[TCML] Would a Tesla coil work in a vaccum?

[jimlux]

Brian Hall wrote:
> 

> 
> But if air is not necessary for the coupling to work, if no physical
> medium is required to transmit the electromagnetic energy - as the
> absence of air between the coils, from what I gather, would not
> interfere with the  production of resonant rise, then should we
> really keep classifying it as an 'air core' transformer then?
> Granted, it is very rare that one hears of a tesla coil being built
> in anything other than 1 atm, but I cant help but think that this  is
> circumstantial.



As you surmise, the term "air core" inductor arises in the context of 
differentiation from "iron core" inductors.  One could also refer to it 
as a "coreless" inductor.


> 
> 
> 
> I know it may have been called an 'air core resonant transformer' for
> a very long time, and old habits die hard, but if having air present
> between the primary and secondary is not a _requirement_ for it to
> work - then perhaps the 'air core' part of what we call it should be
> omitted - or otherwise reflect the nature of what is always true
> about the coupling and transfer of energy from one coil to the other
> - whether in oil, air, or vaccum, just so long as the fluid between
> the pri. and sec. it is a non-conductive material?
> 


It's a term that has been around for centuries, and isn't likely to go 
away soon.

Sort of like how a "transformer" might better be described as "coupled 
inductors".