[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