Hi all ;
What's is exactly scalar energy and wave ? How can we create that ? How can we measure ?( we can measure a current with Volt and ampere what's the components of scalar wave and energy ? )what's the formula that can we use to calculate power , energy of scalar wave ? Thanks
Regards...
Hi, the best detector to build is a wideband "Hodowanec" detector using low noise op amps:
fig.4 on this page works well, :
http://amasci.com/freenrg/grav3.html
to generate scalar pulses discharge a capacitor into a Cadaceus coil, preferably using HV doorknob cap and a spark gap.
Thanks for your attention and information about the detect and create scalar . Do you know any book about scalar wave explain everything ?
Regards...
I dont know of a book, but there may be one?
When searching online also try searching "Gravity Wave", its the same thing with more search hits.
It is thought by some that scalar waves travel superluminaly, instant communication (well one plank time constant) from anywhere to anywhere. I have planned an experiment to look at this, comparing a pulse transmission over a distance of about 10m using radio wave and using scalar wave, I will be trying to do it soon after I´ve finished my current project.
Tom Bearden might be a decent source of info on scalar
Quote from: Asymatrix on November 03, 2009, 05:11:44 PM
Tom Bearden might be a decent source of info on scalar
Yes, his writings on scalar weapons were a fantastic read!
Naudin has played with this.
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/sclxmtr.htm
http://jnaudin.free.fr/spgen/index.htm
A DETECTOR FOR GRAVITATIONAL WAVES:
http://www.omirp.it/
http://www.omirp.it/www/CdS_Detector/Index.html
If you want a great scalar wave lesson or to know what they are you should look at Konstantine Meyl. he has videos on u tube. He also sells a unit that will produce both hertz and scalar waves its a small warden cliff transmitter and reciever. the scalar wave prove overunity happens look on u tube for his name.
bearden is also good. The biggest problem with scalar waves is the fact that they require a medium to travel through (eather)! Mainstream will die before they will admit there is an eather because that is the free energy sea they have been trying to keep covered up! just look at the dead inventors they all made things that proved the eather exists from stanely meyrs to tesla, henry morey and many others. Start with U tube. just understand that an occillating potential produces two waves but the scalar wave has to be caught on a capicator because it is a point with all potential and a zero vector from what I have learned so far.sorry my spelling stinks utube Konstantine Meyl hes a little hard to understand I think he is sweedish physicist studying scalar waves.
I believe you meant:
Konstantin Meyl
Just drop that last "E" in KonstantinE
Google - 12.300 Hits:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&num=100&newwindow=1&q=Konstantin+Meyl+%2BScalar
A PDF to get you started one him:
22.7 MB (23,878,229 bytes)
http://www.scribd.com/document_downloads/24773695?extension=pdf
Quote from: IotaYodi on November 03, 2009, 06:09:06 PM
Naudin has played with this.
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/sclxmtr.htm
http://jnaudin.free.fr/spgen/index.htm
ohh my god
Naudin
the transmitter circuit can not be used normally in this circuit-schematics.
The man has no clue to the design of electronic circuits.
Even if this device should have worked in his laboratory is under the
Displayed using semiconductor NOT possible that you can copy it,
If you are using the same semiconductor types (not just in his set used
Transistors - in all the curves correspond!)
Reason, the transistors ar to use in 5 to 10 amps (typically) but here 2, of Tip 2055 (2N3955)
must here running in "milliAMP " area
that hot work in areas that are not defined in any sheet of defined amplification factors. In addition to "permissible" limits of the semiconductor ANY Function
upon not allow at least 2 transistors .
Also some mor "bugs" are to find .
So, i seen lot of Naudins electronic schematics since years, so he must serch for HELP.
Such work , its dont look "seriosly"
Gustav Pese
Ask for help if you will try this circuit
as an "transmitter" that can emit frequencies.
(i am not shure if that are scalar (!)
Quote from: mondainmax on November 02, 2009, 04:19:24 PM
Hi all ;
What's is exactly scalar energy and wave ? How can we create that ? How can we measure ?( we can measure a current with Volt and ampere what's the components of scalar wave and energy ? )what's the formula that can we use to calculate power , energy of scalar wave ? Thanks
Regards...
"scalar energy and wave" are bullshits from FE gurus engaged in a dead end for free energy by confusing a varying field strength with a longitudinal wave.
It is an effect of a near field (electric and/or magnetic) allowing to couple an emitter with a receiver without propagating electromagnetic wave. It works the same way a capacitor links a signal from a plate to the other one.
Even Tesla whom I consider as a great inventor missed the point by opposing to Hertz and Maxwell and to their transverse electromagnetic waves.
Quote from: Loner on January 27, 2010, 06:29:29 PM
Note: I have, personally, seen a transmission of power/data from the inside of a Faraday cage to a device outside the same. This was after the Army techs verified the room was EM tight, so I know that it wasn't a cracked shield spring or an unknown defect.
A faraday cage must not be EM tight - and an EM tight room must not be a faraday cage.-
Quote from: Loner on January 27, 2010, 06:29:29 PM
exnihiloest, I must ask you these questions.
1. Do you believe that Longitudinal Waves don't exist? (Opinion?)
I don't base anything on beliefs but on objective knowledge.
No fact or observation can confirm a longitudinal wave.
It follows that Longitudinal Waves are for me the same as the pink unicorn. I don't know if it exists or not. I'll believe in it when we will be able to observe it and measure it.
Quote
2. Is this a question of how some people have defined "Scalar" Waves?
Not a question of definition. A wave propagates. The only propagating waves we can witness for are transverse EM waves.
Quote
3. Do you consider 200 miles near field?
Of course. Near field is relative to the wave length. If the wave length is around 200 miles or more, 200 miles is near field.
Quote
4. Can you transmit major power via Electromagnetic Waves over distance? (>90% Eff)
You can, question of coupling. The longer the wave length the longer the distance (always the near field condition). Nevertheless there are some limits when the environment perturbs the coupling (earth roundness, conductor soil with losses, parasitic coupling...).
Quote
5. Was Intel's Power transfer system faked? (It's off the market now, but documented.)
No. It's real but conventional. Physics equations work perfectly.
The "longitudinal wave" is a misinterpretation of the near field (typical Meyl's error). The near field is the electric or magnetic field around the source. It contains energy (energy density: 1/2*epsilon*E² + 1/2*B²/µ) but this energy doesn't move from its own unlike EM waves. It expands from the source with the field and returns to the source at each period. It is this fact that is confused with a "longitudinal wave".
Quote
...
Any references, info, papers, or even book titles would be appreciated, as I can tell from the way you wrote that you're solid in your conclusions, and I wish I were as solid with mine. I try to prove what little I can with my own experimentation, but in reality, I'm just a hack.
I can build with good information, however, and some basic proofs, to keep me grounded in reality, would always be welcomed. I just want to eliminate confusion and prevent discouragement of research into unknown areas.
You reverse the burden of proof. I have not to prove that god or the pink unicorn doesn't exist. It is to the believers in them to show the evidence.
If I asserts that elves exist and walk every night in the woods, avoiding to be viewed by human beings, no one can prove I am wrong.
Quote
Note: I have, personally, seen a transmission of power/data from the inside of a Faraday cage to a device outside the same. This was after the Army techs verified the room was EM tight, so I know that it wasn't a cracked shield spring or an unknown defect. I don't believe an EM wave could exit such a cage as that's how it was tested. Way past basic "Tempest approved" levels. As to WHAT the Signal/Power consisted of, I'll admit, it's still theory at this time.
(To Me, at least. There are those that "Know" it was a longitudinal wave transmission, but I feel they are also caught in the "I Know it all" routine, as they were not there, operating the equipment, nor did they build the equipment.) No-one really Knows all. (I'm ignoring philosophical concepts, at this time.)
We have neither the detailed description of the system nor the protocol of the experiment nor the description of the measurement apparatus nor the measurement data and neither the Army nor other official scientific institution confirmed such observations. In science, all elements in order to be able to duplicate experiments and confirm extraordinary facts are required. A personal testimony is far from being a fact of science.
From the experiments I personally conducted (signals transmission over 100 meters using an electric near field), all was perfectly working according to the physics laws. No anomaly. No mystery.
Our goal is to search for the unknown in order to explain it and to use it for our convenience, because we know that we don't know all.
We have to identify unknown facts and anomalies not described by conventional physics. Reinterpreting what is perfectly known because it is a pleasant idea to think about myteries, falseness of science, and unconsciously we want to have fun, is psychological deviance and outside of our goal.
"We want believe" is the worst attitude.
The discouragement that you want to prevent, in fact you maintain it by letting people running in known tracks and wasting their time in trying to understand what Ampère, Maxwell, Faraday and many others have already understood and explained more than one century ago.
If the speed of light through a media is the same as the speed of sound through the same media would a longitudinal electromagnetic wave appear to be produced. And the second question I have is how fast the current needs to flow between the electric poles in order to produce the magnetic field density change that causes the wave to travel through a vacuum. I would think the current flow would have to be way faster than the speed of light by many many orders. And the magnetic field at any place in space must be present to begin with if it is modified by the current flows.
What generates this background magnetic field the electromagnetic wave is messing with.
@Loner
I was taught by people with closed minds that plasma only exists in the hot exhaust of a jet engine and lightning bolts. This was in the 60's. Now I find out it is in flurescent bulbs. Spark gaps. Interplanetary space. A room temperature metal. Now I find that a magnetically self pinching plasma defies laws of thermal dynamics. The more energy introduced into the field occupied by the plasma the cooler the plasma appears. Eventually I feel man will be able to create plasma at point a bundle it and send it to pointb. With electromagnetic stimulation that disrupts the selfgenerated currents of a plasma the plasma will transmute into hot gasses to be used in such machines as steam turbines.
Sorry about bringing up the problem Einstein spent his lifetime working on. Finnally he comes to the conclusion that mass distorts time and space which is expanding. Mass of course are dimples on the expanding Universe where things appear to be accelerated by gravity towards the center of mass while in his reality they are just stuck to a portion of the Universe that is not expanding at the same rate as the vacuum.
As you can see I have focusing problems. My mind is all over the place all of the time. I need a little meditation time to slow this chemical computer down or I am going to cook the processor. :)
@ Loner
Quote from: Loner on January 27, 2010, 06:29:29 PM
Note: I have, personally, seen a transmission of power/data from the inside of a Faraday cage to a device outside the same.
A Faraday cage only shields against electric fields and RF fields. It does not shield against magnetic fields. You can take a compass into a Faraday cage and it will still point north. The device probably was using a magnetic field to send the data.
Shielding against magnetic fields is hard to do and is usually done with steel or high permeability material. Such shielding is not technically part of a Faraday cage. Faraday cages are usually made of copper screen or copper sheets since good conductivity is important in order to obtain good shielding.
Most researchers place small magnets around the Faraday cage to counteract the Earth's field if they are concerned about both electric and magnetic fields.
If you do a little research you should be able to verify this for yourself.
Dear All,
First, I want to point out that it´s essential in such discussion to separate pure and elementary physics from engineering "thumb-rules" which are simplified for special engineering means.
Take the typical rf communication systems for example:
The goal is to spread information as wide and homogenous as possible. How do you achieve that ?
Well you have limited maximum transmitting power which is matched with the antenna to drive the free-air vacuum freefield impedance. So you try to excite the empty space or ether or whatever with a matched source.
In this scenario you couple the entire energy in the other media - and somewhere out in the far-field - another antenna (which is matched again to the media) couples the available energy at that point from the media in a matched way back to the receiver.
In such a setup both sides are matched to the "media" - in this case the empty space or however.
Because both sides are matched - there is no standing wave nor direct connectio in that media.
So if you turn on 1000 remote receivers+antenna - the power taken from the transmitter will always be the same. Even if there is no receiver.(well thats simplified but true in the far-field)
Well, if you want to transfer energy - this is the complete wrong technology.
If you want to transfer energy - you want the transmitter react to the receiver - both should be "in touch" - and if you don´t take energy out - you don´t want it to be transmitted.
So what happens if we skip that rf thumb-rules and approach the following scenario:
If we setup a transmitter + antenna system which is not matched to the empty space - but matche (impedance wise) to the energy receiver?
If there is no receiving antenna - the transmitting antenna will reflect the energy back to the transmitter (which is highly unwanted in normal setups).
Only if a loaded receiver is present - a standing wave between both antennas will establish - which guides the energy on the direct path. Because both antennas are matched to each others - but not to the media - you will have a standing wave between both antennas. This effects that impedance wise - both systems are "connected".
Similar situations are very typical in acoustic setups.
It´s still EM but has a wider context than radio or television broadcasting.
Buried Radiator Antennas:
Well, its all about matching.
In lower rf - frequencies the dominant transmission is tied to the ground - so you can tap the wave with a high antenna at empty space impedance - or in the ground with almost zero impedance. If you can match that impedance to your receiver- it makes no difference. A buried radiator sounds quite promising compared to a 20m cable between to apple trees;-)))
rgds.
Scalar waves are an interesting theory its one of the first things I found interesting when browsing the net wound up here.
I wonder about a lot would it be possible or likely for quantum entanglement to play a role in this if the theory is correct or the other way around.
@Loner,
For your enjoyment.... http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/larson/1957_April.pdf
Yes, buried antenna were commonplace. What isn't common is the concept of an antenna image.
Oh, that little circuit-board... For us it was in an olive-drab aluminum box with an AN-T??? number. We just called it the 'birdie'. The receiver was called a 'bird-watcher'. And yes, the birdie could be heard 'chirping' from inside a passive or active 'cage', whether they leaked or not.
They weren't using the birdie to test for leaks. It was used to test for inside signals modulating the birdie signal. They didn't want the TEM portion of the birdie signal getting out. After all, back then everyone had a birdie ;)
Quote from: Loner on January 28, 2010, 10:09:08 AM
...
Sending signals, or even a good amount of power, 100 Meters, with signals in the 100 meter "Band" is easy to do in a few days work. (You could do it faster than I, I bet...) That would be a "Normal" near-field transmission, and not at all applicable to this type of concept.
...
My experiment was carefully done for eliminating all possibilities of EM waves. I did not use a 100 m wave length, but a 150 km wave length (2 Khz)!
Quote
...
As for "A Wave Propagates", we must be careful. Standing waves do not,
...
"Standing waves" are superposition of propagating waves of equal amplitude traveling in opposing directions, giving us the impression they are static.
But "standing waves" are not "static waves". If there was no propagation, then the waves would have no speed thus no wave length and we would not observe nodes and anti-nodes at particular positions depending on the wave length.
People who found the laws of physics were not morons. They were intelligent people with IQ over the mean. So before challenging them, we have to understand what they found. Only then, we will be able to comprehend if something else is missing or wrong and only obvious experiments will can prove it. In the FE area there are too much immodest tinkers, blind believers or egocentric self-proclamed genious, who claim they found the holy grail when they are just misinterpreting well known phenomenons, because of their ignorance (imho more than 50% here). These pretentious and ridiculous people make the others to waste their time, attrack in the field ignorant and naive followers and discredit the real science amateur searchers. "Scalar waves" is one of their blah, a magical word like "back emf" or "radiant energy", sounding in their incantations and in the preaches of gurus like Bearden, Bedini and many others who have not yet a working FE machine when they tell us about it for 20 years!
I'm sorry I can't continue to discuss philosophy because it is very time consuming (english is not my first language). My simple message is:
"Standing on the shoulders of giants"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_on_the_shoulders_of_giants
ex
If the energy of the wave is reflected with some loss to the reflecting media then the wave returns and another input is introduced just bout that time. Soon a number of waves with their associated power are accumulated or superimposed on one another. The energy input which produces the wave is regained less radiative losses depending on the emission characteristics of the reflecting media. The standing wave then increases in energy density. The energy of each input does not disappear because the conservation of energy is real. A lazer is a lazer no matter what the frequency.
Quote from: sparks on January 29, 2010, 08:21:37 AM
ex
If the energy of the wave is reflected with some loss to the reflecting media then the wave returns and another input is introduced just bout that time. Soon a number of waves with their associated power are accumulated or superimposed on one another. The energy input which produces the wave is regained less radiative losses depending on the emission characteristics of the reflecting media. The standing wave then increases in energy density. The energy of each input does not disappear because the conservation of energy is real. A lazer is a lazer no matter what the frequency.
I'm not sure to understand what you mean. The source for standing waves needs just to compensate the losses to maintain the same field amplitude (unlike a propagating wave that carries energy taken from the source). In the ideal case, energy is only needed for building the standing wave when energy accumulates in some places depending on the interference pattern of forward and backward propagating waves.
When there are losses, the problem reduces to a propagating wave that "refuels" the energy depletion.
This point is not related to my experiment for transmitting signals at a distance with a near field. A near field is not a standing wave, it is just a field near the source, ideally at distance less than a quater of wave length. At this distance, there is no propagating plane wave (it forms farther if conditions are met, such antennas), B and E are not perpendicular and there is no relation between their amplitudes unlike an EM plane wave, i.e the Poynting vector is irrelevant to know the energy flux. It is the case near coils powered with signals at some Khz: E=0 and energy moves from the coil current to the B field and back to the coil at each period of the alternative signal. The B field can be detected at a distance thus we can transmit signals. Naturally energy conservation occurs. It is the same way one can transmit energy between to LC coupling devices.
I just see my standing A standing in the resonant system. ??? But the nearfield of the oscillator is a mixture of any other magnetic field disruptions which may be occuring at the same time even though at great distances. The magnetic field permeating the space of the oscillator is a mixture of many current induced magnetic field flux changes. Therefore the restoration of the magnetic field to the precurrent conditions will carry the energy of the distant scources into the sytem. The resonance of the system will determine which frequencies are cohered with the magnetic flux changes induced by the oscillator currents.
@ Loner
Quote from: Loner on January 29, 2010, 04:37:33 AM
sorry about this.
Thanks for the "story". I thought maybe you did not know much about Faraday cages, but I see I was wrong.
Quote from: Loner on January 29, 2010, 05:02:13 AM
Fritz, I like that concept, especially about the "Ground", Zero Impeadance connection.
I really think that fits, to a point, as you are then conducting the RF through the "Earth" or "Ground" and if this is possible with standard RF circuits, then I have a tremendous amount of learning to do.
For example, an antenna "Dummy" load, for tuning transmitters, is a resistor (OK, this is also simplified...) that doesn't radiate, or is shielded. The confusing part, for me, here is the shield is connected to ground. For a buried antenna, the ground is still the shield connection, but also the radiating part, so the entire "Earth" becomes the radiating part? I get so confused.....
Were I to measure the resistance between the radiator and the "Ground", I do realize this is very different from the impeadance, but might that mean that the ground/Dirt between the "Radiator" and the "Ground Rod" becomes the radiating part of the transmission ckt? I just get so lost with this stuff, and am always trying to learn, as RF still, to this day, drives me nuts. It's almost as if EM RF and Scalar "RF" were easily interchangeable, if such exists at all.
Ground may play multiple roles in EM.
The radiator thing might be interesting up to few MHz, classical HAM frequencies. In that frequency bands - part of the energy is emitted as ground bound wave. Thats the reason why ground plays a special role here.
If we talk about vhf and even higher - ground "as real" ground has an almost different meaning. On high mounted pole antennas - you have multiple (typ. 3 or more) downwards turned poles which form the "virtual ground" for the upwards turned "antenna" pole. The higher you get in frequency - "real ground" is just a barrier - the propagation itself is almost "optical". (with lots of athmospheric specials - but thats ham stuff).
Or if you take a satellite - how to ground a satellite ????
OK - we have a satellite with vhf antenna - so if the satellite case is shielded - we can use that as floating ground in the oposite to our standing pole antenna. Designs involving a "ground" concept are asymmetrical. So you have one (relatively) low impedance path (ground) and a high impedance path (pole)..
Or take the HAARP thing - they ionize huge spaces in the athmosphere and use that as antenna. In this case we have no ground - its symmetrical and in loop configuration
Back to our radiator antenna. Its quite obvious that the impedance of free space propagation will be different (higher impedance) than the impedance of ground bound wave.
Well there are magnetic antennas (loops) and electric antennas (poles).
If you bury a loop in the ground and match the output power of the transmitter to that low impedance you have a nice setup.
I think you missed out the magnetic vs. electric antenna thing.
While electric antennas need "ground" - loops dont.
@ Loner
Quote from: Loner link=topic=8244.msg225380#msg225380 A=1264691348
I wasn't aware that EM could be sent from underground that way, but hams did it for years. I still have a copy of "The Radio Amateurs Handbook" from the 50's and another from the 60's. It's in the 50's copy, but strangely missing from the 60's copy. I never understood that, so it's a question for me.)
At low frequencies the ground is such a small part of a wavelength that is effectively not there. It is like holding a piece of paper in front of a cell phone antenna.
Quote from: Loner link=topic=8244.msg225380#msg225380 A=1264691348
Just for a history fact, the Colorado tower of Tesla's wasn't in near field by any means, yet transmitted power easily.
??? All transmit antennas are in near field by definition.
@ Loner
Quote from: Loner on January 29, 2010, 06:47:09 PM
Xee2, maybe you could help me
I will try. I have a pretty good background in antenna design.
And maybe you can help me. I know nothing about "scalar waves" and you seem to have done some research on them. You also seem to be objective about your opinions so you seem like someone I could ask questions without having you feel like I was attacking you.
Near field means "near the transmitter antenna". The energy from the transmitter antenna falls off as 1/(R^2) but this only happens some distance from the transmitter (usually assumed to be about 3 wavelengths). Near the transmitter the energy is much higher and it is easy to couple as much as half of the energy to a receiving antenna. Note that distances are in wavelenths and so are frequency dependent. One wavelenght at 1 MHz is 1000 feet. At 1 KHZ a wavelength is one million feet. So at low frequencies the near field can extend for a great distance. At distances less than 1/10th wavelength the antenna coupling is pretty much just the capacitive coupling between the antennas. So I suspect that much of the "scalar wave" results are simply near field results. But, I am trying to find out if there is more to it than that.
@ Loner
Quote from: Loner on January 29, 2010, 06:47:09 PM
I find it interesting that it could be a normal type of EM signal and get through shielding, where a high power swept signal could not.
Do you know about "skin depth" of RF signals? A low frequency signal can go through many feet of steel whereas a microwave signal will bounce off only a fraction of an inch of steel.
@Loner,
The 'birdie' was about the size of a baking soda box with nothing protruding from it and no holes. The only control was an on/off push button. The seams were soldered. I'm quite sure the box was made from aluminum.
The receiver was identical except it had a BNC output jack. It was connected to a spectrum analyzer/scope to display phase modulation of the signal and any other signals that may have modulated the carrier.
I was only an operator at that time so I didn't have the 'need to know' to see a schematic. I know the transmitter had three transistors with no heat sinks and a thick ferrite rod with 2 coils wrapped around it. The coils were covered in heat-shrink tubing. One coil only covered about half an inch of the rod and was at one end. The second coil covered the majority of the rod and looked much like a caduceus coil would look if it was covered with heat-shrink tubing.
The same tests were performed in two U.S. embassies and many tactical AN/TRD-23A system enclosures, that I know of.
The interesting part was to be inside and see the look on a newb's face when the door was shut and his getto-blaster lost the broadcast radio signal. Yet, we could still see the signal from that little box inside from the outside when the same door was shut.
Ah! The good ol' days of the Cold War! :D
IMO, the folks thinking it was magnetic coupling are yanking their own chains :)
@ex
First time I've seen someone describe a 'standing wave' correctly in years :)
put one of these inside a faraday cage and tell me you wont hear it chirping outside it's cage.
MOD Tesla's patent artist did not draw things to scale. That little block E consisted of an extensive network of tunnels with insulated pipes. He wants his charges to accumulate in the capacitor plates not be pissed away into the air or the ground. Also the diameter of the inductor solenoid is much larger than the diameter of the torroid. If not the current radiates from this surface instead of the nice smooth glow zone created around the top capacitor . The top capacitor 1/2 is also a spark gap electrode of sorts. As well as the Earth which he considered to be a smooth polished cold cathode.
Quote from: sparks on January 29, 2010, 01:22:31 PM
...
Therefore the restoration of the magnetic field to the precurrent conditions will carry the energy of the distant scources into the sytem. The resonance of the system will determine which frequencies are cohered with the magnetic flux changes induced by the oscillator currents.
Near fields work only at very short distance. Long distance coupling needs oscillator systems having dimensions of the same order as the distance. An LC circuit with a 1 mtr diameter coil is able to transmit power to another coil of same dimension, at distance about 1-3 mtr. If you want the same for 10 km, you will need a 10 km diameter coil...
@ Loner
I am not familiar with details of Tesla experiments, but I do believe he was transmitting with megawatts of power. To send a signal 200 miles with a megawatt transmitter does not seem like it would be hard to do to me. There are many AM stations transmitting for over 200 miles with far less power. Ham radio operators use to see how far they could transmit using small battery powered transmitters and they were able to send signals hundreds of miles. As far as I know, Tesla was never able to show that he could transmit larger amounts of power all over the world with only two transmitters. But, as I said, I do not know much about his experiments.
In the 1950's a common way of measuring wavelength of microwave signals was to use a "slotted line" which was a waveguide with a slot in it. A signal would be sent into the waveguide and reflected back to set up standing waves and then a small probe would be moved along the slot inside the waveguide to determine the distance between the voltage peaks (which was the wavelength of the signal in the waveguide).
@ Loner
??? There are many types of longitudinal waves. The electric field propagating through a wire is a longitudinal wave. The compression wave in a steel beam is a longitudinal wave. Earthquakes have both compression (longitudinal) p-waves and transverse wave. Is there something special about the type of longitudinal wave you are talking about? I think I missed something.
@ Loner
Indeed, coupling that much power at that distance seems out of the ordinary. But, a big factor in the coupling efficiency between two resonators is the Q of the resonators. If he was able to get extremely high Qs it may come into the realm of feasibility. I would need to do some calculating before I could say anything about that. Tesla was certainly a genius and I suspect knew all about Q of resonators (although he may have called it something else).
Like you have said, radio waves do not have a compression component. But it is possible to make a longitudinal electric "wave". I put wave in quotation marks because it is not technically a wave. You can do this by putting a charged object on something that will vibrate it horizontally and then suspending another charged object a short distance away. The vibrating charged object will push and pull on the suspended charge object and the suspended charge object will eventually be vibrating at the same frequency as the first vibrating charged object. The thing that comes closest to a longitudinal electric wave (at least that I can think of) is probably the field between the two plates of a capacitor as AC is being sent through the capacitor. In this case, the electric charge in one plate pushes and pulls on the charges in the other plate by means of the electric field connecting the plates.
"Tesla's view was that "Hertzian" waves (Transverse Waves) did not exist, and, of course, Hertz had the opposite view." - They were probably both correct. Each is probably an oversimplification of what is happening.
"An analogy given to me was, current RF is looked at like waves on the surface of water. Easy to see, and detect. Longitudinal waves would be pressure waves IN the water," - I think that is a good way of looking at it.
"When current starts flowing through a long wire, it starts at BOTH ends, proven by experiment. The middle is the last place that conduction starts." - This is not true. I have done many, many, measurements of this type. Someone has misled you.
"We all know that electrons "Flow" from - to +. but then what flows from + to -?" - Nothing. The electrons are replaced where they came from by new electrons flowing in.
A "hole" is just a location where the electron is missing. Think of it as the depression made by a ping pong ball floating on water. As the ball moves, the hole moves with it. But the hole is just the spot where some water is missing.
I guess we must consider are all vacuums created equally? Consider a perfect vacuum pump. We start off with a closed chamber with atomspheric pressure in it. Whatever that is, Then we draw back the cylinder using as much force as we can. Then we measure this altered space by its relation to atomospheric pressure. What have we got left in the cylinder. We not only have to draw back the cylinder we have to use force just to maintain the vacuum. As we want a more perfect vacuum we need to apply more force and to maintain this increased vacuum again we must use more force. So lets pin the crankarm. The vacuum will start to drop as the pin begins to bend along with the cylinder walls caving in slowly the valve deforming etc. Within this cylinder we now introduce two pieces of metal which are seperated by an insulator. We then apply charge of unlike polarity. It doesnt matter if it is positive negative just unlike polarization. The plates fly towards each other. Causing two vacated places where there was once very little vacuum because the plates were of mass not vacuum. The plates had pressure. In fact many many orders of atmospheric pressure would be needed to alter the pressure exerted in these plates. We are now playing with the scaler vacuum field within the cylinder. Does the piston head respond to the plate movements? If the plate movement is lined up with the cylinder head doesnt it instantly feel the ivacuum fluctuation. The holding pin bending exactly in time with the movement of the plates. No wavelength no waiting for propogation just instantaneous information as to where the plates are.
@ Loner
Wow. You cover so much in one post.
As you know, light travels about 1 foot in a nanosecond. Take a wire that is 20 feet long and feed it with a 200 MHz square wave from a signal generator at one end and terminate the other end with 50 ohms. Use a dual trace scope with one probe at the start of the wire and move the other probe along the wire. You should see the rise of the pulses in the two channels separating at about one nanosecond for each foot the probes are separated. At least that is the kind of results I got when I tried this. I spent many years making delay lines and this is exactly what they would do. The longer the wire is, the longer the signal is delayed getting from one end to the other. I also used taps along the lines for different time delays. All worked according to theory. So, what is happening with the spark gaps. I am going to have to take a guess here. The 3 gaps are like 3 capacitors in series. When a voltage is applied across the 3 capacitors in series, electrons accumulate on the plate of the capacitor at the negative terminal and electrons are removed from the plate at the positive terminal. When the electrons build up at the negative plate they push electrons on the other plate of that capacitor onto one of the plates of the center capacitor. And likewise, the removal of electrons from the positive terminal capacitor plate will pull electrons onto the other plate of that capacitor from the center capacitor. So electrons "effective;y" move from the plate of the capacitor at the negative terminal connected to the center capacitor to the plate of the capacitor at the positive terminal that is connected to the center capacitor. I hope you can follow all of that. It is just a case of electrons will always move as far apart from each other as they can. So, now where are the electrons? They are on the plates of the end capacitors (gaps). As the voltage builds up it will jump where there is the greatest difference in electrons on the plates (gaps) which is the end capacitors (gaps).
Holes are tricky. I got A's in two semesters of graduate level semiconductor classes. And I still can not give you a better explanation than that they are just places where the electrons are missing. When the crystals are made it is done in a way that does not produce as many electrons as are needed to balance the charge in all of the molecules. The crystal is a semiconductor which means that the electrons can move about. The result is that the molecules compete with each other for the electrons and some of them do not get any (there is a game where there is not enough chairs for everybody and someone ends up without a chair - it is sort of like that).
Yep. Electrons only move at a few cm per second in a wire. But the SIGNAL moves at the speed of light. Use your balls in tube. Paint one ball red and put it in at the start of the tube. Now push another ball into the tube. Bingo. A ball comes out the other end as soon as you push a new ball in (assuming the tube is full). But the red ball has only move the length of one ball.
I do not know anything about scalar waves. That is what I am hoping you can teach me about. Or at least share what you do know.
@ Loner
I think a better explanation for the spark gaps is as follows. The center capacitor has the same amount of charge on both plates to start with because it starts with no voltage charge on it. The other two capacitors prevent any charge from being added to either side of the center capacitor because a DC current can not flow through a capacitor. When voltages are applied to to outer capacitors the charges are rearrange in the wires attached to the center capacitor, but there is still always the same total amount of charge on both sides of the center capacitor since none can be added to either side. Since current is the flow of charge, and since sparks require current, there can not be any spark across the center capacitor because there is no charge difference on its plates to produce the current. There is no charge difference on the plates of the center capacitor until charge is added to one side or the other by a spark across one of the outer capacitors. When this happens, then a spark across the center capacitor is possible.
Quote from: Loner on January 30, 2010, 11:32:20 PM
What you now have is three spark gaps, and what I always thought and assumed was the gaps would fire 1,2,3 in that order. Seems like that's the only way it could work, right? Unfortunately for me, and it still bothers me to this day, is that the end gaps fire first, at the same time, and the center gap fires a little later.
Since there are already so may theories on why this happens....
If you step out of the box for a moment try this perspective...
1. Charge, and all the results of charge and its movement are properties of space.
2. This experiment provides examples of two things:
a) how easy it is for results to be misinterpreted
b) a prime example of LEM motion (yes, 'wave' is not a good word here)
3. TEM cannot exist without LEM but LEM can exist without TEM.
4. LEM current and voltage are always in-phase.
5. Current does not flow at the ends first. No more than magnetic field lines exist without adding some iron filings.
6. 'c' is a constant and matter cannot exceed 'c' but changes in the properties of space can.
Back to your box now :D
I like Xee's second explanation best. Change the spark gaps to caps for an easier, lower voltage test. Apply a short pulse instead of using the switching of the gap. I'll bet the results are the same.
The three gap test wasn't so much a test of how current flowed as it was for how switches switch.
@ BEP
I like experiments. Theories are often not correct. But, it is hard to argue with the results of an experiment. Put 3 capacitor is series and then put a DC voltage (any voltage) across the end leads of the series. Now measure the voltage across the center cap. It is zero volts (my meter reads a few millivolts because the leads are picking up stray fields, I do not live in a Faraday cage ;)).
Do you know what frequency the spectrum analyzer was set at to pick up your birdie signal?
Quote from: xee2 on January 31, 2010, 12:26:56 PM
@ BEP
I like experiments. Theories are often not correct. But, it is hard to argue with the results of an experiment. Put 3 capacitor is series and then put a DC voltage (any voltage) across the end leads of the series. Now measure the voltage across the center cap. It is zero volts (my meter reads a few millivolts because the leads are picking up stray fields, I do not live in a Faraday cage ;)).
I would expect that. Changes in charge level only happen on the leading and trailing edges of a pulse.
Still, I cannot interpret the results as 'current flows at both ends, and not the middle, at the same time on a wire. It does if it has three capacitors or spark gaps in series in it. ;D
Quote
Do you know what frequency the spectrum analyzer was set at to pick up your birdie signal?
The spectrum analyzer hunted for signatures from D.C. to 1.2 gHz. It was looking for signals carried by the LEM signal. The LEM signal from the birdie covered the entire spectrum and was below the noise floor on there and any standard radio receiver circuit.
If you wish to know what frequency the two devices used I don't think you understand what an LEM 'wave' is. I'm not completely sure either but I'll share some characteristics.
LEM signals do not require an antenna.
A coil designed to produce an LEM signal will measure almost zero inductance and very high capacitance (even though the coil is a DC short circuit).
Provided you had a very advanced tube type receiver an experienced operator could detect certain types of these signals. (At the time at least, the solid state receivers weren't capable of detecting the signal - MOSFets could. TRUE Metal Oxide Substrate Fets could)
If attempting to locate the source you were wasting your time. The signal direction displays showed the signal source as all directions at the same time.
When the signal was used as a clock source or carried data bits it appeared to rotate on the direction displays.
The un-initiated dubbed them 'rotary pulse jammers'.
To the birdie point.... The signal transmitted was Brownian noise - covering a conventional spread from 100kHz to 3mHz.
Yes, I know. TEM signals cannot modulate lower frequency TEM signals.
@ BEP
Quote from: BEP on January 31, 2010, 07:26:21 PM
The spectrum analyzer hunted for signatures from D.C. to 1.2 gHz. It was looking for A carried by the LEM signal. The LEM signal from the birdie covered the entire spectrum and was below the noise floor on there and any standard radio A circuit.
This sounds a bit like a spread spectrum signal. This was a classified technology in the 1960's but is now what is used for wi-fi and cell phones. But then again, maybe it was a scalar wave signal. Do you know what "LEM" stands for? Is this short for "longitudinal electromagnetic"?
Spread spectrum uses phase modulation and can modulate any frequency.
Quote from: xee2 on January 31, 2010, 08:14:04 PM
Do you know what "LEM" stands for? Is this short for "longitudinal electromagnetic"?
Correct, but it was normally either electric or magnetic, not both.
The signals I mentioned were not SS or frequency hoppers. Even a newb fresh from school could identify and locate those within seconds. LEM wasn't used for communication except when digital or Morse code. The pulses were the data. There was no carrier, sidebands, harmonics or signal unless you were equipped and trained to receive it. The closest attribute to wave length was the duration of a pulse.
The closest I've seen recently is the original specification for UWB (ultra wide-band).
All of that signal was below the noise floor as well. Unfortunately, even UWB has been redefined and done differently than original. BPL (bandwidth over power line) uses some LEM methodology but the engineers have mangled it into a monstrous source of electronic noise. I'm sure they just couldn't imagine it would work as it was designed.
@ BEP
Original SS was below noise floor and UWB. That was the idea, it could not be detected because it was hidden in the noise. But, if not that then this is very interesting problem. I will have to think about it for a while. Thanks for the many details.
@ Loner
Have you tried any scalar wave experiments? What kind of results did you get if you did?
Quote from: xee2 on January 31, 2010, 09:44:03 PM
Original SS was below noise floor and UWB.
I think we are still talking oranges and apples.
SS wasn't the bandwidth of the original UWB as developed by the originators of Time-Domain, Inc.
Up until the mid 90's SS's main distance and bandwidth limitations were due to ethernet collision packet timing issues. At that time Time-Domain was sending collision free 40mbyte of actual throughput up to 10 miles non-line-of-sight (not 'near line of site' as it was re-termed by competitors who could not compete technically).
The same signal type was used to locate buried survivors of the last big Mexican Earth quake. Good luck doing that with TEM.
The term 'UWB' was originally a method like 'SS', not an amount of bandwidth. We see this word/idea re-definition all the time. Most of this seen by me has been from Microsoft.
Tesla and those brushes. I think they were cold cathode emissions in an ionized gas. Knowing Tesla he was working a little air in a partially evacuated tube with some low duty high amplitude spikes matched to the optimum ionizing frequency of the gas. Plasma is a form of matter that on the whole exibits electrical neutrality while easily being coerced into movement by magnetic field changes. Electrons in a plasma are not only free they are moving in a current. These currents can be a plancks length up to the length of the Universe. The magnetic field disruption enormous to very minute from the plasma currents. My piezo electric buzzer changes its frequency depending on magnetic field changes also. I guess it is back to trying to figure out a scalar wave inferometer of some sort. Got as far as the piezo crystal then my place got hot. Damn little sonic strobe light stopped beating. Now I gotta get it chirping again.
@ BEP
Quote from: BEP on January 31, 2010, 11:15:54 PM
I think we are still talking oranges and apples.
Perhaps we are. The SS I am talking about was originally (1960's) used as a means of communications that could not be detected. Bandwidths were up to several GHz. Could not be detected because signal energy was much lower than noise floor and just looked like noise. Was very secret until somehow it got leaked. Now in common use for all sorts of things (with smaller bandwidths). It seems to fit the description of your birdie. But, if you are sure birdie was not SS then I will take your word for it.
I'm absolutely sure the birdie was nothing of the sort. While I never saw a schematic, the parts count and contents would make it similar to a grid-dip meter.
@ BEP, Loner
Well I do not think it is a scalar wave, but I was able to transmit a signal from inside of a stainless steel can to a small coil outside of the can. So I have confirmed that it is possible to send signals out of a Faraday cage.
Maybe not but it is interesting experimenting anyway.
@Loner,
It is clear to me that I am no LEM expert. Otherwise, I would be pulling some very odd rabbits out of my hat.
My cap analogy wasn't given to say the gaps were acting like caps. Like you said, perhaps in some very small way. It was given to bring out the switching action. And switching is indeed what gaps do. If one side is sharply pointed and the other a wide flat surface you have the equivalent of a rectifier. (also where the schematic symbol for a rectifier came from :D)
I think the most important thing that should be realized from the triple gap experiment is the fact the dielectric does conduct charge. Not that the current flows at the ends first.
My understanding of the triple gap/cap experiment is this:
The reason why the ends fire first is because there is where the greatest separation of potential exists until they do fire. Then the greatest separation of potential is in the middle gap so it fires.
As for differences in color.... I have heard that many times before. Unfortunately, my spark color differences were related to the gap material, frequency and voltage.
Please! Do Not toss any of your results out - documented or in mind. I've done that too often and regret it immensely.
I always form my own opinions of results - I suggest you do the same. If we all do this then there is a pretty good chance at least one of us is right :)
Cell tower antennas use such a variety of supposed innovation. From what you describe I would say each section is fed by a waveguide or the large oval or rectangular rigid coaxial transmission line. Either would be coupled to the antenna with a very small length of rigid conductor or a small open or closed conductor loop. A lot of possibilities there.
They normally use stacked elements with varying spacing between the elements (helps with minus radiation angle for closer clients and still concentrates most energy to where most people are... the ground) Usually these antennas will look like they are vertical polarization but they are not.
Oops.. being a bit wordy tonight...
@ Loner
"I hope you can help me out" - and I hope you can help me out. It should all work best if we help each other. I spent 25 years as an RF engineer so I know that field pretty well. But there are many other fields I know nothing about.
"I can't imagine the Gaps acted like A" - there is capacitance between any two unconnected conductors, no matter how small or how far apart. But if they are small and far apart the capacitance is so small it is just considered an open circuit.
"I am questioning my results" - I think your result were correct (very clever setup), I just think you are interpreting them incorrectly.
"The first part was the ends DID spark first, then the middle" - this is what I would expect to happen, so I think your results are correct.
"spark didn't coincide with the measured voltage spike on the scope" - can not explain this. Probably has something to do with how you had scope attached.
"I really didn't think this was about "Swithing" - it is not about switching. It is about how the charge accumulates on the plates of the capacitors. It may take a while for you to understand this because it is not a way of thinking that you normally work with. You may note, it took a while for me to understand what was happening, and I am suppose to know about these kinds of things. I suspect that there are many, many, others who would not understand. But I am sure you will because you have an open mind. By the way, I remember now this is a trick question used to test physics students (many of whom get it wrong).
"I have no information at all when it comes to ...Scalar type of signals" - well you have more than me and your help would be appreciated.
"At this point, I don't think I want to know" - I hope that does not mean you no longer care about learning new things.
Think about the explanation I gave for the spark gaps. If may take you a while since this in new to you, but I think you will eventually see how it works. Put 3 caps in series and measure the voltage across the center cap. It should be zero volts. Now ask yourself, how can a spark jump between two points at the same voltage. If you see that, then you will see that there can not be a spark in the center gap until one side as had its voltage increased.
@ Loner
Please note, I agree that your results were correct. In the case of 3 gaps the energy comes in from both ends to the middle. But, that is not what happens in a wire. At lease to my understanding.
@ Loner
I have been trying to get information about Tesla's 200 mile test from the web. But with not much luck. Do you know how much power he was using to transmit and how the received power was measured? Did they light up light bulbs at the receiver to determine power received, use a spark, what?
When a diver needs to signal for help he uses morse code by smacking rocks together. The shock wave heard. If the diver takes the same amount of energy and lifts the rock up and down in the water it is not heard. Sonic waves are changes in pressure. Tesla once stated to one of his field engineers upon inspection of his tower construction that he was planning on making the whole earth quiver. When a capacitor plate is voided of charge carriers or filled with antielectrons which have negative mass assignment would we expect the metal to be less dense than one filled with electrons. The capacitor would bubble up if it became less dense than the surrounding density. Whereas when the capacitor plate is filled with electrons it is more dense or massive and would tend to sink. Upon shorting of the two capacitor plates or return of the two capacitor plates to the same density the plate that bubbled up would sink and the plate that sunk would start to bubble up in relationship to the scalar density field surrounding the capacitor.
@Loner,
On the waveguide...
The transmission line used can be a wide variety of things but most towers use a rectangular looking cable like line. The rectangular part is due to the easy/hard dimensions (radio slang for the E and H dimensions).
Don't think the E H dims must be a number based upon the TEM wavelength of the signal. When you see a cable used that is obviously much smaller than any wavelength get them to explain this. They can't or won't. They'll just say it works or it is suggested by the manufacturer. If it is anything but a round cross-section then some waveguide principles are being used. Round can mean it is coax and uses dielectric conduction (LEM). They won't expand upon that either.
I won't claim to be a long time RF engineer. My calling was and is a much broader range. However, Uncle Sam spent a considerable amount of time and money to train me in the wonderful world of wave propagation (all forms 8) )
As far as cell phones and sticking your head in a microwave oven.... It is the same thing. It is just a slower death. Most cell phones max around 300mW P-P but do understand the tower controls the output of your cell. If the tower can't hear your cell it will tell it to speak louder.
You know your battery will drain faster in fringe areas? At the same time did you notice a strange heat in your head as well as in your hand holding the cell? Most cell phones can peak out at 5 Watts.
That must be the same radiation that lights a flurscent bulb when a copper antennae terminates in a glass of water. The copper antennae was run alongside the grow lamp. No connection to the fillament. The standing waves appear to have some effect on florescence. Without the glass of water is was very difficult to get the tube to fire. Even the addition of a steel alligator clip in the open circuit made it very difficult to light the bulb. The radiation off the end of the copper antennae was the usual radiant heating effect. This was very different than the radiation coming off of the magnetically confined plasma I got going one day with a flyback. That was making cold currents. Literal cold currents. It could have been an anomally because the following hours were spent in the exact center of a huge lowpressure circulation and the point of the experiment was ground zero. It could have been totally unrelated but it was pretty scary to go outside and see a perfect halo of cumulous clouds around the experiment site.
The flag was wrapped around the flag pole so tight it looked like a barber pole from the wind blowing in a circle. I will not power this thing up where I am. Way too much heated vapor round here.
How can we distinguish Rf and scalar waves ?
What is the reaction of water on RF ? If I put a RF transmitter antenna under water can I detect RF outside ?
@ Loner
Thanks for any real information you can supply about Tesla's experiment.
Wow. You have been doing many interesting things. A circuit that freezes a wire is way beyond my knowledge. But, I have posted several simple circuits that will light a fluorescent tube with one wire and I do understand and can explain that process should you have any questions.
Quote from: forest on February 02, 2010, 01:47:45 PM
What is the reaction of water on RF ? If I put a RF transmitter antenna under water can I detect RF outside ?
Salt water is a conductor and will short the antenna if the antenna is not insulated. Pure water is and insulator and the antenna will work in it (but not very well).
@ Loner
Quote from: Loner on February 02, 2010, 05:25:37 PM
Xee2, I would enjoy an understanding of the process.
The fluorescent tube lights because there are some gas molecules inside that get ionized. That means that some of the electrons are pulled off of the atoms so that they no longer have equal positive and negative charges in them. Remember, an atom has all of the positive charge in the nucleus and for each positive charge there is an electron orbiting the atom when it is in its normal state. But if an electron is pulled off, the atom then number of positive and negative charges is no longer equal and the atom has a net positive charge. Such atoms are called ions. It only takes a few volts to pull electrons off of atoms. Sparks are blue because the nitrogen atom emit blue light when they are ionized and sparks ionized the nitrogen to make ions before it jumps a gap. Oops, I am getting off topic. The ions in the fluoresce tube are pulled from one end to the other by the high voltages on the ends of the tube as they reverse (tube can also be driven by DC but to keep it simple lets use AC). The high voltages accelerate the ions to high speeds just like the electrons in a TV tube. These accelerated ions crash into other atoms and emir UV radiation (you will have to learn about that later). The UV radiation then excites the phosphor on the tube which then emits visible light. All of this you probably know, and if not can find using Google. So what do we need to get the tube to light. We need high voltage AC. It turns out that it usually takes at least 500 volts for the tube to light. Once lit a lower voltage will keep it lit. So if you apply 500 volt AC across the tube it will light. The frequency of the AC does not matter. Most of my circuit use AC in the tens of kilohertz.The AC does not have to be a sine wave, pulses will work, even pulsed DC or plain DC will work (but it is a little harder to explain why and I am trying to keep it simple).
Does this make sense so far? You probably already knew all of this but it seemed like a good place to start.
Below is my experiment. The 1/4 wavelength of the cb output is about 9 feet. The antennae is copper magnet wire.
The coax was stripped and the inductance of the coax extended by the magnet wire. The shield was just lying around.
Bulb will not light without glass of water. Higher frequency photons contain all the lower frequency photons and are therefore able to be converted into visible light by photon scattering. The atomic preference to absorb different photon types allows seperation of photons from a higher frequency (larger photon pack) and invisiblity to the unwanted photons in the pack. In other words say you are transmitting 10 khz and your matter likes 6khz electron jumping. 4khz will be invisible to the matter and is passed on until it finally reaches a form of matter that likes 4khz jumping. This second form of matter will then scatter 4kz photons. The fluorescent coatings in a bulb cause visible light photons to be scattered while the lower frequency photons just keep on trucking at the original velocity and phase of propogation. Least that is what I understand about photon scattering and traveling waves and crossovers bandpass torroidal filter chokes etc.
@ sparks
Quote from: sparks on February 02, 2010, 11:15:01 PM
Below is my experiment.
??? Is this something you actually did?
yep
@Sparks,
Have you ever blown your finals doing these experiments?
('finals' = CB lingo for PA, final RF transmitter output stage, etc)
Most modern CBs will take a bit of abuse but easily blow if not loaded correctly.
I melted one transmitter down before I used the water. The water appears to be a dummy load. The bulb brightness is also effected by any amplitude modulation. You can see yourself talk.
Quote from: sparks on February 03, 2010, 07:06:12 AM
I melted one transmitter down before I used the water. The water appears to be a dummy load. The bulb brightness is also effected by any amplitude modulation. You can see yourself talk.
Yea. The wire along the light tube and the tube makes for a simple transmission line, the water terminates that TL.
In my CB days (a very long time ago - don't use it much any more) we hung 8ft. tubes in the shack as fun modulation meters :o
Of course, I had a 'foot warmer' back then ;D
I needed the light tube because every time I keyed-down the house lights would dim ::)
Another way to lightup a fluorescent is place one end near the flyback of a tv transformer. Ground one of the electrodes farthest from the flyback. More efficient than heating up a faraday cage. The unit in question didint have any xray shielding anyway so it was real easy to do.
I think there is a little doppler effect going on when we excite electrons into conduction bands. If an electron is a standing wave it must have an associated frequency of oscillation. So as an electron moves towards you you get blueshifts and you SEE ultraviolet. Wheras when it moves away from you you get red shifts. The mass itself doesnt have to get all the way to your receiver it is preceded by the emwaves it is transmitting continously as it stands there.
like a train whistle. The oscillator never gets to you but you hear it change frequency depending on relative motion.
@ Loner
Quote from: Loner on February 03, 2010, 08:05:47 AM
I did/do understand that part
Good. So all it takes to light the tube is at least 500 volts AC.
Now the next step is to see that the AC goes through a capacitor. I am assuming that you already know this. What you may not know, because it really is more an RF thing, is that the amount of energy that gets through the capacitor depends on the frequency of the AC. The higher the frequency is the smaller the capacitance has to be for the energy to go through it.
So if 500 volt AC is connected to each side of the tube it will light. And, if a capacitor with a large enough capacitance is then put in series with the tube, the tube will still light. If you have not done this, it is something you should try.
Note that the capacitor is just two metal plates separated by an air gap. So if the capacitor is replaces with two conductors that are not directly connected they will be a small capacitor. So the tube will still light with just two capacitively coupled pieces of metal which could be wires. BUT, only if the capacitance is large enough for the AC frequency to get through.
The capacitor is not an all or nothing thing. The amount of energy getting through depends on the frequency. So, if the frequency is not high enough to allow all of the power to get through the capacitor there will still be a small amount getting through. If not all of the energy is getting through the capacitor then the voltage across the tube will be reduced. But this can be compensated for by increasing the supply voltage.
In the one wire tube. There is capacitance between the tube and HV power supply. If the AC frequency is high enough and the HV supply voltage is high enough then the tube will light. I think this is an important experiment to understand.
@ Loner
You can also capacitively couple into both ends of the tube like this.
A neon bulb does the same thing but only needs 100 volts instead of 500 volts.
I was going to expand my experiment by increasing the size of the wire by replacing the wire with a piece of copper tubing about two inches in diameter. Then cluster a number of bulbs around it. Monitor the current flow to the supply of the transmitter to see if there was an increase in current draw with the bulbs in or out of the field of the antennae aka transmission line. Kinda busy right now performing surgery on electric slaves invented byTesla in his early years. I in fact worked on one of Westinghouse's first single phase electric motors. No commutator. This motor predated the repulsion induction motors commonly used for singlephase motor applications from the 1920's through the 60's when their use fell off in lieu of the single phase capacitor start and run motors we have today. The motor took the 60hz signal and used inductors of different mass in series connection with the two identical windings inside the motor. The delay caused by the current flows in the "chokes" Causes first one winding to be fired then the second winding to be fired. Creating a rotating magnetic field. I could not for the life of me understand why the repulsion induction motor was ever produced and for that matter the single phase motors now in common use today. I digress but this motor had Tesla written all over it. Alot of Tesla's patents show chokes between the secondary of the supply transformer in series with the rest of the circuit. One on each end of the standard supply transformer. If the rest of the circuit is like that old electric motor of ingenious design then I would imagine that the two lines coming in have already seen a frequency boost before they ever see the rest of the circuit. The two chokes taking the sinsuoidal output of the supply transformer and converting it to a very high amplitude very low duty cycle input into his transmission lines. This would allow him to take the 60hz input sinsouid and convert it into very very short duty waves of very high amplitude.
Sparks
So do ya think that the chokes were considered "extra coils" ? ;]
Mags
What I see is Tesla was producing a lot higher frequency radiation then kilohertz. The extra coils on top of the electric motor changes the time interval between when the voltage appears across each winding in the motor. This is like getting doutble voltage effects but at different times. The voltage will still be 120volts to each winding but it will be out of phase. Changing the motor into a twophase motor from a singel phase scource. Two circuits powered up for the price of one.
@ Loner
I did a quick test using a pulsed 15 KV source (ignition coil I have measured the voltage on). I put two leads on the output and then put a neon bulb on the end of one lead. With a distance of about one foot between the neon and the other lead the bulb was blinking. Capacitance falls off as 1/distance. So I would expect that if I had an output three times higher (45 KV) that the bulb would blink with a 3 foot spacing. I did not test with a tube since they do not work well with pulses and need more voltage than a neon. The unattached lead on the neon was a bit longer than 1 inch.
@ Loner
I did a test by accident. I had a fluorescent tube sitting on the table while I was doing something else and noticed that it was blinking. It turns out that when each end of tube was placed within about 2 inches of the HV output wires from the coil it would blink as the coil was pulsed (nothing connected to either end of tube). So 15 KV seems to be enough to light a tube wirelessly if it is within about 2 inches of the output wires.
This effect is since jear good know.
Ist ist only an effect from RF distortion that is produced from the spar pulse (and will als produces from square wafes with short on an fall times.
If you will test this out.
open an AM transistor radio in the room,
and think about ths.
Gustav Pese
Does effect persist when you put this bulb into pure water (distilled) ?
@ pese
Tube will light wirelessly using sine wave AC also.
@ forest
I have not tried this, but I think it will. Water is just a different dielectric (with a different dielectric constant) put between the plates of the capacitor - as long as the water is not conductive (dielectrics are insulators).
Quote from: xee2 on February 05, 2010, 03:26:32 PM
@ pese
Tube will light wirelessly using sine wave AC also.
If low voltage sine only if very hogh voltages.
that will transittung on staic way.
if low volt sinse or sqare waves (as from some 12/110volt inverters
than OMLY if RF-Disortions , and peacs will make RF. You will heare harmonics of the als an AM-Receivers LW / MW
GP
Quote from: xee2 on February 05, 2010, 03:31:15 PM
@ forest
I have not tried this, but I think it will. Water is just a different dielectric (with a different dielectric constant) put between the plates of the capacitor - as long as the water is not conductive (dielectrics are insulators).
If the water is 100% pure , so it is "insulator" like glas !!
so it will transit.
if it is norma water , is ins conducting , and willtake enery in the water
.
i thonk als ine microwave-oven
pure distilled water, the ar HI- OHM Resistance
im must not comes hot.
(Only idea , i must test this now myself ... thinking about this...)
GP
Pese
"Pure" water in the Micro?? HMMM...
??
I must say It is "Great" to see you here again! ;D
Thanks
Chet
@Pese
Even laboratory pure water will become hot in a microwave oven. The heat is primarily from molecular excitation, not electrical conduction.
I think you will need a one-wire connection to light a submerged lamp. The surrounding water simply acts as the dielectric of a capacitor. This allows for capacitive coupling back to the transmitter. This capacitive coupling is always there and the reason most one-wire and other magical experiments work.
The resistance of most drinking water is high enough to only change the impedance of the antenna, wire or lamp submerged within it. It is not a dead short.
We need a strong proof that scalar longitudinal wave exists and it's not just RF.
All I suspect is that such scalar wave behaves differently then RF in water.
But how do we test it ?
@ Loner
Quote from: Loner on February 07, 2010, 10:57:17 AM
I'm glad the mention of "Pure" water reminded me of one of the things that made me start looking deeper into this. Using an old HHO plate design as a basic load. I had noted that a "Drop" in the water temp was normal when the setup was running correctly. Again, this must be an invalid result, and why the most basic checks and verifications need to be repeated, as lots of work, past this point, was based on some of this type of "Garbage" data. (Was too obsessed. Won't repeat mistake...)
When water evaporates from the surface it cools the remaining water. This is because it takes energy to convert water from a liquid to a gas and unless there is another source of energy that has to come from the heat in the water. In HHO bubbler energy is being added to water by the electricity flowing into it. But heat is also being removed from the water when it is converted to gas. I have no experience with this but I would not rule out the possibility that the water was cooling.
@ Loner
Quote from: Loner on February 07, 2010, 10:57:17 AM
Obviously, this must be an incorrect measurement. (Was peak value on scope, not meter
The peak voltage on a scope is the BEST measurement in my opinion. Meters are not made to give correct readings for pulse voltage or current, and only read AC correctly if it is a sine wave.
@ Loner
Quote from: Loner on February 07, 2010, 10:57:17 AM
lots of reference to KV, and none to 300-400 Volts, which is the value recorded in my early tests.
Lighting a fluorescent tube wirelessly from 3 feet away with a 300-400 volt output is certainly beyond my capabilities and any science I know of. However, my 15 KV is being generated from a 1.5 volt AA battery so it is necessary to differentiate between source voltage and output voltage.
Quote from: BEP on February 06, 2010, 10:13:23 AM
@Pese
Even laboratory pure water will become hot in a microwave oven. The heat is primarily from molecular excitation, not electrical conduction.
I think you will need a one-wire connection to light a submerged lamp. The surrounding water simply acts as the dielectric of a capacitor. This allows for capacitive coupling back to the transmitter. This capacitive coupling is always there and the reason most one-wire and other magical experiments work.
The resistance of most drinking water is high enough to only change the impedance of the antenna, wire or lamp submerged within it. It is not a dead short.
Jes i belive that, but i never try it.
I was thinking over the posting, because ohmic resistance is high.
Like an INSULATOR
and water that contains
salt or minerals
make it conductive.
so possibly the time to heat it up in micro
can be different.
I an sure that some members will test this out
Pese
@ Loner
Quote from: Loner on February 07, 2010, 05:37:08 PM
Any Errors noted at this beginning stage? Any comments? Please feel free as I have no idea of what I'm doing, beyond jumping into the abyss, sticking my hand out and hoping there is a rope there, somewhere......
I am not sure I understand how your coil is made. This is a bad drawing but I hope you get the idea. Is this what you are doing?
Hi Loner
Before I can even think about how it works I need to understand how it goes together. Is this a bit closer to your construction?
@ Loner
Quote from: Loner on February 07, 2010, 10:16:56 PM
Maybe a schematic is easier. This is quick and dirty, and not zipped.
Hope this makes sense.....
Thanks. Does the other coil then go over all of this?
If an ElF wave (dont make alot of these this bandwith is very controlled) produces a current aka wind between the quarter wave nodes and antinodes then this current passes through every conductor in the path between transmitter and first quarter wavelength node. This wind when meeting obstacles of a different density than the media in which the wave is propogated will induce gravity waves in the denser media. You can also look at various geometric shapes that will concentrate currents into particular parts of a conductor. A conductor lieing perpendicular to the transmitting tower will try to concentrate the current in the skin of the conductor. The depth of the current determined by the crossection radius velocity of current and angle of incidence. Im tired confused and need to sleep on this one but spent alot of time out working in the wind today near the ocean. The ocean waves just looked to me like slowed down wind. Gotta nap.
Link below is to gravity waves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_wave
@ Loner
I hope this is correct. Are there any other coil or just the these two?
Loner
so your coils are in series while being at parallel in pairs ? Very good idea
post removed by xee2 - it was not correct
@ Loner
Experiments take time to do, so I do not expect to hear from you for a while. But please post once in a while so we know if you are still working on it or have given up. I am looking forward to your results.
Attached are what I hope are correct conceptual drawings of you coil.
@ Loner
Looking at your last photo, it seems that the two primary coils are connected directly in the center. Are they as in the following drawing? This is electrically the same as before but the current is flowing in the reverse direction in the second coil thus there are different magnetic fields?
@Loner
I dont want to confuse you but if you study how a klystron works it basically creates a scalar wave traveling down the core of the Kylstron. The rf input is amplified this way by bunching up the electron beam we are so familiar with in Television picture tubes. As the bunches of electrons pass by each resonant cavity the cavities are excited into oscillations. Each cavity is an rc circuit tuned to resonate at the output frequency. The oscillations in the rc cavities take the smooth flow of electrons and turns it into a bunched flow of electrons. As more and more electrons bunch together the electrostatic charge (cold current) flows into the rc cavities and excites them into stronger oscillations in each subsequent cavities. The stronger oscillations bunch more and more electrons from the smooth beam into now a wavy beam. When the amplitude of the wavy beam is at the maximum the waveguides and antennae load can take the rf amplified signal appears on the transmitter antennae. The radar beacon is born. Meanwhile the bunchy accelerated electron energy remnant is still beaming along. This energy needs to be absorbed. In a klystron they have collectors that absorb the scalar wave and turn it into heat and dump it into the enviroment. Other uses of the scalar wave have been developed that dump it into various fields of interest.
@ sparks
The people who invented and make klystron tubes do not mention anything about scalar waves. I think you are making this up.
xee
I dont know if it is a scalar wave but it sure fits into what I imagine a scalar wave train would look like. It also fits into what a sound wave would do to the electron cloud inside a wire. It would bunchemup. The bunchemup creates a polarization of the space through which the bunch travels. It also rolls off the end of the "antennae" not transverse. I also think that Hutchinson was playing around with modified army surplus radar transmitters to get the Hutchinson effect. All hunches.
Loner
Hmm, your coils look a lot like my dual layer bi-filar flat coil. Made out of 30 gauge wire, it measures about 2 inches across with a 1/4 inch center hole. Was measuring a DC voltage off of one end another coil when the flat coil (in a choke configuration) was driven by a high frequency signal. The DC is with respect to ground, not across the coil. Go figure.
:)
Transmitting out of a Faraday cage demonstration:
The transmitter is put inside of the 18/8 grade stainless steel container and a loop antenna receiver is put on the outside of the container. Using a 1.5 volt battery it is possable to transmit enough energy out of the Faraday cage to light an LED on the receiver loop antenna.
NOTE - This is not a scalar wave, it is inductive coupling.
video of LED blinking = http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1ipYKYMQBk
@xee2
A floating Faraday doesn't normally do the job very well. Have you Earth grounded the can?
Is the internal circuit electrically isolated from the can?
Even with the above, it is possible to induce via charge at close ranges if voltage is high enough.
@ BEP
Quote from: BEP on February 16, 2010, 06:06:17 PM
@xee2
A floating A doesn't normally do the job very well. Have you Earth grounded the can?
Is the internal circuit electrically isolated from the can?
Even with the above, it is possible to induce via charge at close ranges if voltage is high enough.
You probably have more experience with things like this than I do. The stainless steel container is floating. Theoretically that should not make a difference, but it is always best to earth ground. Everthing inside is electrically isolated by heavy plastic so there is no electrical connection to the container.
I did this to prove to myself that it was possible and I thought I might as well post the results.
It is very possible. In fact, I think most claiming LEM transmission confirmation by using a Faraday cage have a faulty cage.
Also, while it is easy to muffle the electric side the magnetic can penetrate almost any non-ferrous wall. This usually means induction is kept to a very short distance. For instance, I believe you said the can was stainless steel. Some grades pass a magnetic field very easily.
The grounding is very important. The energy absorbed by the wall needs somewhere to go. Without grounding, the cage can act much like capacitive coupling.
@ BEP
18/8 grade stainless is nonmagnetic. So it is like having a copper container. There is no magnetic shielding. In fact, it is the magnetic field that is coupling through the container. As I pointed out earlier, a Faraday cage does not shield against magnetic fields.
Checkout plasma waves. They happen at all sorts of freqs. They will setup standing waves at around 5kz due to the electrostatic field between Earth and the magnetosphere and the properites of air. Tesla would make these plasma things he called brushes in a tube with different gases in them. When he flexed his arm muscle the brush would dance. It seems that plasma responds to all sorts of electromagnetic waves. I imagine a plasma exposed to infrared would setup infrared wave length oscillations. Imagine that. An ionized gas in a tube converting randomized heating into well defined electrical oscillations. As the oscillations intensified from the infrared input would the field appear cold or would it appear hot. I found that the field gets cold because the infrared is no longer being reflected by neutral atoms because there aiint any around they are all ionized an part of the conversion process. The conversion process is simple. Space plasma cools off and forms hot gases. Hot gases cool and become liquids. Liquids cool and become solids. Solids cool and become bose condensates. Bose condensates cool and become black holes. Blackholes explode and become plasma. "intelligent" life has no preference as to what form of matter it uses in its organization. In other words when something chills it gets organized. Just energy with a different phace.
http://www.hmo.ac.za/old_site/Space_Physics/tut/tut.html
t
@ Loner
Inductive coupling only works at close range - that is it falls off very quickly. I do not remember the equation but I will do some digging. In my test, if the receiver loop was more than an inch away from the container the LED would not light. Magnetic field shielding is much harder to do than electric field shielding. The best materials are high permeability ferrites. Check this site:
http://www.lessemf.com/mag-shld.html
But I think a 1" thick steel plate would be very effective (and very heavy). Shielding against RF signals is like shielding against electric fields. A 100 watt RF transmitter would not be able to transmit out of the container I was using. So your FM transmitter was not a good test. BUT, even high voltage power lines only produce a very weak magnetic field signal 100 yards away. So anything you were doing that could get through a steel enclosure and be strong enough to be receive 100 yards away seems very exceptional.
@ Loner
Tuning to me would imply an RF signal. Inductive coupling is only dependent on current and distance. It can be repeated at some frequency, but that is just how often the switch is closed to allow the current to flow. There is no improvement at certain frequencies.
I sent you a PM.
You might find this video helpful: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t23iXhEiQUc&NR=1
NOTE: his mike signal works because the radio waves from it are short enough to get through the holes in the cage he is in. If the cage was solid they would not go through.
Ionization is an endothermic process. It requires heat. When this endothermic process occurs in open air it collects heat energy from the air. Randomized kinetic energy is converted into electrical energy. It's like this. You have an electron filled valence shell neutral atom. The entire atom is moving. When you ionize the atom the electron that is bumped out of the valence shell by the ionization photon has the kinetic energy of the parent atom on board. This is not frindge science this is just thermal energy conversion to electrical energy. You show me a neutral atom that isnt moving round here. Changing the randomized movement of neutral atoms into non randomized movement of it's associated parts. Molecules are even easier to bust. At any given time the molecules atoms become ionized while the mate atom becomes neutral. There is an electrical oscillation of the constituent atoms of a molecule between being neutral and ionized. Stanley Myer was always talking about the resonant frequency of water as well as Keely. This is what these guys were talking about. Molecules are said to share electrons. They are Indian givers. Give me that electron back no fuck you its mine, No its mine ok have it for a nano second see if I care, I got your electron ha ha. No you dont I just grabbed that bitch up while your were talking. Then why is it over here whith me asshole. Becaise I gave it to you and now I want it back etc. etc. etc. Meanwhile an electrical current is oscillating at a very high frequency due to electron sharing in molecular bonds.
Loner,
I was wrong about inductive coupling falling off very quickly. I have been doing some checking and it actually falls off at the same rate as radio waves.
I saw this video on youtube which shows that a metal plate shields coupling between coils. Theoretically this should not happen. I did a test just to check, and the metal did not provide any shielding between the coils in my test.
video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hKidYAuWNE&feature=related
Stainless??
Stainless is not magnetic - it wont block the magnetic flux between coils
@ darkspeed
Very true. But metal in video was aluminum. That is why it seemed strange to me.
@ Loner
Thanks for the update.
I am not a welder either and I do not have an arc welder. So my experience is almost zero at welding. But the heat generated in a resistor is equal to the current squared times the resistance. Thus I would not expect a wire with almost no resistance to generate much heat. I think a spark has more resistance than a wire so by the same equation the spark would generate more heat at the same current. But, I do not think the spark obeys ohm's law, so the equation may not apply to sparks. But a spark is hot enough to light paper on fire where as the wire does not get that hot. Thus the spark is deffinitely hotter than a wire carrying the same current.
@ Loner
The CB antenna will not transmit out of a Faraday cage, so I think it is just a matter of how much shielding there is from the foil.
there are other things going on with that buzz box. You have to take into consideration the heating of the line all the way back to the powerplant when the secondary is shorted. The rapid oxidation of the metals involved is also a scource of thermal. I believe Tesla and Stan Meyer and the Ford Corporation (early engines running on just the magneto no fuel) were "burning air" as a fuel and converting it to electrical power. A scource of nitrates or natural fertilizers is lightning. One natural rain storm always does better for grass then days of irrigation. The rain has dissolved nitrates in it from upper atmospheric ionization of water vapor due to uv light capture. The uv ionizes the water vapor and the electrons go one way along the Earth's magnetic field lines and the ions the other. Lots of free hydrogen ions accumulate at the north pole and when there is a solar storm are displaced out into space in an ion fountain as the magnetic field of the Earth is compressed and displaced. They return to the Earth along the magnetic field vortex at the north pole. I have no idea as to the amount of free hydrogen in the north pole ionosphere but I bet it is substantial. Probably enough to power some implosion engines down on the surface. Ionization frequencies in the presence of a magnetic field with gravity taken into account should alow us to use air as a fuel. The engine pollution will be nitrates the electrical input is a catalyst in the exothermic reaction. Rather have nitrate rain than sulpher dioxide rain any day. So would the plants.
@Loner
When the rod is shorted your amps will peak to the limit of the welder. The efficiency while shorted would be horrible. An arc is high enough resistance to keep the current within the operation window of the welder. So, I can see why you would realize more heat with an arc than a short. I can be wrong.
AFAIK arcs follow Ohm's law to the letter. They always have for me. The increased resistance allows for more voltage drop across the connection (short or arc). Amps x Volts for Watts :)
As far as a CB radio signal exiting a Faraday cage....
If you place the whole rig, battery and all, in the cage the signal should be completely attenuated outside the cage. If it isn't, the cage or use of the cage is at fault.
Much of the E/M radiation from a spark gap will exit the cage. Of course, heat and light will exit a copper screen cage but so will the leading edge of a spark gap pulse. At that point the radiated energy is more magnetic than E/M.
I think one reason why folks say it can't be measured is because they can't conceive of a signal as having only magnetic 'measurable' properties. They will clip their magical little scope probies on it and declare it not there.
BTW: Nothing shields magnetic. Your shield may bend, redirect or reshape a magnetic field but it won't stop a magnetic pulse radiated from a central point. I'm not talking about a perceived pulse from the expansion of field lines growing around an antenna or coil. I'm talking about the rapid succession of leading edges from switch bounce.
Time for work.... Later folks ;D
i have a transmitter i need circuit operation for my presentation plz someone help me to get out tension plz
attachment