[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A Puzzle
From: Greg Leyh[SMTP:lod-at-pacbell-dot-net]
Sent: Monday, September 08, 1997 5:17 PM
To: Tesla List
Subject: Re: A Puzzle
Tesla List wrote:
> > > 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.
> > > - DR.RESONANCE
> >
> > 2%, and not 0.000...% ??? You guys are privy to some experimental data
> > that I must have missed. Can either of you explain?
> > -GL
> >
> 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
I understood what you meant by a 2% measurement error. However, I was more
interested in how and when the experiment was performed that produced this data.
Normally, I would have expected ES and EM coulombs to be equivalent, in the
same way that a pound of water and a pound of ice are the same thing.
This is because the 'coulomb' is simply a definition, a fixed number of charges,
and does not need to be measured precisely in order to be defined.
-GL