Longitudinal Waves

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

Original poster: "Malcolm Watts by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <m.j.watts-at-massey.ac.nz>

Hi all longitudinal coilers,
                             I see in the website paper a suggestion 
that the dampened waves in a ringing tuned circuit is due to energy 
dispersion by longitudinal radiation. Is that correct or have I 
misunderstood the text? My next question/comment hinges on this 
point. 

Regards,
Malcolm


On 8 Feb 2002, at 16:37, Tesla list wrote:

> Original poster: "Mark Fergerson by way of Terry Fritz
<twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <mfergerson1-at-home-dot-com>
> 
> Tesla list wrote:
> > 
> > Original poster: "Wall Richard Wayne by way of Terry Fritz
> <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <rwall-at-ix-dot-netcom-dot-com>
> > 
> > Matt,
> > 
> > You've skillfully avoided answering my questions.  I say again, what
exactly
> > did  Michelson-Morley concluded about their
> > experiments?   If you don't know, better go look it up.
> 
>   Well, I do. They concluded they couldn't see any evidence of an
> Aether _as described_. Worse, later descriptions of an Aether
> still aren't reconcilable with the MM experiment or either G or S
> Relativity.
> 
> >...   If you don't know, better go look it up.  Their experiments are
> > flawed in that they assumed a three dimensional frame of reference for
aether
> > as the earth moved through it.  They were looking for a shift in light
> phase as
> > the earth moved through the aether.  Their assumption was not justified
> as the
> > aether is not orthogonally oriented to 3D space.  So, their experiment
cannot
> > be interpreted and is null.  Likewise Einstein's statement, "Any observer
> will
> > always find the same value
> > for light in vacuo relative to himself, regardless of the direction of
travel
> > of the light and regardless of the velocity of the source."
> > is true, but has no relevance as to the existence of aether.  Hard to
> believe,
> > but aether is not bound by three dimensional geometry.
> 
>   I am reminded of Uncle Al's proposed modification of the Eotvos
> Experiment, to test for geometrical violation of the Equivalence
> principle. (I can't find the URL at the moment; he posts on
> sci.physics and the URL is in his sig file.)
> 
> > BTW, Einstein embrace the existence of aether until his death.  It's well
> > documented in his writings.  The existence of aether is having a
> Renaissance of
> > sorts in modern physics.  There are many experiments that detect aether,
> ZPE or
> > what ever name is fashionable.  Dirac predicted it and won the Nobel
> prize for
> > it.  A good example is recent experimental measurement of the Casmir
effect.
> > There are others.
> 
>   True, but they couldn't think of a way to conclusively test for
> it either.
> 
> > Knowing all there is to know and subsequent denial and exclusion of all
> else is
> > to know nothing.
> 
>   Uh, yeah, but to insist on the existence of something without
> evidence is faith.
> 
> > This aether discussion is germane to Tesla coiling since it involves the
> > Poynting vector force without which Tesla coils cannot function.
> 
>   I tend to agree. An awful lot of stuff is disregarded as
> "unphysical" in reducing math to practice, but we still assume it
> has some kind of reality. This needs to be reconciled.
> 
>   I also think somebody better propose a test involving TCs
> pretty soon or Terry'll kill this thread. ;>)
> 
>   Mark L. Fergerson
> 
> 
> 
>