Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Solid States Devices => Tesla Technologgy => Topic started by: pomodoro on August 27, 2015, 02:19:08 PM
-
What do you guys think is really going on with the light globe in the famous demonstration of '89 by Eric Dollard and Lindermann? Copper foil is attracted to it, a repulsive force is felt, and its light can charge up a nearby capacitor to thousands of volts in a few seconds?
It was also replicated again by an older Eric lately in the link below.
Is is just static , electrons being shot out of the bulb , or is it something unexplainable?
The old experiment, watch from 20:00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFa-IymyWHM
The 'new' replication
http://www.gestaltreality.com/energy-synthesis/eric-dollard/teslas-radiant-matter-replication-by-mark-mckay/
-
Hi pomodoro,
For the following possible explanations to be correct, I assume that the point in the output circuit where the bulb is connected (with the two pieces of wires) has an average HV DC component, i.e. not AC, no zero crossing.
So it is very probable that the filament wire in the bulb floats on HV DC pulses with respect to (system) ground. That would explain why the copper foil is attracted towards the filament of the bulb (normal static attraction).
I think that the repel force sensed by the fingers right on the outside surface of bulb can be explained by the principle of a HV lifter. Our body with our fingers as 'pointers' is a capacitor with respect to our close vicinity, (which is mainly the ground) and could be considered as one of the 'plates' and the other 'plate' is just the filament surface floating on HV DC, the two can constitute an asymmetrical capacitor needed to get thrust the fingers feel.
The HV DC pulses could charge up a capacitor too.
What do you think?
Gyula
-
Hi Gyula, I agree with your explanation, but how would a DC potential build up on the secondary? Even a DC pulsed into the tesla hi Q secondary should turn into AC. I researched those ' diodes' they are not diodes at all but hydrogen discharge tubes that were used in radar systems. They will conduct either way once they break down.
-
Note the neons at either end of the "secondary". Under certain conditions these can act as rectifiers or "detectors". However, the whole setup is, as is typical with ED, a kludge which suffers from PTBarnum-style showmanship, meaningless jargon and lack of good measurements. It gets a big "so what" from me. One wire power transmission using dangerously high voltages to light up a little bulb and charge a capacitor? Invoking the holy name of Tesla, which is sure to make the sheeple bow and scrape, with glassed-over eyeballs? SO WHAT.
The story about how the apparatus was destroyed during a 5-block move to a new lab, and never rebuilt... is hilarious.
Meanwhile, I do _no wire_ power transmission using low, safe, voltages, lighting bulbs brighter than when they are directly connected to the battery, and charging caps to much higher voltages than is supplied by the battery source. And I don't spend a lot of money doing it. So what?
(To call the Diathermy high-voltage source a "Tesla Coil" is a real stretch, and is typical of Dollard's distortions and misrepresentations. Is an automotive ignition coil a "Tesla Coil"? How about a CRT flyback transformer? No, friends, they are not. A Tesla Coil is a 1/4 wave aircore resonator that functions by VRSWR, Voltage Rise through Standing Wave Resonance. Dollard knows this, and also knows that dropping the name of Tesla whenever he can is a surefire way to bamboozle the hopeful innocents in his audience.) Here's what a small 24 VDC powered _actual_ Tesla Coil actually does:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIZClhoU2Xk
-
Awesome lil' tesla there TK. Yep, Dollard's experiment is no replication of the tesla coil at all, after all, tesla grounded one of the secondaries and transmitted power to the other coil through space. Dollard directly connects the two with a wire and the globe, and doesn't use the two coil turn of the secondary at all. Im going to spend a little time to see if I can get the same effect as he did with the globe. I found some 15W 240V vacuum filament bulbs and I have a small Oudin coil, so all I need is a bit of time..
-
.... how would a DC potential build up on the secondary?
....
Hi pomodoro,
That is okay you question that and normally the answer would be: there is no way.
However, at least one thing has to be considered: a HV capacitor (mentioned as door knob type) cannot readily be charged up by AC unless you are always lucky to interrupt the charging process at one of the peak amplitudes (or near to it) of the AC voltage.
Another thing is that the two scope shots under the pictures and schematics in your link show DC component (268V and 334V) if I understand it correctly. (I am a bit uncertain though where the zero lines are in the scope shots (probably in the middle main line or very near to it where number 1 is shown on the right side in each shot) but the two DC values are included in the display.)
I do think that tuning such system is the main issue to get virtually 'any' waveform at the output, even having an average DC level too.
Gyula
-
Hi pomodoro,
That is okay you question that and normally the answer would be: there is no way.
However, at least one thing has to be considered: a HV capacitor (mentioned as door knob type) cannot readily be charged up by AC unless you are always lucky to interrupt the charging process at one of the peak amplitudes (or near to it) of the AC voltage.
Another thing is that the two scope shots under the pictures and schematics in your link show DC component (268V and 334V) if I understand it correctly. (I am a bit uncertain though where the zero lines are in the scope shots (probably in the middle main line or very near to it where number 1 is shown on the right side in each shot) but the two DC values are included in the display.)
I do think that tuning such system is the main issue to get virtually 'any' waveform at the output, even having an average DC level too.
Gyula
The scopeshots appear to be from a LeCroy scope. The scopeshots show Channel 1 only. The baselines are shown by the digit "1" and the horizontal line at the right edge of the trace display area. In both shots Channel 1 is AC coupled, so any DC component will be filtered out. Apparently a 1000x probe is being used; the actual channel setting is 0.1V/div and the probe factor makes it 100V/div.
The DC values (268 V and 334 V) shown on the shots are the Trigger voltage settings wrt the channel baseline. The trigger voltage level is indicated by the little triangles on either side of the trace display area, and the horizontal position of the trigger is indicated by the small arrow at the bottom of the trace display. The trigger is set to rising edge, as indicated by the symbol to the left of the "DC 268 V". These values are -NOT- values of the traces themselves, they are trigger voltage settings. You can confirm this by looking at the little triangles on either side of the trace display and comparing their levels to the channel baseline indicators.
The timebase is set to 0.5 microseconds per division for both shots. On the top shot, the waveform peaks indicate a frequency of about 1.2 or 1.25 MHz, NOT the value indicated on the screen. (There is about one cycle in 0.8 us, or three cycles in 2.5 us). On the bottom shot, the waveform peaks indicate a frequency of about 2.47 MHz, in rough agreement with the value indicated on the screen as read by the cursor position (arrow on waveform at second peak) wrt the trigger point.
I think that the numbers in the channel setting boxes -20.0 v and -47 v normally indicate the offset, or vertical position wrt the center graticule marker, but these don't seem to correspond to the actual baseline positions as shown by the markers on the right side. So I'm wondering if the traces have been moved after the scope is stopped.
-
The problem is not that Dollard "tries to deceive" anyone. He just uses his own terminology and makes a few mistakes. All electrical phenomena can be deduced by the ampere and coulomb forces. Every other needlessly fancy or complex explanation is bogus.
-
The scopeshots appear to be from a LeCroy scope. The scopeshots show Channel 1 only.
.....
Hi TinselKoala,
Thank you for the kind explanations, now all the details are clear for those scope shots (I am not really familiar with LeCroy scopes, got used to mainly to Tektronix, first the analog 454 for decades, then a digital TDS220 and now an OWON).
@pomodoro, sorry for my mistake on the scope shots on the DC values. Still there has to be a resultant DC average for the waveform to cause attraction for the metal foil or some repulsive thrust for the fingers. 8)
Unfortunately, the two scopeshots are not indicated which test points they were taken at. Or are they? have not found reference.
Gyula
-
The schematic for the Diathermy Machine is missing the four (4) spark gaps in shunt with the High voltage transformer secondary. These missing components are the result of a drafting error.
Eric Dollard says there are historical corrections that need to be made to this text, but we didn’t have time to make these at the conference. As soon as this information is available a revised document will be provided. So take the history of this device with a grain of salt for now.
So.... is it "soon" yet? Where is the revised and corrected document, does anybody know?
The scope traces are taken directly from the Diathermy Machine between the “Indifferent (Ground)” and the “High” terminals using a LeCroy 7kV 1000X 100 Meg Probe. These output connections are from the Diathermy Machine’s Tesla Coil Primary. The internal Tesla secondary was not used. Even though no current was taken from the Tesla secondary it still impacts the natural output frequency. In a dark room streamers from the Tesla terminal can be seen.
For most of the conference the IB22 Spark Tubes were shorted across because the tubes appear to have melted portions in their outer walls. It was the intent to tune the system to the natural frequency of the Diathermy machine. The initial capacitance of the two vacuum capacitor banks was 700 pF for the Left Wagon Wheel and 718 pF for the Right Wagon Wheel. Some minor adjustments were made during the conference
Mark McKay, PE
Which doesn't help much since the schematic for the Diathermy machine is incorrect and incomplete. So, really, the scopeshots are meaningless and misleading, but are just there to make Dollard's sheeple go "ooh" and "ah...".
Don't you just love it when people use many thousands of dollards... er, sorry, dollars worth of fancy equipment to produce meaningless and uninterpretable data?
I think that "grain of salt" has to be a pretty huge crystal of rock salt.
-
The problem is not that Dollard "tries to deceive" anyone. He just uses his own terminology and makes a few mistakes. All electrical phenomena can be deduced by the ampere and coulomb forces. Every other needlessly fancy or complex explanation is bogus.
I agree with the latter part of your statement... but.... Do you know the full history of Eric Dollard? I think the deliberate deceptions he has been involved with are clearly documented. Follow the money....
-
I've just made some tests with a simple "Kacher" circuit exciter-type SSTC and it definitely attracts a strip of lightweight aluminum foil, just as I suspected it would. Both to the secondary coil itself, and to a lightbulb load connected to the top of the coil. This is most definitely an AC system. The reason for the attraction is electrostatic, just as the plates of a capacitor are drawn together, even if the cap is charged with AC: the plates are oppositely charged and so are drawn together. This is the principle of the common electrostatic voltmeter, after all, which works for both AC and DC high voltages.
http://www.elect.mrt.ac.lk/HV_Chap6.pdf
-
TK I just did the same with an Electrotechnics BD10A 500khz coil and there was no attraction of the Al foil to the output terminal of 25-50kV. Strange.
But then when the terminal discharges through a 25w long vacuum filled globe to earth it has enough power to slightly heat the filament to a little redness. Putting my hand around the tube a force is feflt and the filament moves towards my hand , ( or away, not sure) oscillating with the primary spark discharge. No attraction to the tube by foil either, the foil is dangling from cotton thread. Perhaps I should use conducting thread and earth or hold it to increase its capacitance.
-
Yes, my foil strip or sheet was hanging from a bamboo chopstick, which I held in my hand. These chopsticks are very slightly conductive to HV, so my foil was resistively coupled to my body which is then coupled capacitively to ground. Maybe that accounts for the difference.
-
Hi TinselKoala,
Unfortunately I did not read through the comments under the scope shots so did not notice Mark McKay's "explanations" on the scope shots, thanks for quoting it (I went through the full text above the scope shots only).
Thanks also for mentioning the electrostatic voltmeter, indeed it works for both DC and AC HV too.
I quote from wiki because for me it is always a good thing to brush up old info/knowledge I tend to forget:
"Principle of operation
Electrostatic voltmeter utilizes the attraction force between two charged surfaces to create a deflection of a pointer directly calibrated in volts. Since the attraction force is the same regardless of the polarity of the charged surfaces (as long as the charge is opposite), the electrostatic voltmeter can measure both direct current and alternating current."
(from link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrostatic_voltmeter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrostatic_voltmeter) )
Gyula
-
I also tested the foil attracted to the Tesla Coils elevated capacitance and light bulb, I think I also tried with paper and from memory that was also attracted. I didn't find it all that odd or anything and just dismissed the effect as the same effect as two oppositely charged plates attracting. The attraction using AC could be a result similar to that of a Universal motor where applied AC turns the motor the same way regardless of the input connections being swapped.
As far as the "subjective" reports of feeling a pressure pushing back on a humans hand I say so what, big fizz, even if there is a repulsive force I don't think it means much.
TK, did you try paper to see if it is attracted and if not what is your prediction for what will happen.
When I tried the foil I had it suspended from a wooden stick and left my body out of it as the voltage was way too high.
I find that people just saying they feel a repulsive force is not scientific, the humans nervous system could be fooled by the electrical effects and just think it feels a pushing force,
They should put together an analogue human and measure an effect.
..
-
I think a similar effect is explained from about 7:16 minutes in the linked video lecture. To get the context the first part of the video must be watched as well as he was talking about Benjamin Franklin and some early history of the discoveries of electricity ect. .
Lec 01: What holds our world together? | 8.02 Electricity and Magnetism, Spring 2002 (Walter Lewin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lx64cq0HeXY
I would also draw attention to figure 2., of the linked Patent Drawing below, from One of Tesla's patents..
Here is a section of the patent referring to the two plates.
In illustration of a particular form of apparatus which may be used in carrying out my discovery I now refer to Fig. 2. In this figure, which in the general arrangement of the elements‘ is identical to Fig. 1, the device at is shown as com posed of two very thin con ducting-plates 2ft’, placed in close proximity and very mobile, either by reason of extreme flexibility or owing to the character of their support. To improve their action, they should be inclosed in a receptacle, from which the ‘air may be exhausted. The plates 25 t’ are connected in series with a working circuit, including a suitable receiver, which in this case is shown as consisting of an electromagnet M, a movable armature a, a retractile spring I), and a ratchet-wheel 10, provided with a spring-pawl 11, which is pivoted to armature a, as illustrated. When the radiations of the sun or other radiant source fall upon plate P, a current flows into the con denser, as above explained, until the potential therein rises sufficiently to attract and bring into contact the two plates 25 t’, and thereby close the circuit connected to the two condenser-terminals. This permits a flow of current which energizes the magnet M, causing it to draw down the armature a and impart a- partial rotation to the ratchet-Wheel to. As the current ceases the armature is retracted by the spring Z), without, however, moving the wheel to. With the stoppage of the current the plates t t’ cease to be attracted and separate, thus restoring the circuit to its original condition.
https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pages/US685957-0.png
Patent link.
https://www.google.com/patents/US685957
Nothing new it seems.
-
Hi Farmhand, thanks for the links, that lecture was good to watch. The lecturer was great at explaining stuff, and yes, static is responsible, but Dollard and Co, produced it not by rubbing, but by ionizing.
. .The ' Dollard Lindemann effect' ;D ;D
I was wondering how that cap was being charged with HF AC from the tesla coil at a distance. Unless he held the opposite end of the cap through a hidden diode it could never charge to a high voltage, not only that but because it was only capacitively coupled trough probably a pF or two to the bulb it would never get much of a voltage developed anyhow. I was thinking of 'Dollard Lindemann Rays'. Then it hit me!
I'm 99% certain that Dollard and the other goof were actually making Xrays. Xrays are capable of ionizing air and probably other material. That would explain the capacitor charging up while Dollard held the other cap terminal, essentially grounding it. That was the reason why he specified vacuum bulbs, not the normal argon filled ones. Xrays were generated when the electrons from the hot filament hit the glass at high speed.
I'm going to replicate the experiment soon, with a Geiger Counter and Fluorescing material near the buld, to see if that is what was going on. There is no need for all that fancy pancake coil stuff. You just need a hot filament and some 40-50kV potential. Even HV AC from a small Tesla coil discharging into a cold vacuum bulb can give Xrays during one half cycle! The fact that Dollard was honest about the vacuum bulb, means that he probably was not trying to fool viewers back then, but the fact that he and the other two 'expert' physicists were salivating at their 'discovery' all the while not realizing that it was due to X-rays is quite frankly shocking.
If indeed it is due to Xrays, then his later replication in 2011 is unforgivable.He would have known by then, and exposed all those people to weak, but still potentially dangerous levels of radiation.
-
pomodoro (http://overunity.com/profile/pomodoro.13316/),
I have also always thought that they were just generation x-rays. One end of filament is at ground and the other is at 50KV AC. That is enough voltage to pull electrons from the wire but not enough to pull the positive atoms from the wire. This creates a 50K electron accelerator that slams electron into the other end of the filament which is a very hard metal. This is how x-rays are produced in dental office.
-
Well he is holding one terminal of a capacitor while grounded while the other terminal and the plate it is attached to is isolated close to an electric field and a flow of current ect. isn't he ? Wouldn't the electrical effects in/around the wires and even from the coil cause the capacitor plate closest to the setup to be charged opposite to the polarity of the field ?
And if the other plate is grounded through Eric then unless the setup was shut off at the Zero volt crossing point the capacitor would have some charge on it.
Any ring down would be damped by the load.
Given the size of the capacitor and the voltage required to get the effect he shows we should be able to calculate the charge on the capacitor an then understand what it would take to get it there.
Anyone remember what size the cap was ? Curiosity has got me, I will watch it again.
-
OK the first thing I notice is the copper strip actually sticks to the glass of the bulb well after the power is shut off.
The second thing is that he is comparing 60 Hz 115 volts AC to many kHz and several thousand volts AC. He would need to compare the Tesla coil output to the output from a regular HF transformer at the same frequency and voltage to show a "special effect" different from regular HF HV AC.
Third thing is simply running the current past the copper strip is depriving the plate of a near equal area to be attracted to.
A good experiment would be to test if the bulb is needed to attract the copper strip, what could be tried is a piece of glass with a resistive conductor across the back side away from the copper strip as well as just a metallic plate made to have a similar resistance to keep the voltage about right across it or some other alternative load that takes away the vacuum bulb.
Fourth thing is that the charging of the capacitor from the light bulb failed (at least once) for no good reason.
Fifth thing is that the capacitor was charged a bit from the wire even though it has much less area than the bulb.
The transmission to the beach is nothing special either, nor is the wireless transmission of pulsed DC over a distance of a foot or so.
All in all I don't see anything special in the video except the various power supplies, I would like to have those.
Here's a clip of my setup lighting a 25 watt bulb from the output coil of the "unpowered" transformer on the right while at the same time throwing a nice arc/spark from the top of the unpowered transformer back towards the top of the transformer that is powered. They are not identical as can be seen but simply tuned near the same resonant frequency. It screams because the resonant frequency is over 700 kHz. I rigged a break out point on the top of the unpowered transformer to let out the power and let more in at the input. hehe Still input is less than 600 Watts. Expensive and noisy way to light a bulb but fun to watch the sparks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVx1FzLFFXc
I don't have an area safe where I am permitted to use that transformer, it interferes with stuff and even destroys some electronic stuff if I use it too close to things. Otherwise I would fix the broken spark gap rotor and do some experiments.
.
-
Nice, but yours may not act like Dollard's unless your low voltage secondary still has 30+KV on it and it is a vacuum bulb. Dollard connected the bulb to the secondary of the driven coil, used a suspect 'loading coil', and connected the other end of the bulb to the undriven HV coil . I suspect that this second coil is not necessary, any large conductor or earth would do instead, just like is used for single wire transmission of power. He has done nothing like Tesla did, but claims to be the only man to have replicated Tesla's work properly.
-
Well that wasn't a demonstration of an attempt at the Dollard experiment, just showing my transformer, it produces several hundred thousand volts at the top terminal unloaded.
If I wanted 30 + KV to do the experiment using that transformer I would need to use the second transformer to step down the HV to the desired voltage, which is just a matter of winding a different output coil for the second transformer and tuning it, then the bulb could have several thousand volts across it. But it would be safer and better to design and build transformer for the voltage desired.
As a general rule I don't follow Dollard or replicate his demonstrations.
-
How many volts did you wind the secondary for in that experiment?
-
OK the first thing I notice is the copper strip actually sticks to the glass of the bulb well after the power is shut off.
.
I think the x-rays are pushing electrons out of the foil as a result of high energy collisions. This leaves the foil with a static positive charge. The foil sticks to objects just like a strip of paper with a static charge sticks to things.
Just my guess. I have not done the experiment.
-
In the video below, a small HV RF vacuum leak tester generates xrays by simply discharging a spark into an unlit bulb. Field emission of electrons is all that is required, but imagine with thermionic emission on top of that, when the filament is glowing...Lindemann is lucky to have his hand still attached to his arm. ;D
https://youtu.be/af8wnm2eGWw
-
I have just replicated this part of Eric's experiment successfully!!
The video will be on youtube quite soon.
I will post the link when ready.
Keep an eye out ,its a shocker :o :o :o :o :o !
Naughty Eric....
-
Here is the link to the Video.
https://youtu.be/5gcwvPcEi2k
As you will see, its not too hard to replicate on a small scale.
8)
-
Very well done. It makes perfect sense to me. I was thinking x-rays about half way through your video...holy crap...how dangerous is that?
I hope many people watch your video.
Bill
-
Thanks Bill.
Hey its awfully quiet here. Where are the Dollard supporters?
-
Fellow researchers, the second video of the Dollard experiment has been uploaded yesterday. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Als9E0lntec
-
Sir
Your experiments have been very intriguing ,as well as a wonderful service to experimenters and how caution needs to be a part of their test protocol for safety sake.
This last one is not booting from the link posted here [at least not for me ??]
EDIT it is working for me now .
I did see you mentioned a special badge/detector and exposing it to this event ?
here
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/20402-dont-attempt-radiant-energy-experiment.html
have you had any report on that result yet ?
respectfully
Chet
-
pomodoro,
I am not convinced that there are x-rays produced in your experiment.
You need to totally shield the geiger-counter in a closed faraday-cage. The strong oscillating electric field causes
electrostaic induction which also affects the inner eletronics of the geiger-counter. If there would be x-rays , can they pass the aluminium-barrier ?.Is a geiger-counter sensitive to x-rays ( cross-sensitivity ) ? I do not know.
But first shield the whole geiger device with a cage. Put the counter-tube including the Box with the electronic into it.
I know its a lot of work to buiild a farady-cage in a correct way but this is a necessary step before you jump to conclusions.
Anyway.. good work
Regards
Kator01
-
Hi Kator, unfortunately I don't have time to do any more regarding this experiment but I understand your reasoning.
However, I have done as much as I can to show that a long wire as well as a long conducting fluoro tube connected to the coil do not emit enough field to show any counts on the research grade Geiger, which is housed in a metal box and has a metal tube holder and kept about 3 feet away. I do get counts when the tube is placed two inches from the coil, but not when three feet away. Only when this special bulb is connected do I then get counts. Also, the fact that the thick lead, positioned only in front of the geiger tube stops the counts but the other metal, aluminum, in the same position does nothing, to me indicates that it is not voltage spikes that are triggering any counts. I think a few people should repeat this experiment with 50kV or more , if they get my results then at some stage put the geiger in a microwave oven as a Faraday cage. I guess they should put a radio in there first to see if it blocks RF.
I use 35kV on my Xray diffractometer and get enough Xrays for a good scan, so 50kV can produce them.
In a week or two I shall get results from the badge that was exposed for 45 seconds two feet away, then I will be 100% sure, but at the moment I'm 95%.
Cheers Pomo.
-
Sir
Your experiments have been very intriguing ,as well as a wonderful service to experimenters and how caution needs to be a part of their test protocol for safety sake.
This last one is not booting from the link posted here [at least not for me ??]
EDIT it is working for me now .
I did see you mentioned a special badge/detector and exposing it to this event ?
here
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/20402-dont-attempt-radiant-energy-experiment.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/20402-dont-attempt-radiant-energy-experiment.html)
have you had any report on that result yet ?
respectfully
Chet
Hi Chet, no results, as I sent it off only yesterday. I forgot to put the dangling foil near it , so the intensity will be a bit lower, but from afar I saw the geiger register many counts. The photo is deceptive, there are two feet from the badge to the tube.
-
Pomodoro,
concerning the normal fluorescent light ( Neon ) This is a Neon-Gas fill tube at almost athmospheric pressure while the
small bulb is at very low pressure.
I have an old german physics-textbook ( Grimsehl-Tomaschek, 1940) in which many experiments are shown , ie. what kind
of radiation is obsereved and measured, depending on the level of pressure. They would feed in High Voltage in the
Kilohertz range and then systematically reduced the pressure in longer tubes. So with these expermiments they identified
different kinds of rays, one of which is the Kathode-Ray-Beam which hits the Anode-Plate and if there are holes in the
Anode-Plate, these Rays pass trough the holes beyond the Anode and create fluorescence while hitting the glass behind
the Anode. At a certain strengh of the electric field which accellerated the electrons, x-rays occur.
What are the conditions vor x-rasy to occur . See here at paragraph "Production by electrons" the list of anode-material to
be used.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray)
The electron-beam must have enough energy for creating "Bremsstrahlung" if it hits the Anode ( Kathode-Ray hits
Anode-material, so there needs to be a longer path the electrons have to travel along in order to reach the respective
kinetic energy.
Question: Where is the Anode in this little Bulb for X-rays to occur ? There is none so something different is going on
here and I have no idea what it is. What I assume is a plasma and oscillations within the plasma.
I am sure that Eric and Lindermann knew about the conditions for X-rays to occur since Mr. Röntgen discovered these
rays in 1895 ( !! ) and all the knowledge was published and known for almost 80 years. They did not expose the audiance
to x-rays in a careless way, certainly not.
Now back to the Faraday-Cage:
The metal box of your Geiger-Counter is :
1) open at the front where the analog instrument ( Galvanometer ) in built in
2) the metal box is grounded, ie. connected with the earth-wire
Both condition inhibit the functionality of a Faraday-Cage. because it is crucial to the function of shielding electric
frequencies that the cage is fully closed ( no opening) and not grounded.
This is the reason why I proposed that you place the whole Geiger-Apparatus in a Faraday-Cage.
Trust me, I have some practical experience with shielding-problems. It sometimes drives you crazy especially at high
voltage.
If you have the time this here can be of interest, a phenomenon which a older radio-professional discovered. Imagine that this
Plasmon-Oscillation occurs at 230 V and what can happen if you feed in 14 Kilovolt at 30 000 Hz... ?
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http://www.radiomuseum.org/forum/gluehlampe_als_ukw_stoersender.html?language_id=6&hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 (http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http://www.radiomuseum.org/forum/gluehlampe_als_ukw_stoersender.html?language_id=6&hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8)
Take care
Kator01
-
Wow, how did you find that great article?? You have awesome skills in finding good stuff on the web! Its a very interesting article.
The normal fluoro light is the mercury one, which is at the relatively low vapor pressure of mercury. It functions as a good antenna since
it has a low resistance when the plasma is generated by the testa coil. Still, no counts were registered!
Because of the relatively high pressure, electrons can't be accelerated enough, as they keep hitting mercury atoms, so no Xrays. For Xrays in a cold cathode, you need some atoms of gas but not many. Here you still get the necessary ionization of the gas, where the heavy ionized gas hits the cathode to produce secondary electrons, but the mean free path of the electrons is much greater, as the vacuum is low, and they can strike the glass with great speed.
Although silicon has a low atomic weight, the Bremsstrahlung will still have a range of energy with a certain low cutoff, but a maximum equal to the maximum kV of the coil. The low atomic weight will affect the intensity but not the energy.
You must have read articles such as the one below below, which detail Tesla's unipolar
vacuum tube for Xrays. It only has one electrode, but he managed to make better Xray photos than those of Roentgen.
http://pubs.rsna.org/doi/full/10.1148/rg.284075206
There is not much difference with the bulb we have. The anode is the glass or the metallic plate when placed near the glass. The cathode is the filament. Of course it will only work with high voltage AC in the 30+ kV range.
Kator, until the badge results are back there is doubt for sure.
Are you able to replicate this experiment? I'd love to see others with HV equipment trying it. I bet one of those ZVS flybacks with 50kV or more could do it too.
Cheers
Pomo
-
Hey hey hey pomodoro,
you are a good researcher too ! Great find ! I didt know this.
Röntgen had no clue even after 5 years when he himself stumbled on these rays! His Letter to Tesla is a total capitulation.
If you understand german language you will notice his humble attitude towards Tesla.
And I have to say: thats a darn good foto of his foot. Shoes at that time have certainly survived 10 years or more. Did you notice the multiple nails driven into the heels ?
This makes the subject serious. Unfortunately I have no means at the present time to replicate.
Still on mystery remains: the attracting force.
Take care
Kator01
-
I had the chance to run the experiment again with a new style of radiation badge. The badge had shown zero uSv cumulative for the last year.
After a short one minute exposure at a distance of 40cm from the tube the results came back as having received 120uSv! . That's anywhere from 1 to 6 chest x rays worth , depending on the site you look at.
Not worth the risk as far as I am concerned.
-
Excellent observation and advice [make sure you know the danger]..
being able to see this in real time is very very important to persons experimenting and people around them.
Thx
Chet
-
Excellent observation and advice [make sure you know the danger]..
being able to see this in real time is very very important to persons experimenting and people around them.
Thx
Chet
No probs, Just did another two tests at different locations to the tube , I'll report on those when results come back. Ultimately, its best to do these experiments by walking far away from the tube when there is HV on it. I sure hope nobody has spent hours in front of a vacuum tube with a Tesla coil on it.
-
Its hard to imagine all the possible ways that we could get some dangerous emissions while experimenting.
when even just the Static field [or is it? can make these emissions
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vRHnZfeiF8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQBjRF9mX1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLvzvwQFKfI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zMKZiPdkPA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uuhM_tio50
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o408A1teERQ
and whether or not its similar... a light bulb [Vacuum tube??] and Tesla Coil experiments ?
TinselKoala very recently [after reading your warning]
mentioned perhaps these
https://www.amazon.com/RADEX-RD1503-Dosimeter-Outdoor-Version/dp/B01M7PTJCS/ref=sr_1_20?ie=UTF8&qid=1498602471&sr=8-20&keywords=xray+detector
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Geiger-Counter-Beta-Gamma-X-ray-Nuclear-Radiation-tube-Detector-Dosimeter-Tester/382033888452?_trksid=p2045573.c100505.m3226&_trkparms=aid%3D555014%26algo%3DPL.DEFAULT%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D41376%26meid%3D525ee8a586e042919bedcb947d3bafc9%26pid%3D100505%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D1%26
-
A lighbulb is mostly safe. Need reasonably good vacuum inside bulb. Bulbs with vertical filaments are usually vacuum = danger , horizontal ones are argon filled= safe. A proper electronic vacuum tube probably safe unless the filament is energised as some air molecules are required for initial ionization. I used the long filament as Dollard did as I suspected it had vacuum , not argon. Its easy to tell, the tesla spark easily sparks thru the gas if its an argon type, but you get no internal sparks to the glass from the filament for the vacuum types.
Remember, the dosimeter badge was 40cm away, a reasonable distance. If someone's hands or head is near the bulb they could get heaps more radiation
Those dosimeters in the links are OK but being electronic could give false alarms. i would build a lead box and a magnetic steel box. If the alarm goes off when in the steel box but is considerably less in the lead box, then yes, there is cause for alarm. My old videos show that a normal fluoro tube gives no reading on the geiger counter, in other words the geiger was far enough not to be giving false signals from the tesla, but replacing the fluore with the special bulb gave the beautiful attraction of the foil and also gave many xrays. I'm amazed nobody tried replicating it, as the attractiopn of the foil to the glass is quite amazing. I used to think about it for years after seeing Dollards video.
-
Yes the Dollard Videos are something to see indeed, must be amazing to see in real life.. another amazing thing which has been on the table of late is the Corum bros ball lightening experiments .
I honestly was unaware this effect could be replicated until Tinsel Mentioned them and their work with ball lightning .
will take more than a few cheeseburgers to tempt him into that replication...
also to note the MO for the ball lightning effect shares similarities with some OU claims ,two frequencies mixing into a third harmonic
which produces a very strong effect ?
Dr.Jones [member physicsprof] shared this detector [below] which he is pleased with [so far]
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3472.msg63066;topicseen#msg63066
being able to qualify the effectiveness of these inexpensive units against commercial grade detection would be nice to see.
and your suggestions above are important when known events are possible on the bench.
-
I see one link above doesn't go thru
Dr.Jones recommended unit
-
Well results are back.
One dosimeter badge came back with no reading, but the other copped 70uSv for the 40 second exposure, or 105uSv if i had left it for 60 secs like the other. This is hp(10) readings, which means deep 1cm penetration into the body.
if you are fooling around with sparks an inch or more long, and with those old school bulbs that don't arc internally (no argon) , watch out! Hard vacuum might be OK, but who knows.