[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Why dont you make some BL
Hi Cabbott,
> Date forwarded: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 19:06:15 -0600
> Date sent: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 17:25:49 -0600
> To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> Subject: Re: Why dont you make some BL
> Forwarded by: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
> From: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
> Original Poster: Cabbott Sanders <cabbott-at-cyberis-dot-net>
>
>
>
> Tesla List wrote:
>
> > Original Poster: "D.C. Cox" <DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net>
> >
> > to: Cabbott
> >
> > In case you haven't guessed why we're not all rushing to do it -- it
> > doesn't work! Been there, done that at 20 kw with dual coils set up
> > exactly as per Corum description.
> >
> > DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net
>
> HMMMMMMM.......... that is SO wierd, D.C... If this is the case, could the
> Corum research be an elaborate hoax? I'm trying to be open as I can to the
> possibility of such. I have never seen ball lightning, but I know it must
> exist from everyone else telling me..... WELL if ball lightning exists,
> THERES
> GOT TO BE A WAY TO MAKE IT, RIGHT?? <sigh> looks like i'll just have to get
> more power.....
>
> -"Playing with forces that quote: "best be left alone"
> - Cabbott Sanders
I have read their stuff fairly extensively and found a lot of it open
to question on many grounds without even looking at the BL bits.
There is more than a hint that even their measurement techniques
could be wanting in some departments. I have also questioned Ken C.
personally and received some rather nebulous answers to specific
points regarding straightforward TC operation. One of the papers in
the 1990 ITS Notes contains a glaring mathematical error which put
in doubt one of their most treasured theories.
Malcolm