Tesla hairpin circuit explanation?

[DejanC]

Hi,

This video has nothing to do with free energy. Would just like some perspective on the impedance phenomenon shown in the first 3 minutes of this video.

https://youtu.be/tlx7tDNXYR8?si=-t0_nhXql7G38_qE

Has anyone seen anything like this? Why the difference in light color in the second experiment? Why not lighting of the 50V light bulb in the third experiment? Does not seem to be a VSWR issue here as placement of the light bulbs is not exact along the transmission line.

Just curious to hear your thoughts about explanations that take into account all of the above!

[Psi]

The difference in color is simply down to if the lightbulb glows from heat (as per typical operation). Or if arcs are forming inside the lightbulb to add some blue.

[Bud]

For Tesla's sake - not fucking again. You were baned once and hopefully gonna be banned again

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/tesla-hairpin-circuit-curious-phenomenon

[coppercone2]

thats how you extend the life of a bulb, you can raise the voltage to higher levels so it spark in there after the filament burned out. old farmers trick

you know for those bat people that just flash the lights 'to save money' when they open the closet then work in the dark. boss man got hoppin mad when he thought he saw that wheel in the electricity box move


wire up that old dynamo blaster to the remains of the light so you can get a bit of light in the dynamite closet when you gotta grab some sticks

[IanB]

Here's what a real engineer would do. Build a replica, take measurements, construct a SPICE model, analyze its behavior.

It turns out there were some interesting details about the circuit elements that were not obvious at the outset, which needed to be included in the SPICE model before it would start to match the observations.

[SteveThackery]

For Tesla's sake - not fucking again. You were baned once and hopefully gonna be banned again

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/tesla-hairpin-circuit-curious-phenomenon

OP: why are you starting a new thread on this? It's exactly the same topic as the other thread, and you got a decent number of contributions already. What's wrong - do you feel you haven't wasted people's time enough yet?

I agree with what has been said already. 1/ You seem to think that if you don't understand something, then it must be a mystery outside the scope of present-day science. 2/ You reject everyone's efforts to explain it, insisting that no, it is actually a mystery. 3/ What you really want is some personal validation for your big-eyed gullibility, your need to believe in magic, your hope that you might become inducted into a world of secret knowledge and mysterious power.

Just give us all a break, will you? There are plenty of other places far more suited to your needs than a forum hosted by Dave Jones.

[MK14]

It's sad for everyone involved.

But I think with some types of people (fortunately rare), they will just keep on creating the same or similar threads like this...
And it will just keep going around in circles and circles, not getting anywhere.

With them just rebuffing, all the good advice, this forum can have, to offer.  Them not really processing the responses, sensibly/scientifically.

Which is why, (from what little, I've seen)most/(all?) Physics forums, seem to have robust rules, which are rigidly kept to, for handling, this type of situation.

[SteveThackery]

I've hit the "Report" button on it, anyway.

[MK14]

I've hit the "Report" button on it, anyway.

Their symbol (the OP), has been changed to the 'BANNED' one (which is sometimes a temporary one).  It is not necessarily obvious, until you are familiar with it (A small red exclamation mark, and a small purple unhappy face, circle, around a couple of lines below their user name).

Which doesn't surprise me, with all the trouble, around that user, and the various mentions, of them having previously banned account(s) on here.

[Xena E]

And there was me hoping that the OP was just finally satisfied with the (part) explanation to their question provided in the video that IanB posted.

[MK14]

And there was me hoping that the OP was just finally satisfied with the (part) explanation to their question provided in the video that IanB posted.

I'm not sure how many previously banned or not, accounts, that person has had on here, but I think it is more than one, or even many.

So, the likelihood of them going, "Ah, the scientific method, and doing things properly/scientifically, and no religious like beliefs, or even any magic needed".  "Great, I will leave your really nice forum, alone now".

Is not that likely to have occurred, going by past experience.

[Nominal Animal]

Here's what a real engineer would do. Build a replica, take measurements, construct a SPICE model, analyze its behavior.

This, exactly!  🤗  🤝

It is also exactly what any scientists would do, being a perfect example of applying the scientific method.

It is also exactly what a software developer would do, when encountering any unexpected effects or problems: determine the exact situation (inputs, state, outputs) where it happens, and optimally simplify it to a minimal reproducible example, then dissect it to understand how.

Laypeople sometimes think that the problem in science and academia is a big conspiracy, rejecting ideas they don't like, like say Nikola Tesla's research.  It is not that at all!  (With our current understanding we can replicate Tesla's experiments, and analyse them, and show what and how is happening; problem is, it is not always what Nikola Tesla claimed, especially when it involves transfer or transformation of energy in various electromagnetic forms –– exactly those claims those looking for free energy and such are hoping would be true.)

When we talk about failures and problems in science and academia, it really is that the simple steps IanB described is just not done often enough, nor rigorously enough.  On one hand, it is the replication crisis: when others replicate the research, they get different results.  It means the actual phenomena was not completely and/or correcly described.  Like showing a wheel perpetually turning, but neglecting to mention the motor inside the hub connected to a battery.  On the other hand, it is the social and human aspects of current scientific discourse: in the past, top scientists have often had not too good social skills and weren't very good at marketing themselves, but today, such people have no room in academia.  Furthermore, it is very difficult to get funding for something others are not researching yet, so most contend themselves to researching the same things everyone else is researching already, wasting resources, and turning away from the scientific method, into an exercise in rapid publishing and creative writing.  Really.  The rise of authoritarian thinking –– considering who is saying more than what is being said –– means tenured leaders easily unwittingly create a social atmosphere where disagreement is cause for dismissal, as critical discussion of ideas one might not actually espouse is gauche/unacceptable/evil.  Basically, we've dropped the ball on the steps IanB listed.

And yet, doing science/engineering exactly like this is possible for absolutely everyone, and it is rewarding in of itself: understanding things, and helping others undestand things, gives most humans a huge dopamine boost.  All it takes is a bit of self-control, and a lot of effort, but most find it fun, too.

Apologies for the wall-of-text post, but this and the related topics in recent times has weighed heavily on my soul.  I love oddball experiments and research (like putting grapes in a microwave), and talking about them in scientific and engineering circles, but somehow when I try, they tend to devolve into unscientific social games and point-scoring (which drives me away instantly).

Finding IanB putting the entire thing in a single sentence, accompanied with a really good example video (made by Fred B's Tech Channel on Youtube), just made my day.  No, week.  No, MONTH. 

[ebastler]

I'm not sure how many previously banned or not, accounts, that person has had on here, but I think it is more than one, or even many.

At least DejanC, Dejan567 and Deco56 seem to be the same person -- sharing the same Tesla fetish and writing style, plus overlapping usernames. All these accounts are now banned.

[tatel]

The guy that banned that f*****g fetishist deserves to be awarded the ears and the tail of the troll, I think.

The only complain I could make is it took too much time to do so. I think we all knew it was going to happen... then why let that troll do his thing? I for one would greatly appreciate if those varmints would be exterminated before their post count reaches 20.

[Simon]

Don't worry from now on any "new" techobable that quotes tesla's name will get an immediate ban with no "trial period". I still don't know if these people are that dumb or are intentionally trolling and trying to seed arguments among us. They often seem to have Russian sounding names.....

[MK14]

Don't worry from now on any "new" techobable that quotes tesla's name will get an immediate ban with no "trial period". I still don't know if these people are that dumb or are intentionally trolling and trying to seed arguments among us. They often seem to have Russian sounding names.....

On the one hand, that does sound a bit harsh, as it could be someone who is going to be receptive to criticism, listen, and amend their ways.

But on the other hand, any poster, who's first (or early posts), is titled something like "Tesla ...", or "Free-energy ...", especially when it includes a video, typical of those sorts of posters, rather than from a proper source, of reliable videos, from established scientists and/or engineers (established/recognized ones).
Then, the thread usually heads downwards, rather rapidly, often/usually ending in the user being banned on here.

But overall, rapidly eliminating, such users, once it is quickly established, they are not going to change their ways, sounds like a good idea.

[tggzzz]

They often seem to have Russian sounding names.....

Serbian rather than Russian.

[ebastler]

They often seem to have Russian sounding names.....

Serbian rather than Russian.

Slovenian, Serbian, Croatian -- the latter being Tesla's nationality too, of course. I think it's likely that some misguided patriotism is contributing to DejanC's fascination with the man.

[tggzzz]

They often seem to have Russian sounding names.....

Serbian rather than Russian.

Slovenian, Serbian, Croatian -- the latter being Tesla's nationality too, of course. I think it's likely that some misguided patriotism is contributing to DejanC's fascination with the man.

Sigh. Having visited the museum of technology in Zagreb, I really really shouldn't have written "Serbian".

I knew what I meant.

[Simon]

Don't worry from now on any "new" techobable that quotes tesla's name will get an immediate ban with no "trial period". I still don't know if these people are that dumb or are intentionally trolling and trying to seed arguments among us. They often seem to have Russian sounding names.....

On the one hand, that does sound a bit harsh, as it could be someone who is going to be receptive to criticism, listen, and amend their ways.

But on the other hand, any poster, who's first (or early posts), is titled something like "Tesla ...", or "Free-energy ...", especially when it includes a video, typical of those sorts of posters, rather than from a proper source, of reliable videos, from established scientists and/or engineers (established/recognized ones).
Then, the thread usually heads downwards, rather rapidly, often/usually ending in the user being banned on here.

But overall, rapidly eliminating, such users, once it is quickly established, they are not going to change their ways, sounds like a good idea.

I'm talking about having made it obvious that they won't listen and that their justification is that tesla had something to do with it.

I really wish people would broaden their education. There were many people involved in the discovery of electricity, yet all these people know of is tesla, maybe edison and rarely Westinghouse, thef definitely have no appreciation of all the others.

[MK14]

I'm talking about having made it obvious that they won't listen and that their justification is that tesla had something to do with it.

I really wish people would broaden their education. There were many people involved in the discovery of electricity, yet all these people know of is tesla, maybe edison and rarely Westinghouse, thef definitely have no appreciation of all the others.

That sounds good!

This forum is really setup for established, engineering and scientific things.

Not woo woo science and mechanisms.

As Dave (and co), have sometimes said in some of his videos.

Make a machine, based on the claimed new science/engineering principles, show it working, and we can talk, and perhaps try out the new machine.

Otherwise, it is just speculative hot air.  Usually based on very woolly and suspect, science and engineering theories and principles.

[T3sl4co1l]

Another principle is to close such topics once the basic introductions have been made:
- they make a claim, post a video, etc.
- proof (other than video and babble) is kindly requested
- they continue making the same claims, referring to the video, etc. <-- close thread somewhere between here
- firmer requests for factual evidence are made
- and ignored/declined <-- and here
- the regular rabble moves in, smells blood, attacks <-- we should also not tolerate this behavior, and report and reprimand such accounts

Someone coming in, new, unfamiliar with the forum, of course should be welcomed, and not rejected out-of-hand.  Even if they're opening rather strongly into a "woo" topic.  People can be wrong, that's fine.  It's whether they're open to change that matters.  Gauge that with the subsequent replies.  Keep it civil, ignore the given topic at first, press the importance of facts, of scientific method; note what is expected as a positive reply, and what negative replies will (eventually) result in a ban.

Thus, the fanatic betrays themself, as they can't honestly accept the scientific method, apply it to their belief system, allow their beliefs to be questioned.  (This psychology became pretty apparent in this case, with the visceral lashing-out in response to attacking their most-highly-held idol, the conclusive proof.)  This leaves one other "in": if they are feeling manipulative, they may feign acceptance, perhaps behaving for now, perhaps trying to drag conversation back towards "woo".  This is fine, as in the interim, peaceful (if dubious) behavior is had, and they will at some point eventually tip their hand and reveal their true beliefs, reducing to the above case.

And yes, I mean literally coaching what kind of reply is acceptable.  Not to an explicit instructional and word-for-word scripted level, of course not, but more to give a sort of informed consent, that yes this is expected, and to leave enough freedom that they need to compose their own words, a simple search and replace or copy and paste won't suffice.  Those smart/mature/manipulative enough to understand the instruction, will behave (at least for the time being), and the immature won't understand it and continue operating from their own internal state of mind.

Tim

[tggzzz]

Someone coming in, new, unfamiliar with the forum, of course should be welcomed, and not rejected out-of-hand.  Even if they're opening rather strongly into a "woo" topic.  People can be wrong, that's fine.  It's whether they're open to change that matters.  Gauge that with the subsequent replies.  Keep it civil, ignore the given topic at first, press the importance of facts, of scientific method; note what is expected as a positive reply, and what negative replies will (eventually) result in a ban.

That's the key bit. We were all beginners at one time, and we all remain beginners in topics that are new to us.

Starting the occasional idiotic topic isn't a problem for me. What does annoy me is when many people have tried to nudge a person in the right direction over a long time and many topics, but that person persists.

At the risk of using an analogy, it is a bit like having a neighbour that makes too much noise without realising it. Gently pointing out they are disturbing you and asking them to reduce the noise usually works, but occasionally you come across sociopaths that don't care and continue to be antisocial. What should the reaction and next steps be?

[joeqsmith]

You also get the regulars who post a few pages, then tell everyone else not to feed the trolls.  Worse are the ones that follow up requesting the thread to be locked.     

Personally, I would read a thread on free energy and Tesla  before I would read anything on social behaviors,  religion, vaccinations,  politics, race, sexual preferences.  These threads seem to have a much higher tolerance (survive longer without being locked).   

But, no problem.  Not my site and Dave/moderators can run it as they see fit.  I'm just happy Dave provides us a place to hang out and interact. 

[Simon]

Another principle is to close such topics once the basic introductions have been made:
- they make a claim, post a video, etc.
- proof (other than video and babble) is kindly requested
- they continue making the same claims, referring to the video, etc. <-- close thread somewhere between here
- firmer requests for factual evidence are made
- and ignored/declined <-- and here
- the regular rabble moves in, smells blood, attacks <-- we should also not tolerate this behavior, and report and reprimand such accounts

Yes that is what I mean. We have been fairly open and let these people carry on on the assumption that they are reasonable but it's obvious that there are extremists even in what they call engineering and mistake this forums tolerance for acceptance for validation of their so called engineering. So once it is clear that they will not listen to reason they should be banned.