[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: A NASA displacement current motor!- was Re: TC Secondary Currents - was ( Experimental Help - Terry?)
Original poster: "Terry Fritz" <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>
Hi Richard,
At 10:41 PM 3/5/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>Hi Terry and list,
>
>First of all Terry, thank you for introducing the NASA patent and Poynting
>vector force into discussion. I appreciate the opportunity to respond to
>the issues you raise. I know the Maxwellian diehards are chagrinned by your
>reference to JLN's web site. Believe it or not, there is a lot that can be
>practically applied to actual Tesla Coils. Since you're a good friend of
>the moderator, tell him thanks. 8<}
Sometimes in our quest for knowledge, it is necessary to search even in the
bowels of hell for information :o)) However, they did do some refreshing
work using "real science" and they are there doing the "real hands-on
experiments" and reporting them fully and in plain sight. They can't go
too wrong for very long that way.
>
>The JLN diagram and displacement theory of the lifters is only one man's
>opinion, that of John Kooiman. He is not of NASA and furthermore NASA does
>not claim their patent functions by displacement current. So, no genuine
>NASA rocket scientist to contradiction here. I originally responded to his
>"DC" theory on JLN and re post it herein:
I noted when reading the NASA patent that they 'danced' around "how" the
force was created with a patent attorney's skill. The more I studied this
today, the more holes I found. They "may" be right, but the judge is still
out. I note much work has only been done in the last few months so this
subject is still young and begging for exploration. I am sure they will
figure it all out in due time. I "thought" I had found the "holy grail"
that would solve everything... but it probably just raises more questions
without providing our "answer".
I made a "lifter" tonight. It would not lift but I did not build it quite
right. As Paul mentioned, it sure looks like a corona motor rather than a
fancy displacement current motor. My gut feeling is that Paul is right and
displacement current has zero to do with its operation. It's just another
corona pinwheel... >:(
>
>============================================================================
>=============================
>
>List, (JLN)
>
>I personally question the latest proposal that attempts to explain
>how the lifter and NASA ASC function. In the newest proposal there
>are extra added and experimentally unproven claims and explanations
>put forward to explain the lifter phenomena. I usually find it best
>to follow the rule of "Occam's Razor". Most of the time the simplest
>explanation is the best.
>
>The basis of the current proposal is a "displacement current" is
>produced in the conductor and is largely responsible for the thrust
>effect on the lower capacitor plate. John K. is certainly correct in
>that the fiction of displacement current was invented by Maxwell. In
>fact, Maxwell realized his equations were not valid and would not
>work unless he contrived this special fix which he
>named "displacement current". He never experimentally validated
>them. In fact, no one has ever experimentally found the existence of
>a displ! acement currents. And, they have been searched for
>extensively. The most definitive search involves SQUID detectors
>which detect on a quantum level and are the most exquisitely
>sensitive detectors known to man. Unfortunately the myth
>of "displacement current", even though not experimentally known to
>exist, has become ingrained into modern electrodynamic theory and
>continues to be taught as such. Why? Because it makes Mawell's
>equations come out right. Any proposal based on "displacement
>current" is flawed and subject to close scrutiny.
>
>Second concern is the new invention of an "indirect ES field"
>component? What is this? Who invented it? Is it experimentally
>proven?
>
>Lastly, and I'll be brief, the orientation in JLN's diagram of
>the "indirect ES field" connecting E field vector to the side of the
>lower plate in reference to, the somehow induced, circular magnetic
>field in the plate is in error. In order to prod! uce the Poynting
>thrust vector the magnetic field has to be! perpendicular to and
>encircling the E field vector.
>
>There are several other questionable claims in the proposal, but will
>conclude now.
>
>With due respect for all opinions,
>
>RWW
>
>=========================================================================
>
>Also not mentioned is the fact that Kooiman imagines that his so called
>"displacement current" flows in the metal conductor capacitor plate rather
>than the dielectric of the NASA asymmetric capacitor. See for yourself in
>the diagram on the JLN site. So there are many errors in his theory as to
>how a "displacement current" creates thrust. He does not say how in his
>"DC" theory.
So you were way ahead of me all the time :-)))
>
>Not mentioned is when polarity is reversed ("displacement current" should
>reverse, right Matt and Paul?) thrust still remains in the same direction.
>Humm! not only mythical, but magical -- this "displacement current".
>
>A couple of points. The NASA ASC and all lifters derive their thrust from
>the Poynting Vector Thrust You Maxwellian true believers may call it
>Lorentz force and that's OK if you want to, but beware it's only on variant
>of Poynting Vector thrust. I'm really trying to help you guys out, you
>know. %<} These machines have nothing to do with gravity modification.
>They work just as well when thrusting lateral and perpendicular to gravity.
> There is some experimental work indicating they may modify inertia. They
>work very well in vacuum and also with electrodes totally encased in a
>dielectric and isolated from air. There is a small ion wind with bare
>electrodes, but it aids or repels the major thrust with reversal of
>polarity. Ion wind is only a very small part of the total thrust or reverse
>thrust depending on polarity. These things work under oil.
Me thinks ion motors do all that too. Make a pinwheel and charge it to
50kV, it is hard to make it "not" work.
>
>These things work really well and are amazing to play with. How do I know?
>I replicated and built the NASA rotary asymmetric capacitor thruster.
Aw shucks!!! You were WAY ahead of me :-))
>It's
>really cool. I demonstrated my thruster to my brother-in-law, a died in the
>wool Maxwellian true believer EE. He has designed and built motors for the
>military all his professional life. There are no coils of wire, magnets or
>heavy iron to account for the thrust. With his entrenched and strict
>Maxwellian code he could not comprehend what produces the trust.
So I guess we have not answered the big question. "Do 'displacement
currents' produce a magnetic field that we can somehow measure?" We took a
good shot, but missed with the NASA motor... If this stuff was easy,....
Cheers,
Terry
>
>--- Richard Wayne Wall
>--- rwall-at-ix-dot-netcom-dot-com
>
>
>