Superconducting Plasma

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Locked
earls
Posts: 275
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 6:48 am

Superconducting Plasma

Unread post by earls » Mon May 04, 2009 5:12 pm

Any thoughts? References?

User avatar
Influx
Posts: 341
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2008 1:06 am

Re: Superconducting Plasma

Unread post by Influx » Fri May 15, 2009 1:48 pm

Tesla claimed to have made a plasma in a glass bulb that had no inertia.!

http://books.google.com/books?id=Y5bOI0 ... t&resnum=4

I believe that particular bulb is discussed by him in this book.

When the brush assumes the form indicated in Fig. 16, it may be brought to a state of extreme sensitiveness to electrostatic and magnetic influence. The bulb hanging straight down from a wire, and all objects being remote from it, the approach of the observer at a few paces from the bulb will cause the brush to fly to the opposite side, and if he walks around the bulb it will always keep on the opposite side. It may begin to spin around the terminal long before it reaches that sensitive stage. When it begins to turn around principally, but also before, it is affected by a magnet and at a certain stage it is susceptible to magnetic influence to an astonishing degree. A small permanent magnet, with its poles at a distance of no more than two centimetres, will affect it visibly at a distance of two metres, slowing down or accelerating the rotation according to how it is held relatively to the brush. I think I have observed that at the stage when it is most sensitive to magnetic, it is not most sensitive to electrostatic, influence. My explanation is, that the electrostatic attraction between the brush and the glass of the bulb, which retards the rotation, grows much quicker than the magnetic influence when the intensity of the stream is increased.

When the bulb hangs with the globe L down, the rotation is always clockwise. In the southern hemisphere it would occur in the opposite direction and on the equator the brush should not turn at all. The rotation may be reversed by a magnet kept at some distance. The brush rotates best, seemingly, when it is at right angles to the lines of force of the earth. It very likely rotates, when at its maximum speed, in synchronism with the alternations, say 10,000 times a second. The rotation can be slowed down or accelerated by the approach or receding of the observer or any conducting body, but it cannot be reversed by putting the bulb in any position. When it is in the state of the highest sensitiveness and the potential or frequency be varied the sensitiveness is rapidly diminished. Changing either of these but little will generally stop the rotation. The sensitiveness is likewise affected by the variations of temperature. To attain great sensitiveness it is necessary to have the small sphere s in the centre of the globe L, as otherwise the electrostatic action of the glass of the globe will tend to stop the rotation. The sphere s should be small and of uniform thickness; any dissymmetry of course has the effect to diminish the sensitiveness.

The fact that the brush rotates in a definite direction in a permanent magnetic field seems to show that in alternating currents of very high frequency the positive and negative impulses are not equal, but that one always preponderates over the other.

Of course, this rotation in one direction may be due to the action of two elements of the same current upon each other, or to the action of the field produced by one of the elements upon the other, as in a series motor, without necessarily one impulse being stronger than the other. The fact that the brush turns, as far as I could observe, in any position, would speak for this view. In such case it would turn at any point of the earth's surface. But, on the other hand, it is then hard to explain why a permanent magnet should reverse the rotation, and one must assume the preponderance of impulses of one kind.

As to the causes of the formation of the brush or stream, I think it is due to the electrostatic action of the globe and the dissymmetry of the parts. If the small bulb s and the globe L were perfect concentric spheres, and the glass throughout of the same thickness and quality, I think the brush would not form, as the tendency to pass would be equal on all sides. That the formation of the stream is due to an irregularity is apparent from the fact that it has the tendency to remain in one position, and rotation occurs most generally only when it is brought out of this position by electrostatic or magnetic influence. When in an extremely sensitive state it rests in one position, most curious experiments may be performed with it. For instance, the experimenter may, try selecting a proper position, approach the hand at a certain considerable distance to the bulb, and he may cause the brush to pass off by merely stiffening the muscles of the arm. When it begins to rotate slowly, and the hands are held at a proper distance, it is impossible to make even the slightest motion without producing a visible effect upon the brush. A metal plate connected to the other terminal of the coil affects it at a great distance, slowing down the rotation often to one turn a second.

I am firmly convinced that such a brush, when we learn how to produce it properly, will prove a valuable aid in the investigation' of the nature of the forces acting in an electrostatic or magnetic field. If there is any motion which is measurable going on in the space, such a brush ought to reveal it. It is, so to speak, a beam of light, frictionless, devoid of inertia.
http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1892-02-0 ... RANSFORMER

That is one cool plasma! :D
Today is the yesterday of tomorrow.

tangointhenight
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 3:18 pm

Re: Superconducting Plasma

Unread post by tangointhenight » Fri May 15, 2009 6:24 pm

Huh, superplasma? Maybe kind of like superfluid?

User avatar
Influx
Posts: 341
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2008 1:06 am

Re: Superconducting Plasma

Unread post by Influx » Fri May 15, 2009 9:34 pm

Well Tesla always said that aether was a super fluid, were em waves were like sound waves in the air.
Today is the yesterday of tomorrow.

tangointhenight
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 3:18 pm

Re: Superconducting Plasma

Unread post by tangointhenight » Mon May 18, 2009 12:38 pm

Influx wrote:Well Tesla always said that aether was a super fluid, were em waves were like sound waves in the air.
Well, aether has yet to be proven.

The theory seems good on paper, but where is the evidence for it?

User avatar
Influx
Posts: 341
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2008 1:06 am

Re: Superconducting Plasma

Unread post by Influx » Mon May 18, 2009 7:50 pm

tangointhenight wrote:Well, aether has yet to be proven.
I am not claiming the existence of aether, Tesla did.

Doesn't the casimir effect prove that the "vacuum" is "something" indeed? Even if it is virtual, the effect is felt by the "real"
Today is the yesterday of tomorrow.

tangointhenight
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 3:18 pm

Re: Superconducting Plasma

Unread post by tangointhenight » Mon May 18, 2009 8:45 pm

Yeah, I agree. But we are far to primitive to even begin to comprehend what the vacuum really is.

It's a cave man trying to figure out what fire is. It's burning but what the hell is it!

What I mean is that we see all this happening around us but we are just to primitive to understand.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests