7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit

[tim123]

I strung out about 70m of wire in the garden earlier on. Wow, it's interesting!

I bought the DSO scope - because I knew it could do spectrum analysis - and I'm not disappointed.

I've got a strong peak at about 10Hz, and again at 20Hz. I'm not sure how accurate the scope is - but it seems to find the mains at 49.9Hz ok.

How cool is that?

[tim123]

Interesting peaks at 3, 6 and 9 Khz, with 9 Khz dominant. It peaks as high as the <50Hz range...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very_low_frequency

"The frequency range below 9 kHz is not allocated by the International Telecommunication Union and may be used in some nations license-free."

[thx1138]

Hi TK,
  I am still mystified as to how the fundamental can be at 7.83Hz, given that wavelength is smaller than the earth's diameter...

Any ideas?

Regards, Tim

I think the essence of your problem is that you are looking as the waveguide as a static entity while, in reality, there isn't anything static about it. Not only is the earth not round but different areas have different attributes and properties, i.e. mountains vs oceans. The ionosphere is not round or fixed either but pulsates with the pressure of the solar wind compressing and relaxing the magnetic field of the earth and while this is happening the earth with all of its surface irregularities is rotating inside that magnetic field and inside the ionosphere. The magnetic field also fluctuates due to variations in the Coriolis effect which affects the outer liquid metal core around the solid metal inner core of the earth. And at the same time the moon is tugging the surface of the oceans this way and that. A complex system to say the least.

I've been studying Dr. Tesla's work for the last few years and one of the things it inevitably leads to is a study of geophysics which didn't even exist as a science in his time yet that's what he was doing more or less. One of his goals at Colorado Springs was to determine the laws of propagation of currents through the earth and the atmosphere. His patent for the transmission of industrial scale power through the "natural media" stated that it would be accomplished between balloons at 30,000 feet. He did a demonstration for the patent examiner in his laboratory using a long evacuated tube to simulate the rarefied atmnosphere at that altitude. Another facet of that idea is that the air is not only rarefied at that altitude but it is also very cold which also enhances conductivity. He stated oiver and over that his method used conduction, not induction.

That was before he went to Colorado Springs. Early in Colorado Springs notes there is an entry about extraction of hydrogen from the air. Although not specifically stated, we can assume this was to maintain the ballons at altitude.

But on July 4, 1899 he made observations about lightning on the plains of Colorado that changed his entire perspective and when he built the Wardenclyffe tower it had extensive underground metal works. I contend that his idea was to generate the equivalent of lightning bolts with his Wardenclyffe device and pump the energy into the ground through the underground metal works.

An interesting note about this is that I've never seen anything where he attempted to maintain balloons at 30,000 feet to accomplish the transmission and that's just as well because he probably would have failed at that. The +250 MPH winds of the jet stream were unknown at the time and they reach into the 30,000 foot level which would make maintaining balloons at that level impossible.

If you want to study the Schumann resonance you'll need to spend quite a bit of time studying not only geophysics but also lightning itself. Very interesting stuff. I think that the unknowns still existing in the study of Schumann resonances could probably be resolved if the scientists studying them were to take a more multi-disipline approach and consider all of the things that affect the resonant cavity - from the sun and moon to the movement of the planet and the internal structure and forces that generate the magnetic field of the planet.

Someone in this thread mentioned if the speed of light were different it could make the calculations different. Note that we almost always say "the speed of light" but the full term is "the speed of light in a vacuum" which the surface/ionosphere cavity is not.

The attachment is my interpretation of what Wardenclyffe was intended to do and could also apply to teh Schumann frequency of natural lightning to some extent. I don't have the skills to do this in 3D but it should give you the idea. It's an animated GIF file so open it in your browser.

I'm not sure what happened when uploading the attachment but it doesn't work when downloaded from this site and it is a different size. It can be downloaded from here: http://www.filesnack.com/files/c7p5wi8p

[tim123]

Someone in this thread mentioned if the speed of light were different it could make the calculations different. Note that we almost always say "the speed of light" but the full term is "the speed of light in a vacuum" which the surface/ionosphere cavity is not.

Hi thx1138,
  I did consider the speed of light as a variable, but it is at it's maximum in a vacuum, and the speed is less in air. That difference in speed is refractive index, so I read... A slower speed should give a lower frequency I think, not higher.

The speed of light in air: 299705000 m/s
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light

"the time for light to propagate completely around the Earth is of the order of 140 milliseconds. This transit time is what causes the Schumann resonance. "

BUT, from: http://www.calcresult.com/electronics/frequency.html

140 milliseconds, at 299705000 m/s, gives 7.14 Hz

7.83 Hz gives:
Period          = 127.7139208173691 mS - milliSeconds
Wavelength = 38276500.6385696 m

My own calcs came out the same. I still don't understand the difference...

Regards, Tim

[thx1138]

Tim123: You're looking at it too simplistically. How many things affect the propagation? Air density varies with different altitudes. Clouds are a different material than dry air. The shape of the waveguide is not uniform. Other lightning strikes will interfer either constructively or destructively with any particular previous puldse. The solar wind compresses and relaxes the ionosphere and the earth's magnetic field. etc.

"In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is." pretty much sums it up. As noted earlier, when there is a discrepancy between theory and actual measurements, use the actual measurements.