Re: quarter wave (fwd)

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: Tesla List Moderator <mod1-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2004 07:07:26 +0100
From: Paul Nicholson <paul-at-abelian.demon.co.uk>
To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: quarter wave

Jared wrote:

> Full size Saskia coils are 36? O.D. 20? I.D. we
> used 1415 meter 22 gauge at 212,000Hz.

Thanks for info on the coils.  But is the 212kHz a measured
frequency or just your estimate of the resonant frequency
(based on your assumption of unity velocity factor)?  Please
take care to distinguish clearly between what you've measured
and what you've hypothesised.  Have you really got a unity
velocity factor (212kHz) or is that just a belief you hold?

> Time delays in L.C. make perfect sense, but the shuffle of
> energy between L and C and the velocity of waves along the
> wire are distinct phenomena.

Oh well it seems I've been unable to convince you of the error
in this by my recent posts and your position remains at odds
with elec eng theory.  It isn't clear why you hold to it so
firmly.  Whatever the reason, it must carry more weight in your
mind than the laws of physics do!

> Have you given any thought to the energy storage mechanisms?
> We would like to know as well.

I've written quite a bit about the energy storage mechanisms
in various posts last week.  I've tried to build a picture of
electrical resonance, of how 'time delays in LC' is the same
thing as 'velocity of waves along the wire'.  I can only add
a little more by way of summary.

The two 'energy storage mechanisms' are the electric and magnetic
fields, corresponding respectively to the potential and kinetic
energy of the resonator. 

On the one hand you can look at the mutual interaction of the
E and H fields in the presence of the conductor and deduce a
'wave velocity along the wire'.  One the other hand you can take
those same two fields and 'lump' the stored energies to represent
them as idealised inductive and capacitive elements. 

The two models start with the same two fields (energy storage
mechanisms) and predict identical resonant modes. To argue the
contrary, you would have to show how the L and C of the coil's LC
resonance store energy in some place than other the E and H
field around the coil.  This is why you're having trouble
identifying the extra storage mechanisms - they're not there! 

I can't explain any better without resorting to math, so I'll 
give up on that particular point.  Meanwhile Jared, you will
have to go in search of the *four* storage mechanisms that your
coil would need for your support your explanation.

> I hope that you can appreciate the fact that we managed to
> do what we have done under difficult circumstances, and with
> a leap of faith.

Yes, its appreciated, although working on the kitchen table
with next to no instruments is not unusual for coilers.  Winding
interesting coils and observing funny effects is something all
coilers do too.  These things are no excuse for not being
scientific about investigating any interesting effects that you
find.  Coilers these days are not so easily bamboozled as they
once were.  Phenomena must work as advertised, and explanations
must conform with known laws.  

At present we're being offered explanations based on faith,
unsupported by data, and which in some major parts contradict
known physics (one always wonders about the reasons for such
tenacious beliefs in the untenable, pathalogical as it is to
further progress).  

My advice is to drop the 'leap of faith' - the preconceived
notions, and look at what the coil and the laws of physics are
telling you.  Measure the resonant frequencies, don't just
assume them from some naive formula.  Take a coil into a lab
at EMU and get someone to measure its mode spectrum.  And while
you're there, ask about the meaning of 'velocity factor' and
the physics behind it.

Some comments I made a while ago are relevant,
http://www.pupman-dot-com/listarchives/2004/January/msg00380.html
--
Paul Nicholson
--