Amazing Tesla experiments! Totally new science

[joeqsmith]

Timestamps are 30 minute mark and 22 minute mark of both videos I have referenced earlier. Please check out that and tell me what you think, I don't usually see light and metallic tape interacting like that.

And still no comment on the Tesla quote. Or textbook references to single wire currencts and powering loads off of them. Also, an antenna does have current in it but that current is being transformed into electromagnetic radiation and heat and is also reflecting on the open end so this is not meant for maximum power transfer. Different situations .

Quickly scrolling through the link, there appears to be at least three videos.  At 30 minutes into the first one, a guy is holding a large bulb between to coils.  Big deal.   Quickly scanning the video, all I saw was a handful of guys standing around playing with the large bulb and a couple of coils.   Just a waste of my time.

[Cyberdragon]

A piece of aluminum (BR. Aluminium) foil is readily attracted to plasma ball as if it were a magnet. Now if my hypothesis is correct, that this is purely electrostatic a current should be flowing in this foil even when not touching the bulb.

(if I can get the foil to be pulled without sticking that is...stupid foil foiling my plans and wanting to stick)

From a small, irregular piece of foil about 1cm away from a 7cm, mains powered plasma globe, I get about 20-30VAC (up to about 40V if I get it close enough without sticking). If the foil contacts the bulb the reading shoots up to around 180-220V. Results measured with both a DMM and VTVM. (my DMM is on it's last legs anyway, let alone trying to measure HF).

Note: the difference in distance between being slightly attracted and instantly sticking is rather small. I believe this to be due to the energy source being a small decorative discharge lamp and not a high power tesla coil.

[Deco56]

https://youtu.be/3uXL4_Yas2k @ 22 minute mark.

https://player.vimeo.com/video/392221283 @ the 30 minute mark approximately.


I have still not heard of a good explanation yet. Too far a distance for capacitative coupling, and not sure how it can be electrostatic effect in a dynamic power system.

Still no comment on the Tesla quote either...

[Cyberdragon]

https://youtu.be/3uXL4_Yas2k @ 22 minute mark.

https://player.vimeo.com/video/392221283 @ the 30 minute mark approximately.


I have still not heard of a good explanation yet. Too far a distance for capacitative coupling, and not sure how it can be electrostatic effect in a dynamic power system.

Still no comment on the Tesla quote either...

A piece of aluminum (BR. Aluminium) foil is readily attracted to plasma ball as if it were a magnet. Now if my hypothesis is correct, that this is purely electrostatic a current should be flowing in this foil even when not touching the bulb.

(if I can get the foil to be pulled without sticking that is...stupid foil foiling my plans and wanting to stick)

From a small, irregular piece of foil about 1cm away from a 7cm, mains powered plasma globe, I get about 20-30VAC (up to about 40V if I get it close enough without sticking). If the foil contacts the bulb the reading shoots up to around 180-220V. Results measured with both a DMM and VTVM. (my DMM is on it's last legs anyway, let alone trying to measure HF).

Note: the difference in distance between being slightly attracted and instantly sticking is rather small. I believe this to be due to the energy source being a small decorative discharge lamp and not a high power tesla coil.

Note 2: The bulb used was only 4W.

I have not experimented with the covered bulb effect yet.

EDIT: I'm out for trying the covered bulb, 4W barely gets a glimmer from a small CFL. I blew up my flybacks as a kid, and short of ripping one out of a scope, I do not have a sufficient energy source.

[IanB]

I have still not heard of a good explanation yet.

I'm not sure why your lack of an explanation is our problem? Why are you demanding other people to tell you about things you don't understand?

There are videos of people playing with Tesla coils. Lots of people play with Tesla coils. There are many such videos. Tesla coils are fun. Watch them and be entertained. If you want to understand how they work, you will have to do some studying.

[Cyberdragon]

I have still not heard of a good explanation yet.

I'm not sure why your lack of an explanation is our problem? Why are you demanding other people to tell you about things you don't understand?

There are videos of people playing with Tesla coils. Lots of people play with Tesla coils. There are many such videos. Tesla coils are fun. Watch them and be entertained. If you want to understand how they work, you will have to do some studying.

He seems to be having trouble understanding electrostatic attraction, not nescessarily tesla coils in general.

[IanB]

He seems to be having trouble understanding electrostatic attraction, not nescessarily tesla coils in general.

There's also electromagnetic induction. If you induce eddy currents in a piece of metal it will experience a force if it is within a magnetic field. That is how induction motors work.

[joeqsmith]

There will be a charge imbalance between the bulbs and film is all.   

On the transmitter side, I have the foil hanging down from the wire.  I can for example approach this with a bit of plastic film in my hand and the two will be attracted.  Odd this would be a question for someone who has a physics background.   Of course when they removed the bulb the effect was greatly reduced. 

As children we would create a charge imbalance using balloons and our hair, or our wool sweaters.  We would rub them and stick them on the walls, each other,    the pets......   Again, its nothing new and there's no magic.   Well, I say that but I will fully admit that my physics skills are greatly lacking.   Physicists would loose me pretty quickly if we dive deeper into the details.

It reminds me of this interview with Feynman: 


You should take the time to read that physics book I linked.  You may enjoy it.
   

[joeqsmith]

So, I just watched that segment again after finding it.  I wish more interviews were conducted this way.   You have someone sitting there who is on a whole different level than yourself.   All you need to do is get them started, then shut the fuck up.  Don't interrupt them.  Just let them talk.   You see a lot of interviews where the person conducting the interview has some desire to inject their own small comments.  The person they are interviewing will normally be very well mannered and abruptly stop talking.   Then we have to wait for the interviewer to make some small point and shut up.    Maybe it's just me but I really enjoyed just listing to Feynman talk. 

[Cyberdragon]

It is also important to note that electrostatics will still happen at alternating current as well. If you were to look at the waveforms of the changes in charge of the two charged bodies you would have 2 waves 180° out of phase. The net result is opposite polarity, therefore the net force between the charges will be attraction.

[Cerebus]

He seems to be having trouble understanding electrostatic attraction, not nescessarily tesla coils in general.

There's also electromagnetic induction. If you induce eddy currents in a piece of metal it will experience a force if it is within a magnetic field. That is how induction motors work.

Real cool trick if you haven't already done it/seen it: Take a reasonably powerful small magnet, neo-diddley-um for preference. Get a slug of similarly sized and weight metal, and a copper, brass or aluminium pipe (15mm water pipe or similar). Hold the pipe vertical and drop the non-magnet down it - "Whoosh, thump" hits the ground in a fraction a second. Now do the same with the magnet, it drifts down the pipe taking several seconds, retarded by the magnetic field created by the induced eddy currents in the pipe created by the falling magnet. Easy source of free drinks if done in the pub with a bit of showmanship.

[Cerebus]

So, I just watched that segment again after finding it.  I wish more interviews were conducted this way.   You have someone sitting there who is on a whole different level than yourself.   All you need to do is get them started, then shut the fuck up.  Don't interrupt them.  Just let them talk.   You see a lot of interviews where the person conducting the interview has some desire to inject their own small comments.  The person they are interviewing will normally be very well mannered and abruptly stop talking.   Then we have to wait for the interviewer to make some small point and shut up.    Maybe it's just me but I really enjoyed just listing to Feynman talk.

I don't disagree with you a bit, but Feynman was a master at explaining things and also a master raconteur  - exactly the kind of person you just wind up and let him do his stuff. People would buy Feynman dinner just to sit back and listen to his stories. Some people need an interviewer to guide them a bit, or winkle out an explanation when they think their audience may need it. The late Raymond Baxter is possibly the best I've ever seen at doing this while remaining as unobtrusive as possible.

[joeqsmith]

So, I just watched that segment again after finding it.  I wish more interviews were conducted this way.   You have someone sitting there who is on a whole different level than yourself.   All you need to do is get them started, then shut the fuck up.  Don't interrupt them.  Just let them talk.   You see a lot of interviews where the person conducting the interview has some desire to inject their own small comments.  The person they are interviewing will normally be very well mannered and abruptly stop talking.   Then we have to wait for the interviewer to make some small point and shut up.    Maybe it's just me but I really enjoyed just listing to Feynman talk.

I don't disagree with you a bit, but Feynman was a master at explaining things and also a master raconteur  - exactly the kind of person you just wind up and let him do his stuff. People would buy Feynman dinner just to sit back and listen to his stories. Some people need an interviewer to guide them a bit, or winkle out an explanation when they think their audience may need it. The late Raymond Baxter is possibly the best I've ever seen at doing this while remaining as unobtrusive as possible.

Very true.   It seems as though in many cases the person conducting the interview has a need to make it about themselves.  Many times they are pugnacious and appear to attempt to compete with the person they are interviewing.  Normally they are way out of their league and it ruins the interview.   I may be just tainted by the poor reporters in the USA who have little to no manners.     

[Cerebus]

Very true.   It seems as though in many cases the person conducting the interview has a need to make it about themselves.  Many times they are pugnacious and appear to attempt to compete with the person they are interviewing.  Normally they are way out of their league and it ruins the interview.   I may be just tainted by the poor reporters in the USA who have little to no manners.   

I get what you're saying. I was thinking in terms of quasi-educational programming and 'popular science' which was once the forté of UK programming. We used to do it really well - nowadays I feel it's a bit dumbed down and get annoyed when interviewers ask questions that force the interviewee to oversimplify what they are saying. The media consistently underestimate the ability of the common person to follow a less than simple topic or an argument that isn't pure black and white.

As far as reporting in general, there are different styles in different parts of the world and I used to point to the way America had 'news anchors' who were clearly the result of mere reporters ambitiously scrabbling the way to the top of the tree versus the UK style of having news readers who seemed essentially rank less. I'm sure there was internal scrabbling to get behind a nice warm desk rather than report from a muddy flooded field, but it didn't come over in the public presentation. So US reporting did always come across to me as much more personality based than here. I would say that UK general reporting is not what it once was having gone from overly deferential to public figures and 'experts' in the 70s - rarely interrupting or challenging an interviewee, through adequately challenging in the 80s/90s, to sometimes needlessly confrontational nowadays where it has become perhaps more personality centric.  Also nowadays everything has to be 'balanced', resulting in arrant nonsense getting as much screen time as legitimate arguments and legitimate counter-arguments in the name of 'balance'. The whole 'balance' thing frequently includes saying something like "how would you answer people who say <the opposite of what you've just said>" when the interviewee has said something like "The sky is blue".

[joeqsmith]

My take on UK programming... Guy Martin.           



 

[Cerebus]

My take on UK programming... Guy Martin.         

Pure class^* (and a lot of tea), as was Fred Dibnah.

^*With a short 'a' sound, as in lass or Lassie.

[IanB]

Richard Feynman, in a nutshell, when asked, "How do magnets work?"

Answer: "Well it's not really possible to answer that, they just do what they do. We can describe what they do with great mathematical precision, and predict outcomes very accurately. But how do they do it? Who knows?"

 

[EEVblog]

Another free energy thread? 
Why don't these people just make their working over-unity machine and sell it? They'd be instant billionaires and win a Nobel prize in physics.
https://youtu.be/47-o5iE6FM4?t=38

[joeqsmith]

My take on UK programming... Guy Martin.         

Pure class^* (and a lot of tea), as was Fred Dibnah.

^*With a short 'a' sound, as in lass or Lassie.

I followed John and Guy on the Isle of Man.  Some of the best driving I've ever had the pleasure to see.   Guys shows are some of the best I have watched in years.

[joeqsmith]

Another free energy thread? 
Why don't these people just make their working over-unity machine and sell it? They'd be instant billionaires and win a Nobel prize in physics.
https://youtu.be/47-o5iE6FM4?t=38

Outside of your comment, I don't think there has been any mentioned over-unity.  I've tossed out 88% top 30% using copper.   I think if Tesla had an idea of free, it meant free to the masses, not free to generate.  In the case of the OP, I think they are just trying to understand more about it.   I can certainly understand it seeming a bit amazing but it's certainly not new science.   

[Cyberdragon]

Another free energy thread? 
Why don't these people just make their working over-unity machine and sell it? They'd be instant billionaires and win a Nobel prize in physics.
https://youtu.be/47-o5iE6FM4?t=38

It's not free energy they're claiming this time. Not every Tesla nut, even if there's BS involved, is a free energy nut. We need to stop that stereotype or we're gonna end up right back here with the same problem, people not understanding basic science.

In this case they claim wizzbang "rays of energy" that "affect physical matter" because they don't understand one-wire currents or how a simple piece of foil is attracted to a highly charged surface.

I've heard this crap alot when reseaching Tesla myself (and from other wackjob sources like free-energy/wireless energy/whatever woowoo) so much so that I actually created a sci-fi/fantasy story universe where a guy in the Tesla era creates magic lamps that harness interdimensional alien Z-rays that can cause weird supernatural effects on our universe (including summoning magical alien cyborgs). I mean hey, when life gives you bullshit...make a good story out of it.

[MK14]

or should we just dismiss it as impossible since we already know everything?

Outside of your comment, I don't think there has been any mentioned over-unity.  I've tossed out 88% top 30% using copper.   I think if Tesla had an idea of free, it meant free to the masses, not free to generate.  In the case of the OP, I think they are just trying to understand more about it.   I can certainly understand it seeming a bit amazing but it's certainly not new science.

tl;dr3 (this entire post is primarily aimed at Deco56)
As Dave said/hinted, it does seem to be related to free energy claims (and other terms, they tend to use).

If you pop over to one of the main chaps websites, and click one or two links (or google search), or however I found the following. It seems to say 'Free energy' and things.

I.e. Eric Dollard, who is both the creator/experimenter, in at least one of the videos, and extensively talked about (in both I believe). His website, leads to the following link (forgotten if directly on his website, or via google search).
Anyway/also, Eric Dollard website, seems to be jam packed, with 'money begging' kind of things. Just like other (typical dare I say), free energy websites.

https://emediapress.com/2020/04/20/where-to-start-with-free-energy/

tl;dr
Once free energy is brought into the equation, my spider sensors suddenly snap into overdrive, and I get rather sceptical of any experiments they claim to perform.

Don't get me wrong, free energy can/does exist. E.g. People staying in a hotel obtain it, for their energy consumption there, as they don't need to pay for it, as such. So, it can exist (end of sarcasm).

I like to keep an open mind, so rather than talk about it. As other(s) request. Just build a working model, and demonstrate it to suitably experienced and/or capable and/or qualified engineers, and let them verify (independently), what is going on,
After which, I will be delighted, to here all about how it works.
But if you/they can't demonstrate it, in the way I described, then why not ?

Sketchy video(s), imprecise documentation, lack of independent testing (as described above), etc etc. Doesn't persuade me.
Sorry, the phones going, be right back. ..........................
Have to go now, and transfer £22,050 to a Nigerian Prince, but I'm going to get back £95,000, once his father is out of hospital.

tl;dr2
If you want to persuade me, that free energy really exists. You would need extremely strong/robust and independent evidence, ideally from multiple sources. Not shaky video sources, from the same (to at least me), suspicious person (Eric Dollard).
Also, the so called expert or knowledgeable person/experimenter, in the other video. Keeps on talking about Mega cycles per second (or some other similar, ancient units). That makes him sound like a (potentially) unreliable electronics engineer, or Physicist, or whatever his knowledge base is suppose to be.
These days it would be Megahertz (MHz), and KHz (Kilohertz), NOT  Kilocycles per second.

[EEVblog]

Another free energy thread? 
Why don't these people just make their working over-unity machine and sell it? They'd be instant billionaires and win a Nobel prize in physics.
https://youtu.be/47-o5iE6FM4?t=38

Outside of your comment, I don't think there has been any mentioned over-unity.  I've tossed out 88% top 30% using copper.   I think if Tesla had an idea of free, it meant free to the masses, not free to generate.  In the case of the OP, I think they are just trying to understand more about it.   I can certainly understand it seeming a bit amazing but it's certainly not new science.

Overunity is the holy grail of the free energy community.
Otherwise it's just regular old energy harvesting, an already well known, well researched and well practiced field of engineering.
I'm not going to waste any brain cells watching the video.

[Cyberdragon]

Ok, I stand corrected, they are real nutters, not just noobs. More points deducted from humanity.

At least in the case of one wire circuits and the foil, the results and effects demonstrated are real, just their explanations are crap (and probably some of their measurements).

Also, hey, some of us prefer to say "cycles" sometimes (especially with old stuff) rather than that hertz crap they came up with! Or should we go on to debate why a capacitor in a points and coil ignition system is still called a "condensor"?

[MK14]

Also, hey, some of us prefer to say "cycles" sometimes (especially with old stuff) rather than that hertz crap they came up with! Or should we go on to debate why a capacitor in a points and coil ignition system is still called a "condensor"?

You can, if you want.
But, if you call them capacitors, I'll think, this person might know what they are talking about   
If you call them condensors, I'll think, possibly, this person might know what they are talking about   
But if you call them, flux capacitors, I'll think you DON'T know what you are talking about 
tl;dr
You CAN use the term 'cycles', if you want. But, it will make it much harder to persuade me, that you know what you are talking about and/or are technically trustworthy.