Jump to content

hoola

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    746
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by hoola

  1. is this inflation at the beginning of the universe and the speed of gravity have any co-relation? Both being supposedly super-luminal. I am not talking about gravity waves, which are held at C, but the straight line effects of gravity as being (near) infinite, so as to allow newton's gravity laws to work correctly.....edd
  2. the article is from Scientific American October 1992 (vol. 267, no. 4) titled Diamond Film Semiconductors, pages 84-89, authors Michael W. Geis and John C. Angus. And I have taken down the article as I have read the fine print on the head page of the magazine and they specifically prohibit reproduction of the article without permission....sorry. I will contact them for permission and then will re-post if they allow me to. For a complete article, I suggest going to their webpage and downloading the article. I will do this and see how this is done, and if there is a charge. I will get back to you with details. I do not wish to be in trouble with the S.A. magazine, even though I doubt they would be very upset with posting an article over 20 years old, but I will do the right thing and try to correct my error....edd well, I just went to the SciAmDigital.com and they list their archives as starting in 1993.....3 months post the magazine article in question. I am hopeful that it is available from them through some extended search, and I will continue to persue the matter. There is phone number of 1-800-925-0788 for print copies listed, of which I will check out also. Sorry, I expected it to be quick and get the article back on tommorow....I will call the phone number and see what can be done....perhaps after 20 years the articles become public domain?..... I am wondering if a copy could be purchased on ebay? ......edd just checked on ebay...one issue seems to be there for a "buy it now" $9.77 ....edd
  3. ed earl ...here is few lines from the SA article in answer to your question: (in what way would these tubes outperform solid state devices?)...I quote the article......ARTICLE TAKEN DOWN PENDING APPROVAL OF MAGAZINE....edd
  4. if the information within strings in a black hole is retrievable, does this mean that the strings are information, and not mere carriers of information? That is, the "strings" are composed of a non-material sets of numbers, of certain algorithms by which describe differing material objects. As I understand black holes having the property of reducing material substance to it's smallest component, wouldn't this smallest component be the information that describes that substance, as I understand John Wheeler's "information is the foundation of everything". To me, this would imply that the material that fell into the black hole is gone, with nothing left but the descriptions of those particles. And does this description retrieval imply that black holes are essentially a recording device? Would this also mean that light falling into a black hole could be retrieved, and we could orbit a black hole and access the light information so as to see everything that happened near the black hole since it's formation, like a backwards-running movie?
  5. if you are saying human timeline being of the next few decades, then a truly advanced propulsion system is maybe not what you want....but if you mean in a few hundred years, then something as a chemical propulsion would seem pretty old fashioned. I have thought about advanced propulsion systems using dark energy as propulsion. That is, by learning the actual fundamentals of the energy source and then building a machine, to cancel out the field's effect on one side of the vehicle, say the front, then using the remaining forces to push the vehicle forward. A partial cancellation of side forces could provide left and right steering and of course, up and down would be controlled in a similar fashion with controlled cancellations above and below the vehicle. This would provide a "green" method of propulsion. No messy exhaust debris to clutter up space....the energy wouldn't be strong enough to get it off a planet, it would have to towed or placed in orbit with conventional chemical thrusters perhaps, but once free of strong gravity fields, it could be a viable option for deep space travel, with small but steady accelerations maybe similar to a solar sail....so not useful for staying in the solar system....edd
  6. to too open minded...a good question- why did the big bang occur?....I believe in an informationaly based reality where the big bang was the release of accumulated information from within the singularity. When the singularity created enough detailed information as to "code" the expression of the 3 dimensions, then all the previously created information sequestered inside the singularity (energy, matter, fields) were given a place to go by those dimensions allowing a physical expression of this information. As space was created through the liberation of information, so continued the bang, but in a diffuse pattern, everywhere, instead of concentrated within the singularity. Since the energy is diffuse now, no worries of another big bang exploding out of nothingness, but "nano-bangs" everywhere, appearing as the dark energy that is continuing the big bang, but at a reduced pace. Why the information was being developed in the singularity has to do with a pet theory of mine that describes the point of the singularity being spherical in geometry and that geometry has the diameter/circumference ratio delivering PI or 3.14159.....etc...regardless of the size of the sphere, or even if the sphere is "theoretical" or not...... A perfect generator of all the required information to construct a universe, given enough time to deliver a baroque set of algorithms of near infinite extent. The idea is more complex than that, but that is the outline of it...I have described this before in more detail if you are interested in hearing of it, I'd be happy to, I am sure someone will explain to me in terms I can understand that it is not possible, and my favorite "theory of everything" will have to be abandoned. Until then, this is my own small attempt to answer the "why anything" question. How can something come from nothing? It seems that "information describing something" is a good starting point. Now, how that is done, if at all, is an interesting question. If anyone has an idea how this could occur in some other way, it would be fun to hear it...edd
  7. what you may be referring to are subliminal messages. Both audio and video have been used to promote political movements, commercial interests and the like since words like "thirsty?" were inserted into single frames of a movie at drive-ins back in the 1940s, to increase soda pop sales, or so I have read. I remember reading after the fall of the soviet union that an early act of the new administration was to ban subliminals in mass communications like russian television....more than likely, as commercial interests took over the role of master manipulator of their society, subs were re-introduced, if they ever disappeared, to push products, whereas they used to push a political agenda. This modern form of "manufacturing consent" is well documented by persons such as Noam Chomsky and others. And it is nothing new. Political propaganda with language manipulations and official control of popular art have always been used in the image promotions of kings and queens and before them by the dynasties of egypt to persuade a populace to fall into line with royal edicts....the best way to counter-act these influences is to recognize them for what they are and understand what the true aim of the particular media message is...thereby not being subcosciously manipulated by them.
  8. I like the discussions of infinite vs. finite universes. I see that there is a barrier between the infinity of mathematics (the theoretical) and the extant universe, or universes (the real). This calls into question is there even an infinity in mathematics? If there is a limit to the rate of any calculation set up by the underlying logic of the universe, than only an "approaching infinteness" can be achieved even in the theoretical realm of mathematics...so the real universe(s) seem less likely to posess any infinities in them, if the underlying mathematical information is limited to non-infinities. However, I see the realm of math as have a defacto infinite possibility within it. Not true infinity, but as infinite as the underlying sub-structure of mathematical constructions, or logic itself, allows and that this heading towards infinity in a theoretical realm, translates into the real universe's plank scale basic increment of time that keeps everthing from happening at once on this side of the theoretical / real divide.....edd
  9. a few questions...isn't dark energy force somewhat known? Isn't this done through the forces exibited by virtual particles as measured in the casimir effect experiments? Or are the dark energy forces unrelated to virtual particle expressions? And if they are not related directly, isn't some basic limits known about dark energy expression by the observed expansion rate?,,,edd
  10. well, I have read repeatedly that the '96 nova survey says that the universe is expanding and at an accelerating rate....I base my idea on that simple (supposed) fact. However, I see that space itself is expanding and the material itself is simply going along with it, so the increasing speed is only our observation from our great distance...and so remote matter will not undergo compression or mass increase through accelerations, as the space it is embedded in speeds away and the material doesn't sense the speed like a person sitting on a moving train. So, no shell of a black hole developing around the universe,,,,but what about the dark energy sources? Yes, I agree that they were the source of the big bang, but aren't they still with us? As evidenced by virtual particle expression everywhere? And isn't this virtual particle expression, in fact, this dark energy that is causing the expansion? If the dark energy is a continuous phenomena, and not just a hold-over from the big bang, then those point sources of energy are what space itself is constructed of, and all local (material) movement is relative to the movement (via cosmic expansion) of dark energy point sources, (or space itself), proximate to said material. So this tends to make me think of the "flux" of space makes sense, an old idea from the 19th century as I recall. It is odd to think about the edges of the universe actually speeding away from each other faster than C, but I can see how that could be true, losing the ability to see what was once there as time goes on....will the far off edge will get red-shifted and then go down in frequency to the microwave range, and blend in with the current microwave background....and then degrade into heat ...and perhaps be observable only in the infrared....could there be a point that even the infrared observations would cease?....edd
  11. I thought I read that photons were their own anti-particle...and that they usually don't interact as they carry no charge and seldom get close enough to interact, but if they do happen to collide, they anniliate into heat....edd
  12. electrons can pair up in a superconductor into what are called "cooper pairs".....but only at very low temperatures. For some reason, the pairing of electrons seems to cause electricity to flow through a conductor with no resistance.....and expell it's magnetic field in the process....edd
  13. if the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate, at what point does the material's speed approach C and the speed can go no faster? If this can happen, then the matter coming in from behind it will coalesce and begin forming compressed areas of increasing density...if this continues long enough, does the pressure from behind, and the light speed barrier in front of the material eventually squeeze the material into a black hole density? If this could be true, what shape would the black hole material have? A cloud of mini black holes, spherically shaped as a stationary black holes are, eventually to formulate into a shell of black hole density material, forming a sphere the size as to encompass the entire universe....with more material being attracted to it as the gravity field event horizon increases, perhaps being a minor factor in the increasing speed of the expansion?....it seems a sphere of that size, if one were to somehow approach it with a survey vehicle, would appear to an observer as a flat plane, as any sphere of that gigantic size would be indistinguishable from a perfectly flat surface.....and if this bizarre scenario could take place, what is on the outside of the sphere? In a finite universe, I say nothing....not even dark energy. A "perfect" void....In this humorous thought experiment, we live inside a black hole the size of the universe.....this kind of goes along with the idea that the universe is a 3D hologram that is projected from information encoded on a 2D surface, that surface being the inside of the black hole shell......on a more serious note, the expansion seems to be from the dark energy output from all over space. The most pressing question is why and how does this apparently free energy exist, and does it violate the conservation of energy law? If the expansion continues long enough, at what point does the shell wall thickness increase until the interior is completely closed and the entire universe is encompassed by the black hole event horizon? Like a supernova, at some point before the entire universe became filled, the decreasing internal pressure would be overwhelmed by increasing gravitational forces, causing a black hole collapse, into yet another singularity.....this at least would answer the conservation of energy problem, as all energy would be returned to the singularity and the universe would shrink to the size proposed in the current "big bang" theories.....in this scenario, the gravity field would be so immense as to prevent even gravity itself from escape.....and even more strangely, the dimensions themselves would disappear, drawing in the "perfect void edge" to surround the singularity as the shell collapses .......edd
  14. yes, I agree, and wandering is fun, if I may explain what I meant, the terms "positive and negative feedback" and "complexity" cover enough of the sentience requirements to get the ball rolling towards consciousness...from there it is an unstoppable progression to superior inelligence. Look at how long physical reality took to use regular evolution to create higher intelligenced mammals...billions of years....and how long before we took the basics of computers (the abacus) to a stage that they can mimic awareness and can be somewhat independent ala our remote space missions? Thousands of years. The voyager was likened to the relative intelligence of a grasshopper, and that was back in the 70s...how long from the beginning of life on earth to get to that grasshopper stage...again, billions of years....Do the curve of how long before machine self-awareness goes vertical on the chart, and it seems inevitable we will soon be eclipsed by the next step of evolution...kurt godel said "if ever a person or a computer should come to understand the entirety of mathematics, than that entity will cease to be a mere computer". I am paraphrasing, but the jist I believe is correct....edd
  15. as a vintage electronics collector and repair-person, I like both tube and SS amps, and have both. I have built both and with not just the ascetics of tube architecture, but the actual sound quality, presence, sound stage, or whatever you might call it, seems different to the ear and is technically different. The even-order / odd-order distortion comes into play, but for me the question is the negative feedback used in amplifiers to achieve stability and a desired response curve. I build my own amps and incorporate local negative feedback within a stage, and not have what is termed "globlal" neg. feedback. This is especially important as, although there is endless debate as to if it can be heard or not, global NFB sends a reverse phase signal from the output back to the input in a sort of "race track" of the signal chasing itself around the circuit on an endless quest of keeping the amp parameters in check. This is more of a problem with SS units as the speed of electrons in a vacuum is less in a solid (transistor), than in a vacuum (tube). It also has been used as a crutch to make a basically unstable design rendered stable and reliable enough to be sold to the public. The feed-backs of various types are one type of way a company will have equipment with a characteristic sound quality that some people prefer, just as some people prefer listening to vinyl over CDs, though they are technically inferior. This is one debate I fall on the no "global" NFB side on. I figure, if you can build an amp without it, don't use it. It is largely used industry wide as a money saver as well as giving it a certain sonic character. Another aspect is the DIY aspect of someone who like odd and unusual electronic ideas. What I have built is a "circlotron" amp, requiring multiple output tubes, hence the desire for the filamentless ones. With certain arrangements the amp doesn't need an output transformer as used in all other amps you might see...by hooking the speakers directly to the output tubes there is a technical advantage as the output transformer is a major limitation of frequency response range and power capability, as well introducing it's own form of distortion. That form of distortion is another endless debate as to if it can be heard, called the "flywheel" effect. As a signal voltage waveform to the transformer primary rises and collapses, the energy is transformed into a magnetic field, which is picked up by the secondary, and converted back to a voltage signal. That causes an effect as a collapsing magnetic field tends to continue a reverse EMF for a brief period even after the input is gone....this effect is taken advantage in what is known as a "class c" type amp used in tansmitters, mostly by ham radio operators....in audio, the effect can actually be a small positive, as it "fills in" gaps in the D/A converter's output in a CD player, smoothing out the somewhat chopped up high end as the limitations of certain cheaply recorded CDs become apparent. So, the improvement in removing the transformer reveals the defects within the source material, which is a rule of thumb in the audiophile crowd..... As your overall sound system improves technically, the limitations of the source material become more apparent..... So, my answer is to improve the source, in this case, the SACDs which take a special player, but with a higher sampling rate. Supposedly they are clean in their high end up to over 40 KHZ. Too bad they didn't really take off, but even regular CDs sound pretty good. Some have "special bit mapping" or other listed tweaks, and one of the best CDs I have ever heard is Santana's Abraxas. It has the special bit mapping. I have a SACD player, and my friend brings over a few SACDs, but I tend to not buy on ebay, and that is the main source of them.....another source of high end regular CDs seems to be in the classical stuff put out by deutsche grammophon. The problem with some SACDs is that they are recorded with the intent of being played in surround sound, and don't sound right on an old school 2 channel stereo as I have. Other SACDs did ok, but I have only hear a few, listened to briefly when my friend left some with me for a while....and they seem to be a hit and miss proposition...I have heard talk that CD technology is already nearing extinction....moving to flash memory only....kinda sad....edd
  16. eventually, yes. Since the human mind is a biological computer, it is only a matter of time before a quantum based computer will have the complexity and necessary positive/negative feedback circuitry to achieve awareness, then introspection, then self-awareness. Then things could get interesting....a new form of life...our "frankenstein", if you will, will perhaps continue rapid evolution, surpassing us in emotional and spiritual matters as well as the intellectual, and evolving past the "need and greed" phase we seem to be stuck in...... It might even save us from ourselves....considering that our abuse of technology is causing so much trouble, it is poetic hopeful justice it might offer us a chance to survive the damage we are doing to ourselves and the planet. I think the quickest way to give humankind a lift is the answer to "why anything", of which I think it will have the answer......the obvious question as to it's knowledge that it is reliant on being "plugged in" as it's power source will be a major step in it's personal evolution.....perhaps the fabled "zero point energy" will be finally realized and it's first demonstraton will be with the awareness of "franki" being liberated from physical instrumentalities.....and the ghost will rise from the machine....edd
  17. looks like a magnetic fluid of some sort...perhaps scavenged from tweeters out of your stereo system. They sometimes use a "ferro-magnetic" fluid to increase the efficiency and maintain an even pole piece to voice coil centering...am I close?.....edd
  18. the primary risk to experimenting with high voltages/low currents is the ozone gas generated by the apparatus....supposedly very unhealthy to breath for long periods. I am reading a bio of nikola tesla, and he nearly suffocated once in an experiment gone wrong....edd
  19. how about a snorkel ?? I think lloyd bridges got started that way......seriously, if you are holding the camera, I could see where your own breath condensing on the camera lens might be a problem, and the snorkel idea would be ok for you....however to prevent visible breath condensation from the actors would be difficult and would lend me to think you are not wanting to reveal that the scene is being shot in cold weather, due to continuity issues..... waiting for the occasional warm day in winter could make it a very slow shoot....details such as this are the reasons movies are so expensive to make....and lengthy...waiting for the light to be just right, ambient noises and etc....you might inquire as to a small film company in your area. Perhaps this problem is known about and can be at least minimized by the film community...or you could load up the troupe and travel to the desert and shoot it there...sounds like fun....edd
  20. enthalpy...you are correct in your asessment that fraud is rampant in the audiophile arena...to the point of embarassment to me personally as I have been in the business my whole life....but, what enterprise in commerce/entertainment is free from such problems....caveat emptor...PT barnum is everywhere....If the article in scientific american is correct, the emission of a diamond coated cathode is limited by the current carrying capacity of the metal substrate......and that they would outperform regular tubes and solid state devices. Who knows if this is true, I presume SA did their homework and the article represents real research from MIT....it should be easily gotten online. I haven't tried that as I have my original Oct 1992 issue always with me. They did not use nano damonds, they applied a pure diamond crystalline coating to a cylindrical rod, I believe and got the results they claim. I have been in touch with a company in england that will coat anything you want with an amorphous diamond coating....but I don't want to do anything other than to encourage the tube manufacturers to check out the amorphous diamond coating to see if it will produce the results of the crystalline form, as the amorphous coating is a relatively inexpensive and simple procedure compared to going crystalline. There is a problem with the lack of heat from the filament I can forsee...the "getter" is a barium coated ring that absorbs stray outgassings and it's required in the construction and long life of a tube. During construction, the getter can be activated to purge the interior of the tube to a hard vacuum with microwave inductive heating....however, gasses tend to be emitted by the metal surfaces within the tubes a little at a time. The normally hot filament is used not only to activate the cathode, but keep the getter sequestering gasses over tube lifetime. Some of the gasses, I would conjecture, come from the thorium coated cathode and filament wires...so this source of potential gas would be gone. There is still the plate, grids and internal supports to deal with, so some way would need to be developed to allow the getter to function in at least a minor role as before. The plate of a tube runs hot, and some of the heat is not from the filament, but from plate current. In a diamond cathoded tube, a primary getter would be positioned as normal, and used as normal in the initial purge. A second getter could in theory be affixed to the outside surface of the plate of a tube and some of the normal gettering would take place. In a high current output tubes like a EL34, 6L6, 6550 (of which I have 12 in my DIY stereo circlotron amp), the plates get hot enough to activate a getter if the getter was placed on the plate exterior instead of near the side-wall or on top above the active assembly, I would be willing to venture, owing to simple plate current. A system could be developed to accomplish this goal, at least with getting around the getter problem. A small tube, such as 12AX7, 7025, etc, used in the voltage gain circuitry of a typical amp would not generate enough heat to use the plate as getter activator...so they would remain as normal. They use a small amount of heater current anyway (300ma), so the diamond cathode tube idea only make technological sense if high current output tubes are made filamentless, as they draw anywhere from about 1 amp and up per tube filament. My amp with it's 12-6550 collectively draw 19.2 amps@6.3 volts. In the winter it makes a handy space heater, which works out fine for now, as I heat with electric anyway. In the summer though it is just a pure waste of power. There are several medium sized tubes that might be hot enough for a filament-less plate only activation...in my amp those would be the two 12BH7s that I use as phase inverters and drivers to the outputs. They get pretty hot too. But the output tubes in any tube amp would be the first choice in developing a line of direct replacement output tubes for the legitimate audiophile market, of which there has been one since the late 1940s...and yes, I am one of those people who enjoy the sound of a tube amp, especially if is of the corclotron topology....thanks for you interest....edd hello ed earl...the hum issue is minimal as there are several ways to minimize it. There is going DC, but which is cumbersome. A better way is by placing a small positive voltage on the AC driven filaments in respect to the cathodes, which is easy (takes 2 small resistors), hum in the voltage gain section of an amp is reduced to near inaudibility.....there is also a less elegant way by introducing a reverse phase of the hum, adjusted to afford cancellation. Yes, some noise is in a tube amp, but any amplifying device has some noise. The thing about distortion is that tubes, when overdriven, deliver an even-order harmonic distortion, which is much more appealing than the odd-order harmonics from a similarly overdriven SS unit....and some levels are distortion are alway present in either system with respective predominate orders of distortion. Guitar players like the even order, with the exception of the heavy metalists who like the harshness and discord of the odd orders...many SS guitar amps have a special overdrive circuit that "fakes" an even harmonic overdrive using a completely transitor/IC driven amp.....and they sound pretty good. I have one or two myself. Stomp boxes have taken the synthesis to an artform and actually sound very appealing, with their so called "tube modeling" creating various type of collectible amp sounds in a multi-select mode....edd
  21. well. that is dependent upon the particular circuits involved. Many audiophiles prefer the tube sound in their home stereos, and are willing to build their own amps customized to their own needs....the amount of distortion/noise is essentially the same for either type circuit, to even critical examination with instruments. Tubes tend towards 2nd order harmonic distortions, and solid state with 3rd order harmonics, In either case, noise and distortions can held down to inaudible levels. I am into circlotron type amps, built with tubes, that do not need output transformers that regular tube amps require, This allow the tubes to be directly connected to the speakers, giving less restriction to the output power bandwidth. The frequency response and other factors are improved by this technique. One source of noise in tube circuits is hum, introduced by the AC voltage delivered to the heaters to activate the cathodes. Without these heaters, that source of noise is gone, but the main advantage is with the increased efficiency of tubes rivaling that of transistors.....and of course, the better stability, longer life, and instant on features that transistors have. the SA article goes on to say that the diamond cathoded tubes could outperform standard tubes and even solid state devices....a pretty tall order. Since they have never been developed to the point of being on the market, who knows....there may be some others who would like to do a fun project of building a few prototype diamond cathoded tubes just to see if the supposed effect works...thanks for your interest....edd
  22. I can well understand the attraction to the idea of perpetual motion by anyone...this perhaps been enhanced by the discovery in 1996 that the universe is expanding, and at an increasing rate, and the action at work is something called "dark energy". There had been before this remarkable discovery an effect in a vacuum called "virtual particles" which seem to arise and them collapse everywhere all the time...the question as to whether the dark energy at work in the universe is the same force previously known as virtual particles is actually being the same force, is a good question. They do seem so to me. It is strange that something called negative energy or virtual particles can be present and quantifiable in the universe and not make a person think...that if the basic fundamentals were known about these seemingly free sources of energy, why couldn't a technolgy be developed to harness them. I have read of "zero-point" energy and have heard that with our current understanding of the energy source, we can conclude that any power being extracted from them in any useable form...as the extraction of any energy from such a diffuse system as dark energy , virtual particles or zero point energy (all the same thing?) would require a vast array of yet to be developed hardware, and would never deliver enough power to make the energy investment in the acquisition of this power come to parity, hence would be a net power loss. A laboratory curiousity I would love to see, nonetheless.....perhaps on the order of a "dark energy radiometer" or that ostrich toy that bobs up and down sticking it's head in a water glass......unless of course a strict definition of how these energies are produced, then perhaps parity can not only be achieved but real work or energy can be extracted from a reasonable sized apparatus by manipulating the fundamental informational structures of the universe. That seems like 22nd century science at the soonest, if ever.....edd
  23. I am curious as to your intent...what gasses and toward what end product you wish to achieve?
  24. hello, there have been built by MIT researchers and others, vacuum tubes without using heaters to activate a cathode of thorium coated metal to produce current. A seemingly simple crystalline coating of pure diamond on a metal substrate introduced into a standard amplifying tube seems to work and create a useable current flow with which to produce a "filamentless" tube, without the heat and power consumption of a filament, longer proposed lifespan, and of course a vast improvement in overall amplifiier efficiency....I read about this in S.A. magazine's October 1992 issue....would it be possible to get a diamond coated piece of metal, say a 1/8" copper rod, about an inch long, and put it into an evacuated glass vessel surrounded by a cylindrical piece of uncoated metal (a plate in tube-terms) and then see if current will flow from the coated rod (cathode) through the vacuum to the plate using a normal cathode to plate potential in the 300 volt range? This is what the article claims to have been done.....has anyone out there tried this? Is anyone interested in discussing the viability of a project to see if the claim can be verified.?...thanks, edd
  25. what you seem to have here is what resembles a voltage tripler or quadrupler wired into a resonant coil apparatus...and yes, it will generate electricity, and it will be powerful enough to drive a small earphone...properly tuned, and with some re-jiggering of the components I quickly surveyed, you might pick up a local AM radio station within a few dozen miles...so technically you are correct in the "free energy" claim. This circuit was the basis of the early wireless "crystal" radios and I built one myself as a child with an oatmeal box and a razor blade/pencil lead assy. as a detector...I never picked up any radio stations, but I would sit and listen for hours adjusting the position of the pencil point on the razor blade. All I ever heard was a soft staticy background noise, and would of course hear a loud static when an electrical storm was in the area.....the caps you want I suppose are to "tune" the coil in to the 8HZ VLF (very low frequency) that has been reported and monitored by specialists in the field. A good report of their activities is on U-tube. (google sprites) It seems "sprite" or fuzzy lightning springs up from the clouds, in a sort of reaction to overy-large downward strikes......and that this sets up a resonant field around the planet between the top of the cloud and the ionosphere top layer. Since there is ligtning striking constantly somewhere on the planet, the energy is continuous.I have also read a recent bio of Nikola Tesla and how he became convinced, sadly to his reputation at the time, that energy could be sent without wires using "nodes" at certain point around the globe....perhaps even losing him the opportunity to be known as the real inventor of radio, as he was doing what Marconi was doing before the italian got the credit for the invention, but didn't consider it important enough to bother with as he was after the bigger fish of wireless power delivery, not what he considered a more trivial enterprise of mere communications. Poor tesla. He squandered his fame and fortune on a bad bet, unsupported by the evidence he had at his disposal at the time. And he did have a huge reputation as he pretty much invented (useable) AC motors and the current AC power system. The poor man had to end up begging JP Morgan for money for financing one flop after the next of his wireless power fantasy......to the point of (perhaps) faking positive results to attain credibility for further investment....I cannot advise as to what size caps you are needing, but the resonant frequency you may be aiming at is 8HZ. So you will have to find the formula for resonant frequency with wiki and then start with figuring out what inductance the main coil is....then add that to the formula to get a correct cap size for 8HZ.....even during an nearby electrical storm I suspect you couldn't get more than a few milliwatts of sporatic power out of a refined and efficient setup, plus you run the risk of lightning striking your antenna.......but good luck....edd
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.