PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
OverUnity Research > General - Free Energy Related > Miscellaneous Discussions (Moderator: Allcanadian) > Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters
2024-11-27, 00:23:18
News: If you have a suggestion or need for a new board title, please PM the Admins.
Please remember to keep topics and posts of the FE or casual nature. :)

Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters  (Read 4366 times)
Topic Options img
img  Allcanadian
Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « on: 2022-12-19, 21:41:04 »
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
Hakasays
Quote
Does anyone have proposed experiments or questions regarding Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters?  The discussion is probably worth an entire thread by itself.

Indeed, I know of countless experiments regarding single-wire, cold-cathode emitters. T.H. Moray, Paul Correa (PAGD), Bruce Perreault and many others.
I will start a moderated thread to keep the gaslighting and misdirection to a minimum.

AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
img  Allcanadian
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #1 on: 2022-12-19, 21:49:53 »
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
img  Allcanadian
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #2 on: 2022-12-19, 22:50:08 »
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
With respect to the Correa's work with PAGD here http://rexresearch.com/correa/correa.htm

When they speak Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharges there actually referring to two distinct phenomena. First an electrode sputtering effect or highly charged material ie. radiant matter ejected from an electrode. In my experiments I proved vacuum tubes are not even needed and can occur on open electrodes or sphere's under the right conditions. Second, autoelectronic emissions, field emission or radiant energy relating to longitudinal oscillations within a glow/corona discharge or plasma.

Relevant quotes...
Quote
Given the self-pulsing and self-producing characteristics of this discharge, we have termed this veritable regime of plasma discharge we have isolated in reactors with diverse geometries designed to optimalize it (and its volt-ampere characteristic), the emission-triggered Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge, or autogenous PAGD for short. The PAGD regime is an homeostatic structure (a fluctuating order) of cyclically recurring discontinuities. Reactors designed to operate in the PAGD region of plasma discharge constitute effective plasma pulse generators with diverse applications (85).

Quote
Unlike pseudospark switches, the PAGD events do not need to be triggered externally or by the interposition of third (trigger) electrodes, though they can be triggered inductively or "electrostatically" at prebreakdown potentials. They are in fact autogenous events where the observed emissions occur at low applied fields for quasi-regular periods, to generate quasi-regular cathode current jets.

Quote
The autogenous PAGD regime deploys extraordinarily large cathode reaction forces, associated with the rebound of anomalously accelerated ions striking the cathode and the anomalous ion counterflow (vaporized cathode metal and gas ions) being swept forward by the emitted electronic flux. The PAGD abnormal reaction forces depend on the intensity of the electronic-emission events that trigger the abnormal glow discharge, and are thus rather distinct from the externally pulsed, emission-independent abnormal glow discharges of the Manuel apparatus (73). In fact, these forces are virtually absent in externally pulsed flashover glow regimes, be they normal or abnormal.

It sounds really complex but is in fact a really easy experiment to setup so long as we understand what we want and what were looking for. I prefer a brute force high voltage/small time period VAD from a capacitor. This must eject charged matter from the surface in the smallest time period or it will not produce a discharge which is oscillatory in it's nature. It's really easy to understand and all were trying to do is use the small time period of the discharge to compress the plasma around the electrode producing oscillations. Think trying to ring a bell in the most efficient manner, it's not rocket science, hit it hard and hit it fast. It's basically a no brainer, if matter is not ejected and the plasma does not oscillate your doing it wrong...

The Correa's offer an easier option and were simply periodically/impulsively raising the voltage on an electrode in a vacuum tube. Within the voltage rise we produce a fast impulsive electrode sputtering effect which under the right conditions can also produce oscillations within the corona/plasma. This is most likely the "kick" Steven Marks was referring to because the plasma is now a conductor/oscillator much like a physical one. However unlike a physical conductor/oscillator our oscillator is made up of the fourth state of matter. Our conductor/oscillator can collapse in on itself and literally cease to exist. As Tesla implied think "wheels within wheels", oscillatory systems within systems and energy.

In my opinion this seems to validate what Tesla claimed, 'If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration.'

AC





---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
img  Allcanadian
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #3 on: 2022-12-20, 23:42:30 »
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
Gearing up for some disclosure in the new year and thought I would throw out another concept from Tesla...

"There is no energy in matter other than that received from the environment" — Nikola Tesla

I believe Tesla said this with respect to the age old problem of the Primary Fields (Electric, Magnetic, Gravic). You see, physics has no explanation for what a field is other than virtual particles popping in and out of existence from multiple parallel universes. It's a mouthful and basically on the same level as fairies and unicorns. As is often the case the physicists acquired a few facts then made the rest up as a wild theory which could never be proven.

In it's most basic form Tesla's claim is asking one question, what are the primary fields and how did they come about. Where did the energy come from to produce an electric field around particles like electrons and protons?. Obviously, if energy is conserved then the energy must have come from somewhere, where is that somewhere?.

At this point we have two options...
1)The particle created the field and it's energy from nothing and "acted on itself".
2)The particle was induced from external field(s) setting it in oscillation producing what we know as an electric field.

It does seem magnitudes more plausible than the nonsense of space/time and virtual particles popping in and out of existence from multiple parallel universes. So why is it most chose to dive headfirst into a rabbit hole of contradictions rather than accept space may not to empty?. It's the damnedest thing I have ever seen and seems to defy all logic and reason.

Let that sink in.... a majority of some of the supposedly most intelligent people have been duped into believing the universe is full of virtual particles popping in and out of existence from multiple parallel universes. One obvious point is that the supposed theory falls right in line with theism and the notion that "anything is possible". I mean if everything is virtual having no real existence in any supposed universe then anything is possible isn't it?.

Why if this is the case then nobody can say a free energy is impossible otherwise we can say they already claimed nothing is real and anything is possible. Hence the reason Tesla became the voice of reason nobody wanted to hear and said "There is no energy in matter other than that received from the environment". In effect Tesla claimed, these people are nut jobs and what there proposing is simply a clever variation on something from nothing. The same old story most have been peddling since the dawn of mankind.

AC








---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
img  Grumpy
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #4 on: 2022-12-21, 00:24:57 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Spherics said something similar:

Quote
Matter is nothing more than spherical stationary standing waves within the traveling ether! Already I hear the shutters closing. It is the ether that has the energy not the matter; it is the ether that is manipulated via torsion fields set up via electromagnetic fields; it is the ether that vortexes and is the essence of the electromagnetic field; it is the collapsing ether vortex that releases energy. The ether its self pulsates at extra-ordinary high frequency. It is this pulsing that feeds energy into the spherical standing waves, that is matter, that brings about all of the characteristics of an atom.

Too bad they didn't explain things further.
   
img  F6FLT
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #5 on: 2022-12-21, 13:38:24 »
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2072
"It is the ether that has the energy not the matter" :

This is really talking about nothing.

Energy in relation to what?
Have you already forgotten that energy depends on the reference frame?

And that's the main question: who cares if there's energy everywhere in relation to anything? What counts is the energy that can power an electric radiator when we are cold or a car engine when we want to move. It is in relation to our equipment that we need energy, and the question is how to obtain it.





---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
img  Hakasays
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #6 on: 2022-12-21, 14:11:34 »

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 568
Quote from: F6FLT
I've been hearing about "radiant energy" for years. It is a generic term in which everyone puts what they want. It can be X-rays as well as radio waves, near field waves, beta radiation, longitudinal waves...
When those who talk about "radiant energy" will be able to define what exactly they are talking about, I think they will have been replaced by real scientists.

If we are to follow high-quality sources like Tesla patents and original source materials, the 'radiant energy' (also called 'cosmic rays') would appear to be rays or particles that retain some overlapping properties with penetrating, ionizing radiation like X-rays but apparently more coherent and less dangerous.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US685958A/en
Quote
Tesla: "It is well known that certain radiation such as those of ultra-violet light, cathodic, Roentgen rays, or the likes-possess the property of charging and discharging conductors of electricity, the discharge being particularly noticeable when the conductor upon which the rays impinge is negatively electrified. These radiations are generally considered to be ether vibrations of extremely small wavelengths, and in explanation of the phenomena noted it has been assumed by some authorities that they ionize .or render conducting the atmosphere through which they are propagated. My own experiments and observations, however, lead me to conclusions more in accord with the theory heretofore advanced by me that sources of, such radiant energy throw off with great velocity minute particles of matter which are strongly electrified, and therefore capable of charging an electrical conductor, or even if not so may at any rate discharge an electrified conductor either -by carrying off bodily its charge or otherwise."


Quote from: F6FLT
Whether a very high voltage is channeled through a single wire or not, makes no difference. Very high voltages generate X-rays, it is commonplace, it is even a warning indicated in the maintenance manuals of CRT TVs and on EHV equipments

See my question posed recently to Griffin:
Quote
H: How was the original accidental discovery made?  Geiger counter triggering an impossible distance from a vacuum bulb?
G: It was after I applied HF HV to the tube, that a fluoroscope within the vicinity illuminated intensely. Applying my hand on its back-side gave a bright and clear image of my hand, to which I tried this at a distance of 6-7' away from the tube. Then came the geiger counter measurements at a distance.

Since then he reports he's detected the rays upwards of 70 feet away with the same apparatus. ??? :o  I wonder what power level and scale of medical/scientific X-ray machine would be required to achieve an equivalent result today?

Clearly we are dealing with different apparatus here.  If old televisions were emitting X-rays capable of illuminating phosphor screens several meters away with relatively minimal currents, I suspect it would have caused more concern for public health at the time.

The modern scientific community seems to have big problems with cold-cathode X-ray tubes, as evidenced in the earlier post:
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/603739/whats-the-issue-with-inventing-a-cold-cathode-x-ray-tube

Perhaps the reason they continue to have such difficulty is because they are locked into the two-electrode paradigm and have not considered single-wire currents as a possibility?


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
img  Grumpy
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #7 on: 2022-12-21, 15:08:30 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
This old patent talks about increasing the range of cathode rays using a Lenard Tube:
   
img  Allcanadian
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #8 on: 2022-12-22, 19:39:13 »
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
Hakasays
Quote
The modern scientific community seems to have big problems with cold-cathode X-ray tubes, as evidenced in the earlier post:
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/603739/whats-the-issue-with-inventing-a-cold-cathode-x-ray-tube

Perhaps the reason they continue to have such difficulty is because they are locked into the two-electrode paradigm and have not considered single-wire currents as a possibility?

I agree and one comment in your link seems relevant...
Quote
To generate X_Rays, you need to get electrons out of a wire (the cathode) into a vacuum. You need to accelerate them to high speed and then slam them into a thin metal target (the anode). The sudden stop makes them give off X-Rays.

Scotch tape can also generate X-rays and the actual process seems very easy to understand. Basically, we want an electrical disturbance with a very small time period to cause matter to vibrate and radiate EM waves within the X-ray spectrum. We can smash electrons into a target or pull scotch tape apart and have the opposite charges rapidly snap back together to produce the same effect.

I learned a few new tricks from my radiant energy/matter experiments which apply here. As we know, we can disturb matter causing it to vibrate and radiate EM waves. However we can also disturb matter causing it to move at high velocity away from the source while vibrating and radiating EM waves in itself. As such we have a group of particles acting as a motional source which seems to have confused many people.

They cannot understand how the EM waves traveled so far thinking it's improbable and there correct. The EM waves didn't travel far, the source radiating the EM waves was moving as it was radiating energy. So the confusion would seem to be a perceptual problem rather than a technical one again. I mean the solution seems obvious and all we would have to do is imagine "a part" of the source being ejected as it vibrates. Like ringing a bell so hard it shatters and all the ringing pieces are thrown outward ringing as they move away.

Very similar to the concept of EMP weapons. We produce a very large magnetic field in a conductor then explode the conductor. At which point all the pieces of the conductor become magnetic field carriers causing the field to rapidly expand. All we really did was liberate the molecular kinetic energy of the explosive and transform it into motional magnetic field energy. No energy can be lost or gained but it can be transformed in any number of ways. The trick would seem to be imagining all the countless ways a transformation could occur.

AC





---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
img  Hakasays
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #9 on: 2022-12-23, 13:42:02 »

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 568
Quote from: Allcanadian on 2022-12-22, 19:39:13
Hakasays
I agree and one comment in your link seems relevant...
Scotch tape can also generate X-rays and the actual process seems very easy to understand. Basically, we want an electrical disturbance with a very small time period to cause matter to vibrate and radiate EM waves within the X-ray spectrum. We can smash electrons into a target or pull scotch tape apart and have the opposite charges rapidly snap back together to produce the same effect.

I learned a few new tricks from my radiant energy/matter experiments which apply here. As we know, we can disturb matter causing it to vibrate and radiate EM waves. However we can also disturb matter causing it to move at high velocity away from the source while vibrating and radiating EM waves in itself. As such we have a group of particles acting as a motional source which seems to have confused many people.

Quote
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/603739/whats-the-issue-with-inventing-a-cold-cathode-x-ray-tube
   "To generate X_Rays, you need to get electrons out of a wire (the cathode) into a vacuum. You need to accelerate them to high speed and then slam them into a thin metal target (the anode). The sudden stop makes them give off X-Rays."

Thanks for the insight AC.  The name of the game in the short-term is working out experiments to characterize and map the rays emitted by these 'radiant energy' tubes.

As slight evidence to the single-plate acceleration+impact theory, Griffin notes yesterday the field also extends many feet in the opposite direction as well as forward.  Beam pattern is fairly directional akin to that of a Yagi.

Other near-term questions/problems to be solved:

* Characterizing the spectral emissions.  Are the emissions 'soft' (UV-band) X-rays or 'hard' (Gamma-band) X-rays?
* Characterizing the bandwidth.  Is it a single-frequency emission or a broadband emission that covers a wide spectrum?
* Characterizing the efficiency/power compared to 'conventional' hot cathode 2-wire beam tubes.  This efficiency seems like it is off-the-charts as shadowgraphs can be taken 20-30ft away with no optimizations.
* Characterizing/Isolating the rays from conventional EM emissions.  Tesla later dubbed these 'cosmic rays' and they may have some unexpected properties compared to normal X-rays.   Tesla believed his rays from these to be safe (or at least safer than Roentgen's).    Perhaps these are coherent rays much like laser emissions that have never been studied in this band?  Or perhaps it is not an X-ray at all, but a low frequency RF emission closer to UV or microwaves that are somehow able to penetrate tissue and metallic bodies.


Other notes:

* Testing different phosphorescent powders will give us some clue as to whether the rays are closer to UV or X rays.  I've helped supply some material to support this.
* Building a detector that can output directly to an oscilloscope.  That will tell us if the waves emitted are:   Continuous, Half-wave rectified (only positive half of each cycle), or Full-wave rectified.  It will also tell us what phase relation the emissions have to the input power.
* It was confirmed yesterday that solar cells are not affected at all by these rays.
* It was confirmed that magnetic and electrostatic fields will only affect+steer the beam in-tube, not in open air (a preliminary test had suggested otherwise)
* An accurate dosimeter is onhand, and I suggested using increasing layers of aluminum foil and charting the output vs aluminum thickness.  That would give us a good idea as to the center freq of the emitted rays.
* The rays will attract thin strips of metal analogous to Dollard's 1980's Borderlands experiments and Dr. Adrian Marsh's replications in 2019 and 2020:
https://www.am-innovations.com/category/experiments/experiments-displacement/
* Dielectric film (tape) appears to be unaffected by the rays, also in agreement with the Borderlands work.


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
img  3D Magnetics
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #10 on: 2022-12-23, 22:54:02 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 342
Almost any electron tube will produce x rays simply by applying 15 + kv to it any or all pins .
Rectifier tubes work better and the larger the tube the better .
Don't do this unless you have  a detector running .
   
img  Hakasays
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #11 on: 2022-12-23, 23:16:26 »

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 568
Quote from: 3D Magnetics on 2022-12-23, 22:54:02
Almost any electron tube will produce x rays simply by applying 15 + kv to it any or all pins .
Rectifier tubes work better and the larger the tube the better .
Don't do this unless you have  a detector running .

I've heard this but could not find much data as to the density or composition of the X-rays emitted.

The rays in above setup are directional and detectable greater than 30ft with the equivalent of an ignition coil circuit. :o


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
img  Hakasays
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #12 on: 2022-12-26, 15:29:46 »

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 568
I did find someone else working with the single-wire cold cathode ray tube concept:
https://youtu.be/QuRdLf8UkJI

And also some crazy Russians working with 2-wire hot cathode 'DIY' tubes :o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwl1JNoFdhg
(do not try at home!)


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
img  3D Magnetics
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #13 on: 2022-12-27, 02:34:33 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 342
This meter works fairly well and records a basic log ,which gives abetter approximation of what dose you might have received.

It would be handy to be able take most of the guesswork out as we are left with some whatever we use.

Great video links . Thanks ,it all helps .


https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005004018941122.html?spm=a2g0o.order_list.order_list_main.589.32a51802b1yF7u
   
img  Hakasays
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #14 on: 2022-12-28, 13:29:10 »

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 568
Quote from: 3D Magnetics on 2022-12-27, 02:34:33
This meter works fairly well and records a basic log ,which gives abetter approximation of what dose you might have received.

It would be handy to be able take most of the guesswork out as we are left with some whatever we use.

Great video links . Thanks ,it all helps .


https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005004018941122.html?spm=a2g0o.order_list.order_list_main.589.32a51802b1yF7u

Griffin's got a good quality dosimeter onhand already, but thanks for the link.  I may grab one for my own replication. :P

To help characterize the quality of X-ray I recommended a set of experiments comparing output with increasing layers of aluminum foil or copper shim stock between emitter and detector.   With that data we can extrapolate with some certainty the rough spectrum of X-rays emitted, whether it is hard (gamma) or soft (UV).   That's assuming it's 100% conventional X-rays being emitted by the single wire and not some novel/coherent ray that shares some characteristics. ???

To get absolute measurements, the best would be to use a double-slit experiment with a precise distance+gap spacing.  With some algebra that would reveal the exact spectra in nanometers, as well as provide more clarity as to whether the emissions are more wideband or narrowband.


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
img  Hakasays
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #15 on: 2022-12-30, 17:26:31 »

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 568
A modern R+D overview paper on the state-of-the-art for cold cathode X-ray tubes.

You can see by their designs and difficulties that Tesla's method was largely lost to time.  There's a completely new field to be explored, for those willing to don the lead aprons to do so :P.


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
img  F6FLT
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #16 on: 2023-01-02, 10:11:57 »
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2072
Quote from: Hakasays on 2022-12-30, 17:26:31
...
You can see by their designs and difficulties that Tesla's method was largely lost to time.
...

This is an interpretation without any basis.

Charged particles accelerated by high voltages move rapidly, acquiring a lot of kinetic energy. When they hit a solid or the air, and are stopped for a short distance, they decelerate very abruptly and the energy is released in the form of electromagnetic radiation, up to X-rays. This is what happens with Tesla's high voltages.

The issue of cold cathodes is to facilitate the ejection of electrons, it is not a corollary of X-rays or very high voltages, even if the former can generate the latter. We must stop mixing everything and anything, Tesla did not invent cold cathodes nor X-rays.



---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
img  Hakasays
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #17 on: 2023-01-02, 13:58:33 »

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 568
Quote from: F6FLT on 2023-01-02, 10:11:57
This is an interpretation without any basis.

My assessment is based on many hours pouring over Journal literature and Internet search results.  I could find quite little work regarding cold-cathode X-rays, except for some breakthroughs in the past few years using wafer-die technology:
https://www.itnonline.com/content/cold-cathode-x-ray-technology-demonstrated-rsna-2020

I even ran the query through ChatGPT to see if a professional AI would conclude the same.(which it did) ;D

If you can find any sources regarding single-wire cold-cathode emitters besides 1890's Nikola Tesla work, I would love to read about it. ;)


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
img  F6FLT
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #18 on: 2023-01-03, 11:53:17 »
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2072
@Hack
None of the references provided invalidate what I said, namely that Tesla did not invent cold cathodes nor X-rays.

If you think they do, you'll have to explain why.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
img  Hakasays
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #19 on: 2023-01-03, 14:02:02 »

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 568
Quote from: F6FLT on 2023-01-03, 11:53:17
@Hack
None of the references provided invalidate what I said, namely that Tesla did not invent cold cathodes nor X-rays.
If you think they do, you'll have to explain why.

I explained the timeline and configurations in greater detail when you asked me about this last month:
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4398.msg102679#msg102679

In-short, Tesla was experimenting with bulbs that were of the same configuration, the same fill-gas and quality vacuum, powered by the same disruptive-discharge high-frequency high-voltage supplies.
So, assuming 'Tesla's Radiant Energy' bulbs are in-fact single-wire, cold-cathode Bremsstrahlung (braking radiation) X-ray emitters, he was already producing these rays as early as 1893 (whether or not he realized it yet).

Since then I cannot find any references for the same type of bulbs in literature or in patents (maybe you'll have better luck?).  So it seems this type of X-ray tube (if it is an X-ray tube) was lost/forgotten.


Griffin is actively experimenting with these bulbs as-we-speak if you have any technical questions or proposed experiments for him. ;)
I also 'commissioned' him to help make me one, in exchange for a pair of CNC'ed Extra Coil formers, so I should also have something to experiment within the next few weeks ;D


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
img  Allcanadian
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #20 on: 2023-01-04, 02:20:30 »
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
Hakasays
Quote
In-short, Tesla was experimenting with bulbs that were of the same configuration, the same fill-gas and quality vacuum, powered by the same disruptive-discharge high-frequency high-voltage supplies.
So, assuming 'Tesla's Radiant Energy' bulbs are in-fact single-wire, cold-cathode Bremsstrahlung (braking radiation) X-ray emitters, he was already producing these rays as early as 1893 (whether or not he realized it yet).

With respect to your one electrode X-ray question to an AI. With machine language/logic and most people we need to be careful about context and what we think were asking them or implying. As well in experiments we need to be careful about what we think were seeing or sensing.

For example, when I tested Tesla's Radiant Energy bulb/circuit I understood it was actually a two electrode device. What the AI and most people could not know is that the rate of change of potential on the electrode/emitter can be so high the impedance of the glass acts as a second electrode. The glass acts like a screen and the space around the bulb a large area lower potential second electrode. In this case the glass or vaporized metal in or on the bulb surface would be the material emitting something like X-rays not the main electrode in my opinion.

In my experiments I was using almost every kind of bulb I could get my hands on. From small NE-2's to 500 watt clear incandescent bulbs and I connected the two connections together to one wire. In essence, every object inside the bulb would produce a very intense purple/white plasma. Not thin blue streamers but more like a thick plasma ball usually spherical. In most cases the impulses would quickly vaporize the electrodes and there was a 50/50 chance the bulb might crack/explode within seconds. I suspect this was due to expansion/contraction of the vaporized metal on the inner surface of the glass.

I don't think I had a cell phone back then but I do know it raised hell with RF and any nearby electronics. As I said it looked like a dense purple/white ball plasma I had never seen before. Sometimes the plasma flash from the surface was similar to a Xenon strobe. It was the time period/intensity which convinced me these experiments were inherently unsafe so I didn't spend a lot of time on them after that.

AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
img  Hakasays
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #21 on: 2023-01-04, 03:10:25 »

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 568
Quote from: Allcanadian on 2023-01-04, 02:20:30
For example, when I tested Tesla's Radiant Energy bulb/circuit I understood it was actually a two electrode device. What the AI and most people could not know is that the rate of change of potential on the electrode/emitter can be so high the impedance of the glass acts as a second electrode. The glass acts like a screen and the space around the bulb a large area lower potential second electrode. In this case the glass or vaporized metal in or on the bulb surface would be the material emitting something like X-rays not the main electrode in my opinion.

Good point AC.   *Technically* a one-wire Tesla setup still uses two electrodes, except the second electrode is 'the rest of the universe', or something you might call a virtual ground.  Eric Dollard calls it 'counterspace' or 'virtual ground'.  A similar analogy might be the imaginary 'ground' that exists between the three wires in a Delta transmission line.

Griffin notes the glass at the front gets hot, which does support your hypothesis that Bremsstrahlung (braking radiation) X-rays are being formed on/within it.


I take it you use a Whimhurst or Vandegraff to get to the very high DC voltages you've used in your work?


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
img  F6FLT
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #22 on: 2023-01-04, 15:06:37 »
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2072
Quote from: Hakasays on 2023-01-03, 14:02:02
I explained the timeline and configurations in greater detail when you asked me about this last month:
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4398.msg102679#msg102679
...

A link to links is not an explanation. Is it possible for you to create a text with your own explanatory words? Or not?


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
img  Hakasays
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #23 on: 2023-01-04, 15:30:48 »

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 568
Quote from: F6FLT on 2023-01-04, 15:06:37
A link to links is not an explanation. Is it possible for you to create a text with your own explanatory words? Or not?

Did you not even read past the first sentence? ??? C.C

Quote from: Hakasays on 2023-01-03, 14:02:02
In-short, Tesla was experimenting with bulbs that were of the same configuration, the same fill-gas and quality vacuum, powered by the same disruptive-discharge high-frequency high-voltage supplies.
So, assuming 'Tesla's Radiant Energy' bulbs are in-fact single-wire, cold-cathode Bremsstrahlung (braking radiation) X-ray emitters, he was already producing these rays as early as 1893 (whether or not he realized it yet).

Since then I cannot find any references for the same type of bulbs in literature or in patents (maybe you'll have better luck?).  So it seems this type of X-ray tube (if it is an X-ray tube) was lost/forgotten.


If you don't wish to research Tesla's 1890's publications, we have the actual working bulb in-hand if you have ideas for any practical experiments, to help characterize and understand the rays/fields being emitted.
Personally I'd rather focus on builds+experiments than give history lessons to people that aren't interested. 8)


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
img  F6FLT
Re: Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters « Reply #24 on: 2023-01-04, 16:12:59 »
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2072
Quote from: Hakasays on 2023-01-04, 15:30:48
Did you not even read past the first sentence? ??? C.C


If you don't wish to research Tesla's 1890's publications, we have the actual working bulb in-hand if you have ideas for any practical experiments, to help characterize and understand the rays/fields being emitted.
Personally I'd rather focus on builds+experiments than give history lessons to people that aren't interested. 8)

I am not interested in devotion to Tesla.

I said why Tesla didn't invent the cold cathode and X-rays in reply#16. To put you on the track, just because the Chinese used the compass in the 9th century does not make them the discoverers of the magnetic field.

If you can't express a logical and intelligible objection in your own words, find a robot that accepts your links as a "discussion".

Do you like links? Here is one: https://www.google.com, you will find the reasons for my reply#16!  8)



---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Pages: [1] 2
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-11-27, 00:23:18