Back to Basics

[lltfdaniel1]

Well i'll be following bruces work because resonance is key to ou..same area as Keelys work.

[giantkiller]

I totally agree.

[Grumpy]

GOD?

Sure! Like this: "There is absolutely NO denying the fact that those two carrier frequencies of 115 KHz and 222 KHz were found and engineered in that sense to do EXACTLY what they do." what? 


Not yet.

The effects are anything but random.

Tesla used electrostatic induction laws that he surmised from his work, but I have only been able to figure out a couple of them.

[giantkiller]

I agree that randomness is not part of the function. I only wanted to show that the bigger events can be seen without particular control. The ECD example would be nice if the event could be sustained into a constant effect and captured.

If this solitary event that was reported is not part of the process we strive for then my tests are only valid to point the builds are another type of effort. If this is the case then I would like to see behind the veil. With high 'Q' and resonance would electrostatic need be added to the mix also? This answer would enable further progress or a better depth of understanding of the goal. So far what everyone has seen are builds and claims of just high 'Q' and resonance or a static B(magnetic) field and pulsing. I also would like to see the specs for an electrostatic process to incorporate. Everyone has a different thought on the input parameters, whether right or wrong. How would an electrostatic process be shown and incorporated? Like T.T.Brown did with 2 plates and H.V? Could this be done with the 2 layers of collector coils. I am adding the second layer next. But just plain inductive coupling could prove wrong. Would 2 biased coils layered be considered electrostatic? This would give 2 magnetic fields in parallel while quenching one with control coils. The restoration of the bias field on one would be seen on the other. Is this even close? The GK4 is a sloppy example but this process was in there in a random way, not statically. If we look at Otto's winding examples the wire usually folds back on itself and then wrapped around. Once again we see a pulse on a bias field.

Making small steps to see possible and negligible parameters. TSL made inroads into this area before he left. I have his post printed out am assessing that info towards additions into the latest build here. He also put the collectors in series with the control coils at one point. The GK4 had these windings very close on a small diameter while my latest has this model spread out in larger diameter. My thinking is the reconnecting flux would provide a large event to capture from the larger aperture. Only the SM17 (large ring) was able to drive truly powered loads. The smaller TPUs actually just interacted with the filament inductance. And they did get hot. Now if the bulbs were lit, cold and under water by one wire then we would have a different design.

Is this assessment aligned with what is perceived by anybody here? I could have easily fallen out of my chair and don't even know if I am laying on the floor correctly. LOL.

--giantkiller.

[lltfdaniel1]

Pfft nothing is random, everything happens for a reason down to the smallest detail.