[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: A Puzzle




From: 	DR.RESONANCE[SMTP:DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net]
Sent: 	Sunday, September 07, 1997 4:56 PM
To: 	Tesla List
Subject: 	Re: A Puzzle

To: Greg L

The 2% I listed means within 2% of the measured value, ie, theory is close
to measured value.  Sorry for the lack of description in the initial post.

DR.RESONANCE-at-next-wave-dot-net


----------
> From: Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
> To: 'Tesla List' <tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com>
> Subject: Re: A Puzzle
> Date: Sunday,September 07,1997 1:13 PM
> 
> 
> From: 	Greg Leyh[SMTP:lod-at-pacbell-dot-net]
> Sent: 	Sunday, September 07, 1997 5:35 AM
> To: 	Tesla List
> Subject: 	Re: A Puzzle
> 
> DR.RESONANCE wrote:
> 
> 
> > To: Rich Wall
> > 
> > Theory or not withstanding, it has come to within 2% of actual measured
> > value and that works well enough for our purposes.  For exacting
research
> > work, I agree, it is not accurate enough.
> 
> 
> > > Unfortunately, your method is severely flawed.  There was a long
thread
> > > on the the interconverability of electrostatic coulombs and EM
coulombs
> > > this last year.  The original experimental method proposing to
connect
> > > the two is severely lacking.  R. Hull has written elegant posts in
this
> > > regard.  You may refer to the archives or perhaps Richard may choose
to
> > > comment on this old information.
> > >
> > > RWW
> 
> 
> 2%, and not 0.000...% ???  You guys are privy to some experimental data 
> that I must have missed.  Can either of you explain?
> 
> 
> -GL
> 
>