GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Plug Heater

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 501815
  • *Total Topics: 14978
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 16
  • *Total: 18

Author Topic: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit  (Read 59939 times)

Offline tim123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #15 on: December 13, 2013, 03:42:28 PM »
Hi Tim
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schumann_resonances

Hi Groundloop,
  ok, found it:

"The real Earth–ionosphere waveguide is not a perfect electromagnetic resonant cavity. Losses due to finite ionosphere electrical conductivity lower the propagation speed of electromagnetic signals in the cavity, resulting in a resonance frequency that is lower than would be expected in an ideal case, "

Oh, no that's back to front... 7.83 is a higher frequency than 7.14. Hmmm, so - no that's not it then...

Which part of the page do you think explains the phenomena?

Regards, Tim

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #15 on: December 13, 2013, 03:42:28 PM »

Offline Groundloop

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1738
Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #16 on: December 13, 2013, 07:44:09 PM »
Hi Groundloop,
  ok, found it:

"The real Earth–ionosphere waveguide is not a perfect electromagnetic resonant cavity. Losses due to finite ionosphere electrical conductivity lower the propagation speed of electromagnetic signals in the cavity, resulting in a resonance frequency that is lower than would be expected in an ideal case, "

Oh, no that's back to front... 7.83 is a higher frequency than 7.14. Hmmm, so - no that's not it then...

Which part of the page do you think explains the phenomena?

Regards, Tim

Tim,

Consider the distance between earth surface and the top of the Ionosphere as a waveguide.
Then use your math to find the frequency based on the thickness of the waveguide.

GL.

Offline tim123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #17 on: December 13, 2013, 08:29:19 PM »
Tim,
Consider the distance between earth surface and the top of the Ionosphere as a waveguide.
Then use your math to find the frequency based on the thickness of the waveguide.

Hi GL,
  - distance between earth surface and the top of the Ionosphere  = 600Km
 - a waveguide of 600 Km has a cutoff frequency of about 250Hz

I'm no wiser... Would you mind giving a full explanation?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #17 on: December 13, 2013, 08:29:19 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Groundloop

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1738
Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #18 on: December 14, 2013, 09:13:00 AM »
Hi GL,
  - distance between earth surface and the top of the Ionosphere  = 600Km
 - a waveguide of 600 Km has a cutoff frequency of about 250Hz

I'm no wiser... Would you mind giving a full explanation?

Hi Tim,

Quote:

"The fundamental mode frequency for Schumann resonance
is a standing wave in the Earth–ionosphere cavity with
a wavelength equal to the circumference of the Earth."

End quote.

My personal view is that the above conclusion is not correct.
I do not think that the cavity theory explains the observed reality.

The theoretical frequency is found to be 7,48Hz.

(The circumference of the earth at the equator is 40075,16 kilometers.
Speed of light, c = 299792458 meters per second.
Frequency = 299792458 / 40075160 = 7,48 Hz.)

The real frequency measured is 7,83Hz. When a real measurement
is different from the predicted theoretical value, then one must
conclude that the theory is wrong.

My theory is that the observed frequency is the result of reflections
of radio frequency energy from the different layers in the Ionosphere
and that some ELF frequencies more easy can be reflected.

So the RF energy from the lightning is radiated away, and most of
the RF is converted to heat by atmospheric damping. For some frequencies
the damping is less and the signal can be reflected back and forth between
the layers. This frequency happens to be 7,83Hz.

I have not studied the Schumann resonance in detail, and I'm not a Phd.
Maybe some other forum members can offer a explanation to why the
measured result frequency is different from the predicted one.

GL.

Offline tim123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #19 on: December 14, 2013, 12:54:03 PM »
When a real measurement is different from the predicted theoretical value, then one must
conclude that the theory is wrong.

Agreed.

I like your theory, but the observed frequency remains something of a mystery...

I suppose I'll just have to put it on the back-burner, and see what turns up...

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #19 on: December 14, 2013, 12:54:03 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Groundloop

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1738
Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #20 on: December 14, 2013, 01:19:18 PM »
Agreed.

I like your theory, but the observed frequency remains something of a mystery...

I suppose I'll just have to put it on the back-burner, and see what turns up...

Tim,

Yea, you probably have to ask a person that have extensive knowledge about
wave guide theory, wave theory, transmission lines theory, cavity resonators etc.

On a more humorous note, maybe we got the speed of light wrong? :-)
Or maybe we got the size measurement of the Earth wrong? :-)

Change one or both and the math will confirm the actual measurement. :-)

GL.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13818
Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #21 on: December 14, 2013, 08:58:39 PM »
Quote
(The circumference of the earth at the equator is 40075,16 kilometers.
Speed of light, c = 299792458 meters per second.
Frequency = 299792458 / 40075160 = 7,48 Hz.)

The real frequency measured is 7,83Hz. When a real measurement
is different from the predicted theoretical value, then one must
conclude that the theory is wrong
.

Really? Can't you think of any other reasons why a 'real measurement' could differ from a predicted theoretical value by less than 5 percent?


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #21 on: December 14, 2013, 08:58:39 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline tim123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #22 on: December 14, 2013, 09:18:42 PM »
Really? Can't you think of any other reasons why a 'real measurement' could differ from a predicted theoretical value by less than 5 percent?

Hi TK,
  I am still mystified as to how the fundamental can be at 7.83Hz, given that wavelength is smaller than the earth's diameter...

Any ideas?

Regards, Tim

Offline elementSix

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 356
Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #23 on: December 14, 2013, 09:20:14 PM »
To suck the lightning energy from the ground, you use a Resonant Impulse wave Generator, with the one side of the secondary connected to a good earth ground, and the other side of the coil to your output device.  HV DC is the only way to create impulse waves that work the right way to suck that energy from the ground.  Very abrupt Unidirectional Impulse currents , Make and Breaks.  Real Tesla Coils use HV DC in a resonant tank.  If current is consummed in the resonant tank, then the device won't work right. 

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #23 on: December 14, 2013, 09:20:14 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline tim123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #24 on: December 14, 2013, 09:33:22 PM »
I actually wanted to try creating a resonant antenna around part of the garden - tuned to a harmonic of 7.83 - to see if it helped things to grow... I've read that it does.

I've been working on making deep-tone wind chimes too - also tuned. Also been playing with powered chimes...

I think there's energy to be harvested - if you can set up an earth resonance. And I think it has health benefits too... Probably. :)



Offline tim123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #25 on: December 16, 2013, 06:13:27 PM »
I strung out about 70m of wire in the garden earlier on. Wow, it's interesting!

I bought the DSO scope - because I knew it could do spectrum analysis - and I'm not disappointed.

I've got a strong peak at about 10Hz, and again at 20Hz. I'm not sure how accurate the scope is - but it seems to find the mains at 49.9Hz ok.

How cool is that? :)


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #25 on: December 16, 2013, 06:13:27 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline tim123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #26 on: December 16, 2013, 07:09:02 PM »
Interesting peaks at 3, 6 and 9 Khz, with 9 Khz dominant. It peaks as high as the <50Hz range...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very_low_frequency

"The frequency range below 9 kHz is not allocated by the International Telecommunication Union and may be used in some nations license-free."

Offline thx1138

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 89
Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #27 on: December 23, 2013, 02:57:15 PM »
Hi TK,
  I am still mystified as to how the fundamental can be at 7.83Hz, given that wavelength is smaller than the earth's diameter...

Any ideas?

Regards, Tim
I think the essence of your problem is that you are looking as the waveguide as a static entity while, in reality, there isn't anything static about it. Not only is the earth not round but different areas have different attributes and properties, i.e. mountains vs oceans. The ionosphere is not round or fixed either but pulsates with the pressure of the solar wind compressing and relaxing the magnetic field of the earth and while this is happening the earth with all of its surface irregularities is rotating inside that magnetic field and inside the ionosphere. The magnetic field also fluctuates due to variations in the Coriolis effect which affects the outer liquid metal core around the solid metal inner core of the earth. And at the same time the moon is tugging the surface of the oceans this way and that. A complex system to say the least.
 
I've been studying Dr. Tesla's work for the last few years and one of the things it inevitably leads to is a study of geophysics which didn't even exist as a science in his time yet that's what he was doing more or less. One of his goals at Colorado Springs was to determine the laws of propagation of currents through the earth and the atmosphere. His patent for the transmission of industrial scale power through the "natural media" stated that it would be accomplished between balloons at 30,000 feet. He did a demonstration for the patent examiner in his laboratory using a long evacuated tube to simulate the rarefied atmnosphere at that altitude. Another facet of that idea is that the air is not only rarefied at that altitude but it is also very cold which also enhances conductivity. He stated oiver and over that his method used conduction, not induction.
 
That was before he went to Colorado Springs. Early in Colorado Springs notes there is an entry about extraction of hydrogen from the air. Although not specifically stated, we can assume this was to maintain the ballons at altitude.
 
But on July 4, 1899 he made observations about lightning on the plains of Colorado that changed his entire perspective and when he built the Wardenclyffe tower it had extensive underground metal works. I contend that his idea was to generate the equivalent of lightning bolts with his Wardenclyffe device and pump the energy into the ground through the underground metal works.
 
An interesting note about this is that I've never seen anything where he attempted to maintain balloons at 30,000 feet to accomplish the transmission and that's just as well because he probably would have failed at that. The +250 MPH winds of the jet stream were unknown at the time and they reach into the 30,000 foot level which would make maintaining balloons at that level impossible.
 
If you want to study the Schumann resonance you'll need to spend quite a bit of time studying not only geophysics but also lightning itself. Very interesting stuff. I think that the unknowns still existing in the study of Schumann resonances could probably be resolved if the scientists studying them were to take a more multi-disipline approach and consider all of the things that affect the resonant cavity - from the sun and moon to the movement of the planet and the internal structure and forces that generate the magnetic field of the planet.
 
Someone in this thread mentioned if the speed of light were different it could make the calculations different. Note that we almost always say "the speed of light" but the full term is "the speed of light in a vacuum" which the surface/ionosphere cavity is not.
 
The attachment is my interpretation of what Wardenclyffe was intended to do and could also apply to teh Schumann frequency of natural lightning to some extent. I don't have the skills to do this in 3D but it should give you the idea. It's an animated GIF file so open it in your browser.
 
I'm not sure what happened when uploading the attachment but it doesn't work when downloaded from this site and it is a different size. It can be downloaded from here: http://www.filesnack.com/files/c7p5wi8p
« Last Edit: December 23, 2013, 06:07:00 PM by thx1138 »

Offline tim123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #28 on: December 24, 2013, 12:16:38 PM »
Someone in this thread mentioned if the speed of light were different it could make the calculations different. Note that we almost always say "the speed of light" but the full term is "the speed of light in a vacuum" which the surface/ionosphere cavity is not.

Hi thx1138,
  I did consider the speed of light as a variable, but it is at it's maximum in a vacuum, and the speed is less in air. That difference in speed is refractive index, so I read... A slower speed should give a lower frequency I think, not higher.

The speed of light in air: 299705000 m/s
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light

"the time for light to propagate completely around the Earth is of the order of 140 milliseconds. This transit time is what causes the Schumann resonance. "

BUT, from: http://www.calcresult.com/electronics/frequency.html

140 milliseconds, at 299705000 m/s, gives 7.14 Hz

7.83 Hz gives:
Period          = 127.7139208173691 mS - milliSeconds
Wavelength = 38276500.6385696 m

My own calcs came out the same. I still don't understand the difference...

Regards, Tim

Offline thx1138

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 89
Re: 7.8 Hertz Resonant Circuit
« Reply #29 on: December 26, 2013, 03:30:15 PM »
Tim123: You're looking at it too simplistically. How many things affect the propagation? Air density varies with different altitudes. Clouds are a different material than dry air. The shape of the waveguide is not uniform. Other lightning strikes will interfer either constructively or destructively with any particular previous puldse. The solar wind compresses and relaxes the ionosphere and the earth's magnetic field. etc.
 
"In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is." pretty much sums it up. As noted earlier, when there is a discrepancy between theory and actual measurements, use the actual measurements.

 

OneLink