Re: Tesla's Energy Transmission (Warning Long Post)

To: tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Tesla's Energy Transmission (Warning Long Post)
From: NickandSim-at-aol-dot-com (by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>)
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 11:40:14 -0700
Approved: twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net
Delivered-To: fixup-tesla-at-pupman-dot-com-at-fixme

Hi All,
         comments:
<< 
     Hi Nick,
     I think that the energy of 1 GW used by Tesla in
 his TC can't be deduced by the long of the sparks (128
 feet). 
It can actually - Colorado springs is fairly dry so we can assume dry air and 
with that work out the voltage/
 Don't forget that TC produce a layer of intense
 ionised air around it,so, the energy for the next
 sparks can decrease. So, you can obtain 125 feet, but
 with an acceptable energy (smaller) for a gave value
 of power.
The top terminal tesla used was huge - do the calcs for voltage stress and 
you will realise the voltage needed to created any significant inoized layer 
around a 68 foot diameter terminal is massive.

    More, the Earth is an anisotropic medium, where the
 waves are lost through multiple reflections in the
 metalic deposits, or because of the iron core of the
 planet.
The variations are fairly small and gradual so that the refraction is not to 
great or sudden - therefore the effect is more a loss in efficiency than 
distinctly seperate destructive waves.

    You forget also, that the phase of wave is modified
 by passing through variated obstacles. So,the returned
 wave to TC is dephased, and the resonant cycle can not
 be sustain.
The point of tuning the magnifier system is to bring the returned wave into 
phase.
     All my greetngs
  >>
Regards
Nick Field