but it has been done and shows almost a limitless supply of energy as a result of this process.


This is where we went wrong in our logical fallacy of electrons. When all along it was the medium in between every atom that is the cause of energy or current because it passes the electric field as a superconductor.


We need to look at this in the right approach and then design our devices to include this natural phenomena or encourage it's process. Tesla did this after having the aha moment. Light is only the interaction of the medium with matter. This is never more evident then looking into space. Without matter light would not exist and doesn't in space till matter is there to re-radiate the mediums longitudinal (polarized) energy.

[MileHigh]

Well how do you explain a TV tube then?

On a different matter, you posted this, "There is no danger to this stuff and Tesla repeatedly shown that by passing the energy through his body and even the bodies of others as in the worlds fair where he shown his AC system in full scale. Tesla wasn't ready to release the full details at that time but was completely sure it could do no harm to any life and had even the audience do the same, passing of the current through their bodies."

That's an illustration of how you are obsessed by Tesla and can see nothing wrong or bad about him.  The simple fact is that in Tesla's time the medical knowledge and the medical equipment simply did not exist to draw any conclusions about any possible harmful effects related to any hypothetical wireless energy transfer system.  Yet you insist that it would not be harmful purely due to your irrational form of blind faith in all things Tesla.  We have collectively learned as a society to not have blind faith in technology.  For you to make that claim makes all of your claims suspect.  i.e.; the Tesla series bifilar coil is a "perfect antenna" and a myriad of other claims you have made about what in fact is no more than an inductor in the final analysis.

In that sense Jbignes5, the "talking the Tesla talk" is just the little boy that cried wolf.  The only way your claims would have any credibility with me would be for you to show tangible real world results on the bench with real measurements.  That means timing diagrams and the whole nine yards, the real thing.

I will give you some context for that.  You know there is that 1988 clip with Peter Lindemann and Eric Dollard where they demonstrate "longitudinal electricity."  It's big, it's loud, and it almost looks like they are in Frankenstein's laboratory.  There is loud buzzing and noise and you see that they make a light bulb light up.

The problem is that they never show how much input power was required to light up the light bulb.  I don't even think they make a measurement of the power being drawn by the light bulb.  You have this big one hour long presentation and for all we know the efficiency of energy transfer in their demo might have been 5%.  You have two grown men that claim that they know what they are doing yet they don't even show a basic measurement like that.  The clip is a farce.

Yes, that's tough talk from somebody technical that wants to see real results.  I had exactly the same expectations from Inteligentry and Yildiz and both of them failed spectacularly.

So the challenge for you is to bridge the gap between all of the speculative Tesla talk and actually show something tangible and real.  I hope that you have somebody technical to work with you because I am not getting the vibe from you that you know how to work on a bench or that you have the basic real-world electronics knowledge.  You might believe that you can "cast away" all of that conventional electronics and energy stuff and just focus on the Tesla angle and like magic everything will come together and you will get great results like Synchro1 says.  In the real world that's not going to happen.  You simply can't play with high frequencies and MOSFETs and coils and show your output voltage is higher than your input voltage (as an example.)  Stuff like that will not cut it.  I am willing to bet you that most people are exhausted from seeing inconclusive YouTube clips.

[jbignes5]

Well how do you explain a TV tube then?

On a different matter, you posted this, "There is no danger to this stuff and Tesla repeatedly shown that by passing the energy through his body and even the bodies of others as in the worlds fair where he shown his AC system in full scale. Tesla wasn't ready to release the full details at that time but was completely sure it could do no harm to any life and had even the audience do the same, passing of the current through their bodies."

That's an illustration of how you are obsessed by Tesla and can see nothing wrong or bad about him.  The simple fact is that in Tesla's time the medical knowledge and the medical equipment simply did not exist to draw any conclusions about any possible harmful effects related to any hypothetical wireless energy transfer system.  Yet you insist that it would not be harmful purely due to your irrational form of blind faith in all things Tesla.  We have collectively learned as a society to not have blind faith in technology.  For you to make that claim makes all of your claims suspect.  i.e.; the Tesla series bifilar coil is a "perfect antenna" and a myriad of other claims you have made about what in fact is no more than an inductor in the final analysis.

In that sense Jbignes5, the "talking the Tesla talk" is just the little boy that cried wolf.  The only way your claims would have any credibility with me would be for you to show tangible real world results on the bench with real measurements.  That means timing diagrams and the whole nine yards, the real thing.

I will give you some context for that.  You know there is that 1988 clip with Peter Lindemann and Eric Dollard where they demonstrate "longitudinal electricity."  It's big, it's loud, and it almost looks like they are in Frankenstein's laboratory.  There is loud buzzing and noise and you see that they make a light bulb light up.

The problem is that they never show how much input power was required to light up the light bulb.  I don't even think they make a measurement of the power being drawn by the light bulb.  You have this big one hour long presentation and for all we know the efficiency of energy transfer in their demo might have been 5%.  You have two grown men that claim that they know what they are doing yet they don't even show a basic measurement like that.  The clip is a farce.

Yes, that's tough talk from somebody technical that wants to see real results.  I had exactly the same expectations from Inteligentry and Yildiz and both of them failed spectacularly.

So the challenge for you is to bridge the gap between all of the speculative Tesla talk and actually show something tangible and real.  I hope that you have somebody technical to work with you because I am not getting the vibe from you that you know how to work on a bench or that you have the basic real-world electronics knowledge.  You might believe that you can "cast away" all of that conventional electronics and energy stuff and just focus on the Tesla angle and like magic everything will come together and you will get great results like Synchro1 says.  In the real world that's not going to happen.  You simply can't play with high frequencies and MOSFETs and coils and show your output voltage is higher than your input voltage (as an example.)  Stuff like that will not cut it.  I am willing to bet you that most people are exhausted from seeing inconclusive YouTube clips.

I know what I must do. On the other hand you have done and are doing the exact same thing as the "Tesla fanboy"  you are complaining about. You idolize Einstien and the others and the only thing they did was pose theories. Nothing more.


As for your feeling about my technical ability I will tell you again. SHUT THE HELL UP! You don't know me and to tell you the truth I will not explain my credentials again to you.


You say you are an engineer. Well all engineers that I know are arm chair, pencil pushing, theorists. They do no actual work and design things that have little to do with practical everyday technical work. You know the real Technicians who actually do the work always complain about the engineers who lack practical implementations to the devices they design. Especially when the Technicians have to fix those devices.


I have looked over your postings and I see you actually like the guy in the video that I showed on purpose to show what little people know of Tesla or anything for that matter. He spews false information in just about 75% of that video. He didn't even get the banker correct that said that is I can not hook a meter to it, that statement was attributed to J.P. Morgan who was Tesla's finance man at the time. Not the guy he said it was. The only thing that could be considered correct was the tube operation and only from the standpoint of your most holy theorists.


Show me the proof of your theories like electrons. Show me the electron? Can't do that? Hmm then it is just a theory and will stay a theory until you show the proof. There is an old axiom I would like to share with you. You can not prove a theory wrong with another theory. It must be proven wrong by fact. Since your electron theory is not fact then don't bother arguing anything in this thread until you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the electron is real and visible. Not with just mathematics which is no proof and can be designed to prove just about anything.


We are here trying to prove our theories and the theories of others who have a lot more credibility then you. Tesla had over 200+ patents in the US alone based off of his theories. When he talks then he should be afforded some respect because of those credentials.


If you want to hang around thats fine and if you disagree then prove it wrong. Otherwise shut up because your doing nothing then saying you are right with no proof at all. Not just theories and math but Real world evidence.

In order to bring light to Tesla's ideas and devices based on those ideas we must understand the man and his ideas. How exactly are we to do that if you are here interrupting our progress and plans to do those real world experiments with disinformation and lack of understanding of the principles involved? Your suppression techniques are highly honed and use nothing more then bully tactics and degrade anyone who doesn't think like you and your most holy theories.

It is not your job to police the masses and debase them because you "think" and you "Believe" they are wrong. Get off the high horse you are on and do the research into Tesla. Do the experiments that many have done on this forum and you will see there is something to this approach. If you would rather not then leave us be and let us waste our time. It is "our" time and not yours, we should be able to do what we wish with it and not be harassed in the process with out right lies.


As for your questions lets give it some thought.

The cathode ray tube (CRT) is a vacuum tube containing one or more electron guns (a source of electrons or electron emitter) and a fluorescent screen used to view images.[1] It has a means to accelerate and deflect the electron beam(s) onto the screen to create the images.

Now if we substitute Electron for charged particle we start to understand what it really is. It is a particle accelerator and has lead mixed in with the face of the tube to block x-rays that are emitted by the charged particles from the particle gun when they slam into the phosphor laced front. The inner mask is to bring clarity and resolution to the dots of the screen.


As for the medical nature of this current it was well known about the benefits this kind of stimulation to our bodies. MANY MANY medical devices were made of Tesla's designs and proved that at least or bare minimum it was safe. Although there were a great many that scoffed at this idea and did exactly as you are doing now. All disinformation and no facts. It was suppressed in the same method you are using now. Though intimidation and disinformation.

As for your assertion that the bifilar coil is a normal inductor is disinformation. This is not true and the simple video shows that proof that I provided. When compared to the reception and broad casting ability there is a clear difference between the bifilar pancake coil and a normal solenoid pancake coil when used as an antenna. In order to get a spark to jump a gap there is a threshold of voltage one has to breach of the receiving coil. This is usually in the 30Kv per CM. In the example in the video the solenoid as the broadcaster and the bifilar had 1mm of space the receiver could not fire very well and in the bifilar coil as the broadcaster and the solenoid as the receiver it was 2mm and fired very well. This is not a magnetic coupling. It is an electric coupling because it was using a High voltage supply with a rotary break machine to create the impulses from the High voltage, very low current being supplied to the broadcast antenna.
There is two reasons for this. One is the ability of the bifilar coil to charge up faster then a regular solenoid coil. This is due to the cancellation of the self inductance of the bifilar coil. Another reason is the capacitance of the coil. Since capacitors use the electric field in longitudinal mode they tend to charge up faster then the coil. The electric field allows this speed increase which has been shown to be faster then the speed of light.

Again you are out of your field here and I respectfully ask you to stop the bullying tactics.

The reason for the demonstration was to show the difference of each type of energy and the method to correctly analyze both. Obviously they did it to prove there is a difference and not to prove any overunity claims. That was not the scope of the video.
Again in order to investigate the two form of energy you have to devise methods to produce and analyze both types. There was even a method to do analogue computers to help with that analyzing which showed that capacitance converts current to longitudinal energy and coil convert current to the magnetic. But I don't expect the great OZ to understand anything of these analogies or methods because they did not teach you to think, only to follow what they were telling you.

As for the input power well how much power does a 10kv machine take to operate? 200-500 ma?<-this depends on the size of the transformer or the design of the transformer. This is because it converts current into higher voltages and usually chokes the current of the source. Duh even a first grader knows that...

Do not compare us to those scammers <-This is yet another tactic you guys apply to scare people away from investigating the claims of others. I have neither asked no one to do this work or tried to sell anything at all. I am doing this to investigate Tesla's work and that is the point of this thread. I also know the dangers of regular currents and know the non dangers of Tesla's longitudinal energy. Since there is little current in it it has no power to hurt anything if done properly. And this is the point I would like to bring up again. You have to use this in the proper methods for it to become harmless. Tesla informed us that 2k impulses a second is where it becomes harmless or even from his claims beneficial in the electric field around the device. Anything lower and it becomes dangerous, with a single impulse a second having very damaging results.

[MileHigh]

Jbignes5:

I notice that you have chosen to ignore my comments about the medical safety issues.  Why is that?

I have read your comments from time to time for a long time now, and I don't get any sense that you have a mastery of the basics of working on a bench.  I get the feeling that you are a theory guy and turning your esoteric theories into reality on the bench is going to be a rude awakening for you unless you do "fake pseudo" YouTube clips like we see all the time.  i.e.; the Lindemann-Dollard clip from 1988 was a fake pseudo test.  Perhaps you will pleasantly surprise me.  I can tell you that it was absolutely shocking watching Aaron working on the bench a few years ago because he was almost completely lost.  There is a huge difference between talking the talk and actually doing bench work and I am hoping that you do indeed have good bench skills.

You say you are an engineer. Well all engineers that I know are arm chair, pencil pushing, theorists. They do no actual work and design things that have little to do with practical everyday technical work. You know the real Technicians who actually do the work always complain about the engineers who lack practical implementations to the devices they design. Especially when the Technicians have to fix those devices.

It's more like this:  The front line hardware design engineers do the design work and then when they get their stuffed PCBs they debug them on the bench.  They might have to do one or two revisions to get rid of the wires and then they release it into production.  They are responsible for the design and the transfer into production and they get support from engineering technicians and production technicians.  So the front line design engineers are totally hands-on.  You are quoting an old cliche about the supposed tensions between engineers and technicians.  In reality that is almost never the case.

Show me the proof of your theories like electrons. Show me the electron? Can't do that? Hmm then it is just a theory and will stay a theory until you show the proof. There is an old axiom I would like to share with you. You can not prove a theory wrong with another theory. It must be proven wrong by fact. Since your electron theory is not fact then don't bother arguing anything in this thread until you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the electron is real and visible. Not with just mathematics which is no proof and can be designed to prove just about anything.

Well I asked you to explain the cathode ray tube in terms of your theories and you have ignored the question.  Why is that?  Unless you can explain the cathode ray tube then don't bother arguing anything in this thread until you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that your theory can explain how a cathode ray tube works without electrons.

How does that shoe fit Jbignes5?  The message being stop your silly fake litmus tests for gaining your "approval" to post.

You can look up the early 20th century research into the nature of the atom and the electron.  Rutherford would probably be a good place to start.  I am sure that there are hundreds of megabytes of information about the discovery of the electron and the measurement of its mass, and the discovery of the electron orbitals, and how there is a direct relationship between an energy level change in the electron orbital and the wavelength of the photon emitted and so on and so on.

We are here trying to prove our theories and the theories of others who have a lot more credibility then you.

I have a lot of credibility and I have been around for a while.  There is a huge paper trail.  So you are just spinning right now and that doesn't bode well for your credibility.  Even though we might not share opinions on issues, that doesn't mean that I am not credible.  If you want to get some credibility with me you could answer my question from a week ago.  I honestly don't believe that you can but I am open to being pleasantly surprised.  Since this thread is about the Tesla coil the question is a propos.  Your claim that you "already answered it" is just more spin.  Quote your answer to back up your statement or more appropriately try to answer it for real.  If you can't answer it then why not take the plunge and admit that and we can go over it together?  I am fully familiar with the psychology of refusing to reveal if you understand something or not.  It takes a big man to open up and ask for some help.

The reality Jbignes5 is that many people play with coils on the bench without having a true grasp of how they actually work.  They can't explain where the high voltage spikes come from.  Are you in that class?  Be honest with yourself.  If you are in that class, before you do any work with some kind of coil-based project, you should task yourself with mastering the basics of how coils (and capacitors) actually work in the real world.  Or you can ask for some help.  The truth is the vast majority of experimenters don't understand how they work.  So if you educate yourself you will be ten times more effective on the bench.

I look forward to seeing your testing and reports assuming that you will post them online here or perhaps elsewhere.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

Jbignes5:

You extended your original posting so I will comment more...

In order to bring light to Tesla's ideas and devices based on those ideas we must understand the man and his ideas. How exactly are we to do that if you are here interrupting our progress and plans to do those real world experiments with disinformation and lack of understanding of the principles involved? Your suppression techniques are highly honed and use nothing more then bully tactics and degrade anyone who doesn't think like you and your most holy theories.

It's "disinformation and lack of understanding" from your point of view.  We are back to the issue of differing points of view.  That's healthy and that's what the forum is here for.  A while back this thread was just yet another thread to idolize Tesla and the patent for the series bifilar coil.  Somebody sees "electromagnet" in the title and says, "Tesla's coil makes for a better electromagnet!!!"   Somebody else says, "It will make for a superior pulse motor!!!"  It was just near-mindless praise for the patent.  I said, "Hold on, let's look at this patent seriously."  I made tons of points and most of the time the response was either anger or listless mute silence, like when I posed the question asking for practical real-world applications for this coil.  There have been no responses to that question.

Then you parachuted into this thread which is fine.  The thread was moribund and going nowhere so if you have some ideas and want to bring something new to the table that's great.  But from my perspective your first few big postings were filled with a bunch of far-fetched ideas that would never be realizable on the bench.  And I have heard them 1000 times.  So I told you that just like you are free to tell me what you think.  We are equal and on a level playing field.  I am not suppressing or bullying you at all, and by the same token I don't want you suppressing or bullying me.

It is not your job to police the masses and debase them because you "think" and you "Believe" they are wrong. Get off the high horse you are on and do the research into Tesla. Do the experiments that many have done on this forum and you will see there is something to this approach. If you would rather not then leave us be and let us waste our time. It is "our" time and not yours, we should be able to do what we wish with it and not be harassed in the process with out right lies.

You can look in the mirror with respect to policing and debasing yourself.  We should all try to get along even if we have differing opinions.  I have done tons of experiments on the bench.  For example, with a scope and a resistor and a few other parts I have measured the inductance of a coil.  I didn't rely on an "idiot meter" to tell me the inductance.  Have you ever done that?  How many experimenters on the forums do think have done that?  Nobody is going to be harassed, and I do not lie.  That's more spinning.

Now if we substitute Electron for charged particle we start to understand what it really is. It is a particle accelerator and has lead mixed in with the face of the tube to block x-rays that are emitted by the charged particles from the particle gun when they slam into the phosphor laced front. The inner mask is to bring clarity and resolution to the dots of the screen.

Okay, you want to substitute "electron" for "charged particle" when an electron is a charged particle.  I don't see much there Jbignes5 but let's leave it alone because it is quite far off topic.

As for the medical nature of this current it was well known about the benefits this kind of stimulation to our bodies. MANY MANY medical devices were made of Tesla's designs and proved that at least or bare minimum it was safe. Although there were a great many that scoffed at this idea and did exactly as you are doing now. All disinformation and no facts. It was suppressed in the same method you are using now. Though intimidation and disinformation.

I disagree with you completely and it's pure Tesla spin zone.  There is no substance to what you are saying and all electrical medical devices are very seriously scrutinized and they have to use medical-grade components.  I view this as pure disinformation on your side.  You are basically saying, "Trust me and take it for granted that there will be no adverse effects from being continuously bathed in high-power EM waves because Tesla said so and you can trust early 20th century technology to have covered all the bases."  Your statement does not fly in the real world of today.  Now, the point has been made and I am prepared to move on.  If you want to rebut then fine.

Okay I will continue in another posting.

MileHigh