TESLA pattend 390721 BUILDERS THRED

[pauldude000]

@Grumpy

I respectfully have to state that I disagree with your statement both utterly and completely, and that it demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of this device, or the inventors own statements concerning said device.

Occam's razor, the inventors own descriptions, and device design demonstrate that the original TPU is nothing but a "rotating field transformer" as well. No hard evidence to the contrary has been provided by anyone to the contrary.

Lengthy posts, hotly debated arguments, assumptions more than can be counted, concepts from every quarter from scientific to practically magic have been put forth by many, yes. No hard evidence whatsoever. Self determined "experts" out the keaster, yes, but no actual replications of the "SM" device as mentioned. Other devices of other geometries put forth by other supposed self-determined experts are NOT replications of the SM device. (Yes I include the much vaunted, somewhat diefied, Spherics in this statement. His device is NOT an SM device.)

Let's cover spherics for a second. He comes in. CLAIMS to be an assistant of SM. CLAIMS he knows how SM built his early units. Claims he has a more advanced design. HOWEVER, HE CANNOT REPLICATE THE ORIGINAL DESIGN!

(Which demonstrates he lied somewhere, as you cannot advance a design, without understanding the original.)

This should have been a red flag for everyone concerned, but amazingly enough, he has gained his own elitist faction, which practically think him as the SM God, and themselves reigning experts.

(Yes I do know much more than you think about this, about fancy codes and secret e-mails, and NO, I am neither impressed nor interested. These guys have already taken their "blue pills", so to speak. I have no intention of spouting off about details so these guy's "secret" {gag} is safe.... I know where they are coming from and why, and also know that their "God", knowingly or not, is trying to kill them off slowly, or did they forget that RE kills?)

Paul Andrulis

[Grumpy]

@Grumpy

I respectfully have to state that I disagree with your statement both utterly and completely, and that it demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of this device, or the inventors own statements concerning said device.

Paul Andrulis

Then you are foolish.  Go ahead and build it - then you will see for yourself.

By the way, Tesla authored a very extensive article on "polyphase" devices that explains this device in more detail - I'll see if I can locate it - in this article, Tesla supports my statement with his own words.  I believe it was prior to 1892, when he started to persue other things.

I don't know why so many are reading so much into Tesla's patents that just isn't there.  Actually I have a good suspician of "why" and do not hold it against anyone - and I commend the strength of thier influence - bastards.

Carry these patents into a cave or underground for a while and you'll see what I'm talking about.

[pauldude000]

@Grumpy

Some very good points, and one EXTREMELY good question.

I don't know why so many are reading so much into Tesla's patents that just isn't there.

Very good question. The problem is that this is coming from all sides. People see a carbon arc or a light bulb in a schematic, and assume RE because of the archaic symbol used. Many people see capacitive plates and insert spark gaps in their mind. Many read his patents and assume they are in full understanding of both what he states and also of what his diagrams portray.

They interpret these thing through their own understandings, world-view, and desires, and could care less about Teslas understandings, world-view, and desires. Therefore, to these people, his words and drawings will remain just that, words and drawings.

Occam's razor tells me that your suspicions are probably right, but not to applied to the right people, or to the proper extent. But then again, you may be simply invoking and ancient principle, of "holding your friends close, but your enemies closer". (Seek out those who intend you harm. Just a hint. Also remember the fate of Julius.)

Paul Andrulis

[Grumpy]

@Grumpy

Some very good points, and one EXTREMELY good question.

Very good question. The problem is that this is coming from all sides. People see a carbon arc or a light bulb in a schematic, and assume RE because of the archaic symbol used. Many people see capacitive plates and insert spark gaps in their mind. Many read his patents and assume they are in full understanding of both what he states and also of what his diagrams portray.

They interpret these thing through their own understandings, world-view, and desires, and could care less about Teslas understandings, world-view, and desires. Therefore, to these people, his words and drawings will remain just that, words and drawings.

Occam's razor tells me that your suspicions are probably right, but not to applied to the right people, or to the proper extent. But then again, you may be simply invoking and ancient principle, of "holding your friends close, but your enemies closer". (Seek out those who intend you harm. Just a hint. Also remember the fate of Julius.)

Paul Andrulis

Exactly!  Hey, wait a minute...we are on the same frequency - hmm - let's wait and see if it passes.

Not only are the symbols "open to interpretation", but the terminology is as well, so you really got to take a hard open-mined look.

Tesla explains the reason's for a device in his patents and then explains how they operate - who are we to add to that?

I believe that the really good stuff came later and was not patented - remember Tesla's "Bolts of Thor" and his "Death Ray"? - ever see a pattent for those?  He even states in interviews when he is like 60 that the magnifier's arrangement was how this was accomplished at the time.  He kept experimenting until he died.  Not every device he ever invented works on RE principles.  Tesla did not even discover the effect until around 1892 - give or take.

What is really dissapointing is that in the efforts of people to find answers and understand things in their own ways - they often over-complicate simple concepts becasue of preconditioning and erronious beliefs that are not their own.  They throw in particles and parts of Einstein's theories, and everything else - including the kitchen sink.

Production of RE is fairly simple to explain and achieve if you pay attention.  The park gap that I showed is the first half - the excitation by unidirectional impulses.  The second half is just a coil of high self-induction and low self-capacitance.  Then there are modifications of this.  this is what Tesla first used a gap and a coil.  A tuned (resonant) coupled coil system can not approach what is possible with a magnifier, but it can drive one.

If you really want to hear some good ones - ask people to explain the magnification mechanism of the coil of high self-induction.

[pauldude000]

@Grumpy

I understand completely. You know what my RE "detector" is? My hand.... (may sound stupid, but true.)

For instance, I was messing with the base drive system of my replication of EM's device, adjusting the frequency trimmer pot, when my hand started to "prickle" sting. I checked with my scope probes, and sure enough, the trannies emitter signal was going ape. I am starting to wonder if the effect is coming from the npn junction itself, in that negatively biasing the p junction is making some form of a N(PN)N effect. Basically the effect of the transistor, amplified by the coils. I dont know, just guessing.

It frustrates me that there is entirely too much cr** where we end up "just guessing".... Grrrrrr.....

It also frustrates me when guesses are treated as truth. (Physics in general, including the professional, amature, "inventors", and "new" idealists. This seems to be a common HUMAN thing.)

Paul Andrulis