Re: those folks at MIT (fwd)

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 11:08:05 -0300
From: Antonio Carlos M. de Queiroz <acmdq@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: those folks at MIT (fwd)

Tesla list wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 17:05:30 -0700
> From: Ed Phillips <evp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: those folks at MIT (fwd)
>
>     Thank you for sending the paper.  Have you read the original article 
> in ScienceExpress which got this discussion started?  I would have 
> expected a comment from you if you had and have been wanting to see it.
>
>   
I have read the papers. Not great novelty, just a quantitative 
evaluation of what can be achieved.
Some time ago I was making some experiments with pulse radio, with a 
setup that was like two
Tesla coils at some distance, connected to antennas. Similar to the old 
system for spark radio
using tuned circuits. At one of the coils the primary capacitor was in 
series with a low-impedance
signal generator producing a square wave.
At the other end I was observing the voltage over the primary capacitor.
Each transition of the (low impedance) square wave was producing a an 
energy-transfer transient
similar to what occurs in a Tesla coil.
I don't have the results here, but I remember that the attenuation was 
not large. The system was
operating at 10 MHz, and the distance between transmitter and receiver 
was about 2 meters, with
1 m vertical antennas. The coils were cylindrical, about 15 cm high and 
10 cm wide, with internal
primary coil. Just a few tens of turns.
I remember that I commented that no amplifier was required at the receiver.
I have to comment that the amount of wire used was much greater than 
what would be required
to connect the transmitter directly to the receiver without measurable 
attenuation, hehe...

Antonio Carlos M. de Queiroz