Eric Dollard

[upgradd]

Doc Green your mistaken in the notion that a bulb in SERIES has different levels of brightness depending upon its placement in a group of bulbs. That logic is for a TWO-WIRE line with loads placed in parallel at different points along its length. Not a series circuit.

In a series circuit all points exhibit the same magnitude of electric current, unlike the parallel circuit discussed above. So from this logic any number of bulbs in series all share the same current and hence I^2*R heating. Making each, aside from manufacturing tolerances, demonstrate the same light output.

Not here to be a circuit nerd, just pointing out a basic err in logic. Although, it is pretty cool to see the bulbs light with out a physical return wire (displacement currents at work here?), RF magic at its best I suppose.

[dR-Green]

Doc,
Don't know where you get the "discouragement campaign" from. I am just questioning why all the focus on *very* old tube tech.

Like I said the last time around, you just seem to be wanting to be a disruption and being more than happy to say what can be summed up as "what's the point?" to everything. What's the point of asking what's the point? Why do you collect old radios to LOOK at? Why not buy a shiny new radio to look at? Why does one person buy a red car when another person buys a blue car?

Don't get me wrong, tubes are interesting and can probably survive an EMP better, but they are very primitive and bulky by today's standards.
I have old ham radios, some dating back to the 30's, but only for demo and display purposes but I don't build new projects with tubes.
I was wondering why anyone would want to.

An EMP? What's the field like around the coils that these things are powering?

It's funny how two people can witness an event and describe it differently.

Indeed.

All I can say is that I was appalled when I saw that video of Eric ranting and raving about a very minor thing, verbally abusing everyone who were only there to help. THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THIS BEHAVIOR.

You can be appalled all you like, beyond that it's none of your business. Who is anyone else to judge you and take sides in your argument when they are not involved in it? I'm sure Eric was appalled when he saw the video too, seeing as he was filmed without his knowledge and only came to know about it through the said video appearing on youtube. What a nice thing to do to someone. How would you like it done to you? Why are you so offended on behalf of people you don't even know? You have overlooked the fact that the person/people involved would also not hesitate to press record during a personal disagreement that you are having, or a rant that you happen to be having (you do experience varying moods, do you?) and then edit it as they see fit to post over youtube in order to portray you in whatever way they wish. Careful of the company you keep.

All that is not productive and it's certainly no use or healthy being appalled at something but to deliberately keep coming back to constantly be reminded of it, unless you constantly want to be appalled, or are deliberately trying to sustain the argument with apparent undermining through the questioning of why a person chooses to do what they do, and dispensing "advice" (criticism) on how someone else should go about their personal business. That is a question for philosophers, and your audience has no interest in the negative propaganda. I'm not here to type myself into oblivion on a computer keyboard with opinions that are based on opinions so anything that's not experiment or work based is irrelevant.

I am truly interested if the "instantaneous transmission" is possible.

How do you ever intend to find out if no one does any research? And who is supposed to do the research? You are free to take the information that Eric provided and make it work in your own way if you are confounded by the part that says to use vacuum tubes or you disagree with it. Make it work without them! That would be far more useful than questioning why other people choose to use vacuum tubes, and then you won't come across as an external disruption but someone who is actually working on the problem and trying to make it work. Make it work on the bench.

So, Doc, what do you need to know? You never asked before...

Any designs you can share with us, say 10 and 100-500 watt?

I would like an efficient power amplifier(s) of the mentioned power outputs, that will be suitable for both +/- sine waves as well as + square wave carriers. Preferably a class B type design, but not alternating for the square wave carrier. It's for experimental use so the more versatile and simple the better. I would appreciate this and it would make far more interesting (higher power) experiments.

[dR-Green]

Doc Green your mistaken in the notion that a bulb in SERIES has different levels of brightness depending upon its placement in a group of bulbs. That logic is for a TWO-WIRE line with loads placed in parallel at different points along its length. Not a series circuit.

In a series circuit all points exhibit the same magnitude of electric current, unlike the parallel circuit discussed above. So from this logic any number of bulbs in series all share the same current and hence I^2*R heating. Making each, aside from manufacturing tolerances, demonstrate the same light output.

Not here to be a circuit nerd, just pointing out a basic err in logic. Although, it is pretty cool to see the bulbs light with out a physical return wire (displacement currents at work here?), RF magic at its best I suppose.

Yes you are right, thanks for pointing that out. Although I'm not sure what you mean by the parallel loads at different points along its length.

[dR-Green]

Thank you very much for this insightful post. Much appreciated. I am trying to learn all of this material and read it with attention...how ever I stumble when there are abbreviations like A.T.T or similar...

Is it possible to post a legend with all such abbreviations. I know many of the readers have been following your posts from day one and probably know the meaning of all the abrivations.

Unfortunately I am new to your work. I would really appreciate it. Thanks again for your contribution.

CRI = Crystal Radio Initiative
CRD = Cosmic Ray Detector
CIG = Cosmic Induction Generator
TMT = Tesla Magnifying Transmitter (or Transformer)

I can't think of any others at the moment.

[cyborg]

Like I said the last time around, you just seem to be wanting to be a disruption and being more than happy to say what can be summed up as "what's the point?" to everything. What's the point of asking what's the point? Why do you collect old radios to LOOK at? Why not buy a shiny new radio to look at? Why does one person buy a red car when another person buys a blue car?



An EMP? What's the field like around the coils that these things are powering?



Indeed.



You can be appalled all you like, beyond that it's none of your business. Who is anyone else to judge you and take sides in your argument when they are not involved in it? I'm sure Eric was appalled when he saw the video too, seeing as he was filmed without his knowledge and only came to know about it through the said video appearing on youtube. What a nice thing to do to someone. How would you like it done to you? Why are you so offended on behalf of people you don't even know? You have overlooked the fact that the person/people involved would also not hesitate to press record during a personal disagreement that you are having, or a rant that you happen to be having (you do experience varying moods, do you?) and then edit it as they see fit to post over youtube in order to portray you in whatever way they wish. Careful of the company you keep.

All that is not productive and it's certainly no use or healthy being appalled at something but to deliberately keep coming back to constantly be reminded of it, unless you constantly want to be appalled, or are deliberately trying to sustain the argument with apparent undermining through the questioning of why a person chooses to do what they do, and dispensing "advice" (criticism) on how someone else should go about their personal business. That is a question for philosophers, and your audience has no interest in the negative propaganda. I'm not here to type myself into oblivion on a computer keyboard with opinions that are based on opinions so anything that's not experiment or work based is irrelevant.



How do you ever intend to find out if no one does any research? And who is supposed to do the research? You are free to take the information that Eric provided and make it work in your own way if you are confounded by the part that says to use vacuum tubes or you disagree with it. Make it work without them! That would be far more useful than questioning why other people choose to use vacuum tubes, and then you won't come across as an external disruption but someone who is actually working on the problem and trying to make it work. Make it work on the bench.





I would like an efficient power amplifier(s) of the mentioned power outputs, that will be suitable for both +/- sine waves as well as + square wave carriers. Preferably a class B type design, but not alternating for the square wave carrier. It's for experimental use so the more versatile and simple the better. I would appreciate this and it would make far more interesting (higher power) experiments.

Well Doc,

Not to belabor the point much further, but I don't think anyone wants to work with a person who has temper tantrums and insults them. I don't care who they are!
It's not about judgement, but a matter of being respectful. You reap what you sow in situations like that,yet he says he's a victim. 'nuf said...

After your somewhat unfair castigation, now you want me to design an amp for you? How about an outline?

There are some basic considerations:
1)what frequency range
2) what power
3) input / output criteria, interface and impedance.
4) power supply type, ie: AC or DC input and voltage
5) budget
6) can this be created from materials on hand?

The square and sinusoidal power amp types are different animals with different design criteria. I would not recommend a "one size fits all approach"

Before you can answer any of the above, you must have an idea of what it is you are trying to do.

For instance,I just finished building a 1200 watt VHF power oscillator for a lab which used a 48V SMPS (120vac) as a power supply.
The oscillator had to be variable from 30 to 60 DBM .
There were a lot of other details, but there were specific requirements that had to be addressed for the project.

[dR-Green]

After your somewhat unfair castigation, now you want me to design an amp for you? How about an outline?

There are some basic considerations:
1)what frequency range
2) what power
3) input / output criteria, interface and impedance.
4) power supply type, ie: AC or DC input and voltage
5) budget
6) can this be created from materials on hand?

The square and sinusoidal power amp types are different animals with different design criteria. I would not recommend a "one size fits all approach"

Before you can answer any of the above, you must have an idea of what it is you are trying to do.

For instance,I just finished building a 1200 watt VHF power oscillator for a lab which used a 48V SMPS (120vac) as a power supply.
The oscillator had to be variable from 30 to 60 DBM .
There were a lot of other details, but there were specific requirements that had to be addressed for the project.

You asked where I got the discouragement campaign idea from, so I expressed what I see. I could have said things like "with all due respect, it's none of your business" to soften it up, but it's an universal fact that's not personal, and I included "who is anyone else to judge YOU..." because that also applies to everyone including you. I don't think it was unfair, if I was then it's only to get the point across. You have already been banned once, and the only place it's going to get you if you continue with that is banned again, so what's the point in that? If you are as experienced as you say you are then you could get far more productive things done, and if you really have an interest [in a specific thing] then there's only one way anything is ever going to get done in the way you want it done. But if you can help to get results faster then I for one will appreciate your assistance/cooperation.

1: <5 Mc. There isn't really a lower limit requirement, but I probably won't be needing lower than 500 kc let's say
2: 10W and 100-500W, although as it stands there are no strict requirements. 10W would be pretty nice to begin with
3: 50 ohm impedance. What do you mean by interface?
4: DC, +/-12V supply if possible. It may be a mobile unit, but beyond that there's no fixed/specific criteria. If the primary coil can be driven with only 12V then the results should be pretty good already. But it's all experimental, something needs to built and tested before being able to determine anything further
5: As little as possible. What would drive up the cost?
6: A lot of the materials may be at hand but it depends how specific things will need to get

Fair enough if the same amp can't do sine and square, that idea is mainly for convenience and not having to rearrange everything on the bench, but if it's more convenient to build two separate amps then that's fine. An [built-in] oscillator isn't entirely necessary for the initial steps until other important things have been established. I have a signal generator, a method of modulating the amplitude of the signal, but I need a method of amplifying the power, and variable gain would be nice. It will be for experimenting, testing the efficiency (of the coils and transmission) etc so the more versatile/controllable the better.

[David G Dawson]

Cosmic Ray Detector Test 1 &amp; 2

Have completed Test # 2 for the CRD without problems:
Will present pictures for others who are getting themselves involved with this adventure of Erics we are travelling along with.
Have decided to part dedicate my Lab to Eric's work such that he has another resource to carry out the work that is remote from whatever occurs in the USA.
I am doing my own projects but will concentrate more on what Eric is offering in an attempt to assist in making his revelations become a reality.
Made this decision after listening to the Adam Bull audio as much more detail was obtained from that discussion than Eric had previously divulged.- Thanks Adam!

Test #2 Setup:



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Caps and Test Bed:


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Test Request:


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Test #1 Results:


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Test #2 Results:


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Caps used can be seen in the background.
Oil-Filled gives a bonus but too large and cumbersome and could not get any lower than the 88 volt for this particular 0A4G and have anywhere from the 0.15uF to the 2uF with equal brilliance.
Noticed in some instances the gas fired late but was probably a borderline case.
The 0.047uF gave 90 volts on a second attempt.
On the 10,800pF, all I could see was an arc between starter and cathode but no gas fired.
Will put the second Test on Chart and Post later.
I do not make schematics for these tests but why I take the pics as a reminder.

Can someone pass this on to Eric please and we can get down to some serious business.
In the meantime I will get the CRD back up and running and refine whatever I can.
Think both Tests have shown that something in the 0.33uF area appears to be the best but that will be for Eric to decide.

Smokey

[7redorbs]

Blame Game Science &amp; The 5 principles of Derailment

Whilst many would prefer to like to blame Eric Dollard, there does seem to be a historic and concerted campaign to disrupt the forward and ongoing movement of his work. Certain methods include derailment by misguidance, subterfuge by misdirection and dishonesty, intimidation by the conduit of transport, or violence by the means of active threat. And the best and probably most celebrated scientific ignorance by the means of tenure or self glory.

For all those so-called detractors who would speak out against the work of Eric by these above means, I would add it achieves very little but entirely disrupting the work.

The the only real objective and scientific way to test the works of Eric Dollard is to continue the progressive analysis of the CRD and CIG, and follow the FTL virtue or characteristic in the spirit as Tesla had suggested, in terms of detecting a FTL Cosmic Ray, this may have already been achieved by David Dawson from Eric Dollards work, as I have repeatedly said, it is but a small step away from a second perfected and individualised unit which has the very real promise of providing a delta T or differential for a velocity measure of these so-called new-type of particles.

Someone suggested Tesla never suggested FTL, this misdirection has been identified as a misinformed opinion not backed up by literature released by the scientist i question.

What Eric and Tesla say, it goes against the fabric of the modern scientific oligarchy, and which is why so many talented individuals were once involved in a recreation here that recognized that and the importance of such work. Unfortunately, as always in these matters it is apparent at least one of the methods of derailment is always available to the citizen, or the government employee. And so explains why something so engineerable and detectable, in the same case as the electrostatic discharge of pi / 2 * C velocity can go ignored conveniently as an exception, no different than the inventive helping of the epicycle, almost akin to the belief that the earth itself, or the electron, is the centre of the universe, an epicycle like einstein generation has been produced, and it is too late now there is no going back, the damage has been done, fortunately for us, we will not suffer the same fate as the romans and the greeks, and will not continue to believe a mans centric invention of electricity for 2000 years like the greek epicycle was. And why did this come about? IT wasnt incompetence of scientists, or a lack of methods or observational capacity. No , the same flaw that all inventive and electromagnetic science of kirchoff and ohm suffers from is it ignores the faraday equation itself, and most importantly of all, they all suffer from the same inventive defect, some missing piece of information. And instead it results in a science of great fiction, suffering from missing pieces of information it results in a conceptually wrong idea to the operation of a general electric wave and then somehow results in the argument that arises. Nonetheless the universe waits in the same form it always had, it is mans state in this case that requires altering,

Must apologize as response was rushed

Best Wishes,
Adam

[cyborg]

Cults of personality

Whilst many would prefer to like to blame Eric Dollard, there does seem to be a historic and concerted campaign to disrupt the forward and ongoing movement of his work. Certain methods include derailment by misguidance, subterfuge by misdirection and dishonesty, intimidation by the conduit of transport, or violence by the means of active threat. And the best and probably most celebrated scientific ignorance by the means of tenure or self glory.

For all those so-called detractors who would speak out against the work of Eric by these above means, I would add it achieves very little but entirely disrupting the work.

The the only real objective and scientific way to test the works of Eric Dollard is to continue the progressive analysis of the CRD and CIG, and follow the FTL virtue or characteristic in the spirit as Tesla had suggested, in terms of detecting a FTL Cosmic Ray, this may have already been achieved by David Dawson from Eric Dollards work, as I have repeatedly said, it is but a small step away from a second perfected and individualised unit which has the very real promise of providing a delta T or differential for a velocity measure of these so-called new-type of particles.

Someone suggested Tesla never suggested FTL, this misdirection has been identified as a misinformed opinion not backed up by literature released by the scientist i question.

What Eric and Tesla say, it goes against the fabric of the modern scientific oligarchy, and which is why so many talented individuals were once involved in a recreation here that recognized that and the importance of such work. Unfortunately, as always in these matters it is apparent at least one of the methods of derailment is always available to the citizen, or the government employee. And so explains why something so engineerable and detectable, in the same case as the electrostatic discharge of pi / 2 * C velocity can go ignored conveniently as an exception, no different than the inventive helping of the epicycle, almost akin to the belief that the earth itself, or the electron, is the centre of the universe, an epicycle like einstein generation has been produced, and it is too late now there is no going back, the damage has been done, fortunately for us, we will not suffer the same fate as the romans and the greeks, and will not continue to believe a mans centric invention of electricity for 2000 years like the greek epicycle was. And why did this come about? IT wasnt incompetence of scientists, or a lack of methods or observational capacity. No , the same flaw that all inventive and electromagnetic science of kirchoff and ohm suffers from is it ignores the faraday equation itself, and most importantly of all, they all suffer from the same inventive defect, some missing piece of information. And instead it results in a science of great fiction, suffering from missing pieces of information it results in a conceptually wrong idea to the operation of a general electric wave and then somehow results in the argument that arises. Nonetheless the universe waits in the same form it always had, it is mans state in this case that requires altering,

Must apologize as response was rushed

Best Wishes,
Adam

I suppose much of this was directed toward me, but as in politics a half truth or outright lie is presented as truth to promote an agenda AKA Machiavellian politics. Forums are no different in this regard as evidenced by your post.

My original statement was that the TCs do not exhibit FTL properties as some have claimed to have measured. Tesla never said they did either,not even in all of those diverse snippets. He is talking about cosmic particles not TCs!!! In fact, Tesla's time calcs for circumnavigation of a ground wave were based on c.

Followers of Cults of personality never end up in a good way. History has shown this to be true. I would rather think for myself.
It is obvious that nothing I can say or prove will dissuade the "true believers"
from whatever erroneous things their master has taught them and so it goes...

This was a social experiment on my part to understand what is going on with the E.D. "movement".
My conclusions are that there is no discussion here , but only dogma to be revered and protected no matter what.

Anyone such as myself who questions the "teachings" or the "master" is vilified and called a disruptor, etc.

This is not science, but some kind of religion. You guys even use words like "divulged" and "revelation" when referring to communications form the guru.
WOW!

For the record, there is nothing here that I wish to disrupt nor do I have a clue why a person would think in such conspiratorial terms.
I was just running some thoughts up the flag pole to see if they would fly.
Not only didn't they fly, but were NUKED!!!
Another WOW!

[dR-Green]

Anyone such as myself who questions the "teachings" or the "master" is vilified and called a disruptor, etc.

Well, what do you want to happen?

If you attend a particular school or course, then you are expected to follow the curriculum, it's a basic premise that is commonly acknowledged. What's the point of going to music class and complaining that no carpentry is being done? [edit] Ignoring personal interpretation of what has been said, of course. Arguing against someone's personal interpretation is not scientific or valid.

You would be kicked right out of the educational/philosophical institutions of the ages for doing what you are doing here, because rather than having mastered what is taught and then going about your own way to develop it as you see fit, you are demanding that the teacher changes the curriculum to suit what you already believe. That would earn you a booting, nothing less.

APPARENT faster than light propagation velocities have been measured here on numerous occasions. Tesla's measurement is in CS Notes. Eric has said himself that nothing is actually moving faster than light in this instance.

Eric says do it exactly like he says [without question] in order to test the existing theory. Based on what happens and is observed within the strict and controlled guidelines, THEN it can and possibly MUST be reviewed and/or changed. Changing things in the system before starting anything, or everyone starting from different positions as in personal quests, is not science, certainly not organised science that will yield universally useful data.

[cyborg]

Well, what do you want to happen?

If you attend a particular school or course, then you are expected to follow the curriculum, it's a basic premise that is commonly acknowledged. What's the point of going to music class and complaining that no carpentry is being done? [edit] Ignoring personal interpretation of what has been said, of course. Arguing against someone's personal interpretation is not scientific or valid.

You would be kicked right out of the educational/philosophical institutions of the ages for doing what you are doing here, because rather than having mastered what is taught and then going about your own way to develop it as you see fit, you are demanding that the teacher changes the curriculum to suit what you already believe. That would earn you a booting, nothing less.

APPARENT faster than light propagation velocities have been measured here on numerous occasions. Tesla's measurement is in CS Notes. Eric has said himself that nothing is actually moving faster than light in this instance.

Eric says do it exactly like he says [without question] in order to test the existing theory. Based on what happens and is observed within the strict and controlled guidelines, THEN it can and possibly MUST be reviewed and/or changed. Changing things in the system before starting anything, or everyone starting from different positions as in personal quests, is not scientific.

Doc,

I was HOPING for discussion of the "whys" rather than excoriation.

Not really complaining about carpentry in the music class, but how score is being composed. Harmony with physical facts would be preferred. Theories based on bad data are inherently flawed.
FTL in a TC is bad data.

Take a straight length of wire and determine it's natural resonance.
Now, coil it up and check again. It will now resonate at a lower frequency.
Why? because it is more inductive for one reason!

f0 = 1/ 2*pi*sqrt(LC)

velocity factor = 1/c*sqrt(LC)

where c = velocity of light
C= inter-turn and stray isotropic capacitance
L= inductance

These formulas work fine for TCs. QED

What say you now, doc?
Am I still getting kicked out of music class?

[Farmhand]

Eric claimed FTL propagation on his coils and wanted to give himself a speeding ticket in
the old borderlands video. There was no misunderstanding as far as I can see.

The first I seen Eric actually say there was no actual FTL on the coil was when I
questioned it and asked if that was the case. Even though I was abused for as
far as I can tell no good reason I still asked valid questions.

The online Tesla Coil building calculators all predict that a tall small diameter
coil will have a apparent FTL propagation and a short large diameter coil will
have a STL propagation.

With my transformer, the secondary is slower than light and the extra coil is
apparently FTL, but I tuned the setup so that when they are put together I
get very close to light speed. And I can get double helix Arcs from it. Picture
attached.

Any transformers built on wood that is not insulated will have problems with
higher voltages.

My question is how do you guys expect to drive your transformers with some
power ? At full frequency of like 2000 kc per second ? Tubes ?

Cheers

[dR-Green]

Doc,

I was HOPING for discussion of the "whys" rather than excoriation.

Not really complaining about carpentry in the music class, but how score is being composed. Harmony with physical facts would be preferred. Theories based on bad data are inherently flawed.
FTL in a TC is bad data.

Take a straight length of wire and determine it's natural resonance.
Now, coil it up and check again. It will now resonate at a lower frequency.
Why? because it is more inductive for one reason!

f0 = 1/ 2*pi*sqrt(L/C)

velocity factor = 1/c*sqrt(LC)

where c = velocity of light
C= inter-turn and stray isotropic capacitance
L= inductance

These formulas work fine for TCs. QED

Diameter = 251.46 cm
Height = 238.76 cm
Number Of Turns = 100
Conductor Length = 789.9848887 Metres
Measured Frequency = 116300 Cycles/sec
Free Space Self Capacitance = 115.6716pF
Burdened Capacitance = 260.52pF
Inductance = 17.684mH

Be my guest. Especially with "f0 = 1/ 2*pi*sqrt(L/C)", because it's LC not L/C, although I think you already know this. Using the stray (burdened) capacitance will lead you way off.

C (free space) = a function of the geometry of the coil. Propagation velocity is also determined by the geometry, so naturally it's all related. Also the coil is in QUARTER WAVE resonance.

Where are the physical facts supposed to come from if no one does any experiment to establish the facts?

What say you now, doc?
Am I still getting kicked out of music class?

I don't know, I'm not an admin. One might even say that only you can make that decision. Upon the entrance of Plato's school it was written "Let no one ignorant of geometry enter here." If you understand what that means then you will also know what I meant.

[dR-Green]

With my transformer, the secondary is slower than light and the extra coil is
apparently FTL, but I tuned the setup so that when they are put together I
get very close to light speed. And I can get double helix Arcs from it. Picture
attached.

G'day Farmahnd. I believe Cyborg here will argue that your coil is something like 2% (or maybe 20%) the speed of light, because he doesn't consider the quarter wave resonance. He thinks in terms of the full wavelength at the resonant frequency.

My question is how do you guys expect to drive your transformers with some
power ? At full frequency of like 2000 kc per second ? Tubes ?

Personally I will be using tubes soon, but I would also like to try some decent amount of power with a solid state circuit which is why I asked Cyborg if he has anything he can share.

Nice picture by the way!

[cyborg]

DR Green

thank you for pointing out the formula correction . I fixed it.

C (free space) = a function of the geometry of the coil. Propagation velocity is also determined by the geometry, so naturally it's all related. Also the coil is in QUARTER WAVE resonance.

The straight wire fundamental will be quarter wave also.

This all relates back to what I said about belief and dogma.
I believe that I have have wasted enough of my time and every one else's .
This is like trying to prove that the Earth is round to the "Flat Earth Society".