[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Corum's new paper, a "naive swindle"? (tryimg to 'stir' it up)

Hi all,

I have been following this thread with some interest, although the
"theory" (both lumped and transmition line) is a bit above me, it has
seemed quite apparent to me that the Corum's methods are needlessly
complex, as Terry and others have pointed out. One thing I might add
though, is since they (Corum's) published this article supporting their
theory, that they now should be subject to peer review. Are they avaiable
for discusion? It would be interesting if some folks here were interested
in "publishing" the work defending the lumped perameter model. A heated
discourse between the two groups would indeed lead to a advance in the
scientific understanding (and would be entertaing for the likes of myself
;-)).

Regards,

David Trimmell

On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, Tesla List wrote:

> Original Poster: gbyrd-at-aros-dot-net 
> 
> Hi Noah,
> 
> The term "naive swindle" originated on the corum paper "Class Notes", page
> 10. They say "modeling with lumped circuits is of marginal utility (it's a
> naive swindle!)". If it's nasty talk, they are the ones that originated it!
> The Corum paper is a slap in the face, stating that only "sophomores" would
> consider a lumped circuit model of the Tesla coil. I've spent thousands of
> hours thinking about Tesla coils, published some of my own work (and even
> went through a divorce partly because of it), and for what, to be called a
> sophomore? I am a strong believer that the resonator can be modeled with a
> lumped circuit. I believe the Corum brothers are just as strong for their
> transmission line theory. I agree with alot of their theories, but I do not
> like the way they attack the lumped circuit model.
> 
> Regards, Duane A Bylund
> 
> 
> At 11:36 AM 4/12/00 -0600, you wrote:
> >Original Poster: "Benkanosan" <benkanosan-at-townsqr-dot-com> 
> >
> >HI, Y'ALL
> >It is so great to become part of such an enthusiastic and bright group of
> >amateur coilers. I am a little awed by the intelligence shown by "lay
> >amateurs" in pursuing such a highly tecnical and scientifically founded
> >hobby. One little thing bothers me.  Why is there so much personal acrimony
> >directed toward some theorists who have published results? I refer
> >particularly to the subject title of this email as an example: "naive
> >swindle". I had the opportunity to have a number of conversations with Dr.
> >James Corum years ago when he was a full professor of electrical
> >engineering, and had several conversations with him about relativity theory,
> >Tesla, etc. I can assure you, Jim Corum is a man of immense personal
> >integrity, extreme intelligence, and unquestionable good will.  How is it
> >that so much negative energy is directed toward his work?  If one disagrees
> >with a scientist's position, ad hominum argumentation is usually not the way
> >to express the correctness of an opposing theory ("naive swindle" - wow,
> >that's pretty nasty talk!) Am I missing something in all this that more
> >experienced coilers can clue me in on? Thanks, guys (and gals). Happy
> >coiling!
> >Noah
> 
> 
> 
>