No announcement yet.

Who performs the first longitudinal Moon-Bounce in history?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Who performs the first longitudinal Moon-Bounce in history?

    Hi all,

    I'm sure many of you know about moon-bouncing in amateur radio:
    EME (communications) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The use of the Moon as a passive communications satellite was proposed by Mr. W.J. Bray of the British General Post Office in 1940. It was calculated that with the available microwave transmission powers and low noise receivers, it would be possible to beam microwave signals up from Earth and reflect off the Moon. It was thought that at least one voice channel would be possible.

    The "moon bounce" technique was developed by the United States Military in the years after World War II, with the first successful reception of echoes off the Moon being carried out at Fort Monmouth, New Jersey on January 10, 1946 by John H. DeWitt as part of Project Diana. The Communication Moon Relay project that followed led to more practical uses, including a teletype link between the naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii and United States Navy headquarters in Washington, DC. In the days before communications satellites, a link free of the vagaries of ionospheric propagation was revolutionary.

    Later, the technique was used by non-military commercial users, and the first amateur detection of signals from the Moon took place in 1953.
    In my Einstein article I added this:
    Tuks DrippingPedia : Ruins 106 Years Einstein Relativity

    Given that the propagation speed of longitudinal electric waves (which according to the current theory cannot propagate trough a vacuum) is about 1.6 times the speed of light, it would be a very interesting experiment to see whether or not moon bouncing could be achieved practically with longitudinal electric waves. If Tesla is right, we would see an Earth-Moon-Earth roundtrip time of in the order of 1.6 seconds, while normal EM waves would take more than 2.5 seconds.
    Since the distance between the Earth and the Moon is on average 384,400 km, on average we would have a return path of over 750,000 km, which would take more than 2.5 seconds at the speed of light, which is the speed with which EM waves propagate. However, longitudinal waves could make the round-trip in just 1.6 seconds, a difference of 0.9 seconds!

    I mean, explaining away a couple of nanoseconds in the CERN neutrino "anomaly", all right, they get away with that. But I would really love to see how they would explain away an early arrival of no less than 0.9 seconds...

    So, if we were to make a longitudinal transmitter of considerable power (Wikipedia says you need over 100W for EM waves, but the higher the gain of your antenna's, the less power you need) and we would connect that to a computer (transmitting f.e. audible morse code or something), you could setup a system whereby any (radio amateur) could enter a message trough the internet to a server, connected to a transmitter which sends the signal to the moon. Now since any decent internet connection should be able to get the message from the amateurs computer to the transmitter computer well within half a second, any radio amateur that builds a receiver should be able to determine that the signal he himself entered on the computer is being received from the moon well before any EM wave could possibly travel back and forth between the earth and the moon.

    That way, it could be experimentally proven that:

    a) longitudinal waves exist,
    b) they travel at much a faster speed than the speed of light.

    This would mean that it could be experimentally proven that the current Maxwell equations are wrong and that therefore the Lorentz transform is rubbish after all and thus Einsteinan relativity can finally be put where it belongs: the trash can.

    Since radio amateurs have been using moon-bouncing before, such an experiment using longitudinal waves may be possible without requiring large amounts of funding.

    So, I went looking for some information on how to do this in practice, and it seems that all you need to be able to transmit and/or recieve longitudinal waves is spherical antenna:

    Monstein, Wesley - Observation of scalar longitudinal electrodynamic waves(2002).pdf

    Mathematically a spherically symmetric source can generate only scalar waves; so the ball antenna can only generate a Φ-wave, and, thus, only a longitudinal electrodynamic E -wave. The spherically symmetric current density J within the ball, that gives rise to the pulsating surface charge source, is divergenceless, ∇ · J = 0; so ∇ · A = 0 and ∇× A = 0; and no transverse wave can arise. The ball antenna as a receiver detects the net charge induced by the component of the incident E field normal to the front surface; so only longitudinal E-waves can be detected.
    This is the sketch of the aluminium ball antennas from the pdf:

    Now if you would mount such antenna's on a set of ordinary sattellite dishes, you could perhaps easily build longitudinal antenna with high gain, as some people do for the transmission of EM WiFi signals:

    How-To: Build a WiFi biquad dish antenna -- Engadget
    TREVOR MARSHALL - Biquad feed for primestar dish

    It seems to me that this is not only doable, but also doable within a reasonable hobby-budget.

    So, which radio amateur is going to get his name in the history books for performing not only the first longitudinal moon-bounce, but also delivering the final blow to Einstein's nonsense known as his relativity theory?
    Last edited by lamare; 11-04-2011, 06:41 PM. Reason: typo, cleaned up link to Monstein&Wesley, typo

  • #2
    Nikola Tesla (yeah the dead guy) may have beat you to the punch:

    Nikola Tesla "Lost" Manuscript? Not Verified as being authentic or not. Read it for yourself.. |

    Read part 2.


    • #3
      Wave going inside conductor of spherical shape with the speed of c occur on surface as a shadow of speed (Pi/2)*c Maybe that neutrino distraction is exactly that, surface of earth not counted into computations.


      • #4
        radio waves and OU

        Originally posted by broli View Post
        Nikola Tesla (yeah the dead guy) may have beat you to the punch:

        Nikola Tesla "Lost" Manuscript? Not Verified as being authentic or not. Read it for yourself.. |

        Read part 2.
        As most may know or not know, I have been a radio ham for most of my life and when I started using HF for long distance communication I was very surprised to be able to use 2.5watts of RF power and speak from England to Australia with the Australian end reading an off scale reading on his RF meter. Now that was not moon bounce "though I have done that", it was propergation during high sun spot activity and bouncing off the ionospher several times to earth and back again until it reached the reciever in Australia.

        Now the question is, was the 2.5 watts of RF increased as it bounced around the earth until it reached the reciever in Australia? It would seam it did as shown by the RF meter used in Australia!!!!! line of sight would not give such a large RF meter reading at maximum distance possible from transmitter to reciever!



        • #5
          Originally posted by boguslaw View Post
          Wave going inside conductor of spherical shape with the speed of c occur on surface as a shadow of speed (Pi/2)*c Maybe that neutrino distraction is exactly that, surface of earth not counted into computations.
          Dollard wrote about the speed of longitudinal waves propagating at a speed of pi/2 times c:

          Tuks DrippingPedia : Transmission Of Electricity

          The electromagnetic theory, or what was known as the Hertzian wave theory in Tesla's era, fails to explain certain observations made in practical radio engineering. According to E.M. theory the propagating velocity of electric induction must be the velocity of light. In the practical world of engineering however, the factor π/2, or 1.57 times the velocity of light will appear in wave calculations. Is it not coincidental that Tesla claimed that the effective propagation velocity of his wireless system was π/2 faster than the so-called speed of light?

          Also, according to E.M. theory, the propagation of electric induction must be the cross combination of the dielectric induction and the magnetic induction, these two inductions never propagating independently. The work of J.J. Thomson and M. Faraday indicate that these two distinct forms of induction do propagate independently. Wheatstone claimed that the dielectric induction propagated at π/2 times faster than light.
          Tuks DrippingPedia : Induction In The Dimension Of Time
          Lord Kelvin felt that it was possible to establish compressional waves, such as sound waves, thru the luminiferous aether, these waves being a version of Maxwell's displacement current. This current, often called capacitor current, flows thru electric insulators, and even thru so called empty space. No conductors or electron flux is involved with this current. Kelvin indicated his feelings that these waves must prop*agate faster than the velocity of light. To quote Kelvin's description of the actions of the induction in the space between the plates of a capacitor fed by an alternator:

          "Now does any one believe that, if the revolution were made fast enough, the electro-static law of force, pure and simple, would apply to the air at different distances from each plate? Everyone believes that if the process can be conducted fast enough, several million times, or millions of millions times per second, we should have large deviations from the electro-static law in the distribution of electric force through the air in the neighborhood. It seems absolutely certain that such an action as that going on would give rise to electrical waves. Now, it does seem to me probable that these electrical waves are conden*sational waves in the luminiferous aether; and probably it would be that the propagation of these waves would be enormously faster than the propagation of ordinary light waves."
          The velocity of dielectric propagation was experimentally verified by Prof. Wheatstone to be π/2 times faster than the velocity of light. Tesla also states this velocity in his writings on wave propagation.

          In view of these scientific discoveries, and the fact that Oliver Heaviside developed a theory of faster than light electrons which was confirmed by Dr. Tesla, it is a wonder how the present notions of electro-magnetism and its limiting velocity as purported by Einstein an his follo*wers have dominated electric theory. It is of particular interest to note that C.P. Steinmetz did not consider Hertzian waves as transmission of energy but as energy loss by the hysteresis of the aether.
          Tuks DrippingPedia : Sbarc Lecture
          As wireless progressed, Tesla established the system where he could transmit [electrical power] longitudinally through the earth at a velocity of 291,000 mi./s. Also he developed a beam tube […]

          (Skeptic interrupts) whoa, what was that speed?

          291,000 mi./s, Pi over 2 times the velocity of light.

          (Skeptic) 186,000 mi./s is C, I think you're exceeding C, maybe kilometers?

          No, it's Pi over 2 times the velocity of light.

          (Chris Carson) he is exceeding c, he'll go on and explain.

          (Skeptic) okay.

          There's a different set of dimensions. The velocity of light simply is an expression of the ratio between energy and mass.

          (Skeptic) right, which is a limit.

          A limit to what?

          (Skeptic) a constant…

          It's a constant. Not a limit.

          In the beam, Tesla found that he could transmit direct current energy over incredible distances, and this energy not diverging out of the beam, much tighter, more compact than any laser ever built. In the longitudinal mode through the ground, there were really no losses and the lightbulb would light up at the other end. Marconi, in an attempt to circumvent the Tesla patents, changed the impedance of the system and used the flat top antenna where you would get transverse electromagnetic propagations at 186,000 mi./s and longitudinal magnetic dielectric transmissions at 291,000 mi./s. For those that want to go back through history, Prof. Wheatstone proclaimed that the velocity of electrostatic induction was Pi over 2 times the velocity of light. Those of you that know about electronics and electricity, I'm sure you've heard of the Wheatstone bridge. Wheatstone was a very important researcher.
          Wikipedia says this on its page on Wheatstone:
          Charles Wheatstone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
          Velocity of electricity

          He achieved renown by a great experiment — the measurement of the velocity of electricity in a wire. He cut the wire at the middle, to form a gap which a spark might leap across, and connected its ends to the poles of a Leyden jar filled with electricity. Three sparks were thus produced, one at either end of the wire, and another at the middle. He mounted a tiny mirror on the works of a watch, so that it revolved at a high velocity, and observed the reflections of his three sparks in it. The points of the wire were so arranged that if the sparks were instantaneous, their reflections would appear in one straight line; but the middle one was seen to lag behind the others, because it was an instant later. The electricity had taken a certain time to travel from the ends of the wire to the middle. This time was found by measuring the amount of lag, and comparing it with the known velocity of the mirror. Having got the time, he had only to compare that with the length of half the wire, and he could find the velocity of electricity. His results gave a calculated velocity of 288,000 miles per second, i.e. faster than what we now know to be the speed of light, but were nonetheless an interesting approximation.

          It was afterwards found that the velocity of an electric field travelling in a cable depends on the nature of the conductor, its resistance, and its electro-static capacity. Michael Faraday showed, for example, that its velocity in a submarine wire, coated with insulator and surrounded with water, is only 144,000 miles per second (232,000 km/s), or still less. Wheatstone's device of the revolving mirror was afterwards employed by Léon Foucault and Hippolyte Fizeau to measure the velocity of light.
          I found a pdf with his "An Account of some Experiments to measure the Velocity of Electricity andthe Duration of Electric Light." and made an OCR version:

          The deviation of half a degree between the two extreme sparks, the wire being, as above stated, half a mile in length, would indicate a velocity of 576,000 miles in a second. This estimated velocity is on the supposition that the electricity passes from one end of the wire to the other: if, however, the two fluids in one theory, or the disturbances of equilibrium in the other, travel simultaneously from the two ends of the wire, the two external sparks will keep their relative positions, the middle one will be alone deflected, and the velocity measured will be only half that in the former case, viz. 288,000 miles in a second.
          So far, I have not be able to find a theoretical explanation that gives us this pi/2.


          • #6
            Thanks for that Wheatstone document Lamare, I keep reading all over the internet that Wheatstone's results were due to a calibration error in his tests, but I can never find an explanation as to what the specific error was, is anyone able to substantiate this claim?


            • #7
              Finally found something of an answer in the right direction:

              Why do transverse waves travel faster than longitudinal waves? - Yahoo! Answers

              In solids, p-wave (longitudinal) speed is compressive strength [Oops! I mean modulus] divided by density of the medium; s-wave (transverse) speed is sheer strength [Oops! I mean modulus] divided by density. Transverse waves are always slower than longitudinal waves in the same medium because sheer strength is always less than compressive strength. Earthquake waves, for example: The p-waves are many times faster than the s-waves. [Modulus us like a spring constant; it's the ratio of stress to strain.]

              A gas has no sheer strength, so it does not provide a medium for transverse waves. So there are no transverse waves in air that can be compared to sound waves.
              And some formulas:
              Seimic Waves and Earth’s Interior

              P-waves are the first waves to arrive on a complete record of ground shaking because they travel the fastest (their name derives from this fact - P is an abbreviation for primary, first wave to arrive). They typically travel at speeds between ~1 and ~14 km/sec. The slower values corresponds to a P-wave traveling in water, the higher number represents the P-wave speed near the base of Earth's mantle.

              The velocity of a wave depends on the elastic properties and density of a material. If we let k represent the bulk modulus of a material, m the shear-modulus, and r the density, then the P-wave velocity, which we represent by a, is defined by:
              P Velocity

              A modulus is a measure of how easy or difficulty it is to deforms a material. For example, the bulk modulus is a measure of how a material changes volume when pressure is applied and is a characteristic of a material. For example, foam rubber has a lower bulk modulus than steel.

              P-waves are sound waves, it's just that in seismology we are interested in frequencies that are lower than humans' range of hearing (the speed of sound in air is about 0.3 km/sec). The vibration caused by P waves is a volume change, alternating from compression to expansion in the direction that the wave is traveling. P-waves travel through all types of media - solid, liquid, or gas.
              Secondary , or S waves, travel slower than P waves and are also called "shear" waves because they don't change the volume of the material through which they propagate, they shear it. S-waves are transverse waves because they vibrate the ground in a the direction "transverse", or perpendicular, to the direction that the wave is traveling.
              Tranverse Wave Motion

              As a transverse wave passes the ground perpendicular to the direction that the wave is propagating. S-waves are transverse waves.

              The S-wave speed, call it b, depends on the shear modulus and the density

              Even though they are slower than P-waves, the S-waves move quickly. Typical S-wave propagation speeds are on the order of 1 to 8 km/sec. The lower value corresponds to the wave speed in loose, unconsolidated sediment, the higher value is near the base of Earth's mantle.

              An important distinguishing characteristic of an S-wave is its inability to propagate through a fluid or a gas because a fluids and gasses cannot transmit a shear stress and S-waves are waves that shear the material.
              Last edited by lamare; 11-03-2011, 11:03 PM.


              • #8
                I think the medium is indeed more important. You can easily send longitudinal electric waves, it happens all the time in wires and whatnot but experiments show those don't exceed the speed of light, in fact they slow it down. So the aether might show something different if you can manage to send a true longitudinal electric wave. Meyl also showed this. I'm also interested in the following question; Is this new speed a new limit then?
                Instantaneous transfer would be the ultimate goal and this has even been demonstrated with the concept of global scaling formulated by Hartmut Müller.
                Last edited by broli; 11-03-2011, 11:25 PM.


                • #9
                  NASA's Advanced Energetics for Aeronautical Applications: Volume II also has a piece on longitudinal waves, referring a.o. to Eric Dollard (BSRF):


                  page 61:

                  The BSRF researchers claimed that they have demonstrated that the wave propagation velocities of transverse waves and longitudinal waves are significantly different, even when they are produced by the same signal source.

                  The wave velocity of transverse waves was determined by measuring the frequency for which low-power radio waves directly coupled to the end of a conductor of known length produced a resonance condition that resulted in a maximum voltage measured at the "far" (nonsource) end of the conductor. Wave velocity was calculated as (resonant) frequency times wave length, which was equal to frequency times conductor length times four. (The factor of four is included because reflected energy and input energy result in a maximum output when the conductor length is one-quarter of the full [electric] wave length.) The wave velocity of longitudinal waves was determined in a very similar manner; however, the radio waves were capacitively (i.e., not directly) coupled to one end of a conductor equal in length to the conductor used for the transverse wave velocity measurement. As was done for transverse waves, wave velocity was calculated as (resonant) frequency times conductor length times four.

                  The results of these determinations were as follows:
                  – transverse wave velocity = 2.44 x 108 m/s = 0.81 x c; and
                  – longitudinal wave velocity = 3.74 x 108 m/s = 1.25 x c.

                  The velocity of transverse waves in "free space" (i.e., not confined to a conductor or other physical material) has been measured to be 3.00 x 108 m/s, and this value is commonly referred to as "the velocity of light, c" (Ref. 25).
                  When we divide these velocities we get 1.25 / 0.81 = 1.54, very close to 1.57 (pi/2).

                  In other words: these measurements by Eric Dollard a.o. confirm that with a conductor as a medium, in which the speed of light equals 0.81 x c, the longitudinal waves propagate a factor pi/2 faster than the transverse waves.

                  Fort those not so familiar with Eric Dollard's work, there are some video's available with his experiments. It appears NASA refers to these video's...

                  At Vimeo:
                  Tesla's Longitudinal Electricity - Eric Dollard, Peter Lindemann & Tom Brown
                  Transverse & Longitudinal Electric Waves - Eric Dollard And Thomas Joseph Brown

                  At YouTube:
                  Eric Dollard Peter Lindemann Tesla's Longitudinal Electricity

                  Eric Dollard Tesla Longitudinal wave Energy SBARC Ham Radio with Chris Carson
                  (Partial) transcript of this one: Tuks DrippingPedia : Sbarc Lecture
                  Last edited by lamare; 11-04-2011, 06:35 PM. Reason: Added vids


                  • #10
                    Size of sphere

                    I have been thinking a bit about how big the sphere should be. As with Herzian antenna, I think you would want a sphere with a 1/4 lambda radius.

                    Given that the propagation speed of longitudinal waves is pi/2 times the propagation speed of a normal transversal wave trough the medium at hand, you would have to make the radius pi/2 times the quarter wave length as you would normally calculate for a 1/4 lambda antenna for EM operation.

                    So, to calculate the ideal radius, you take the desired frequency and divide that by 1.57 (pi/2) to get the EM frequency with the same wave length. Then you can apply normal calculation.

                    And if you're working with a 1/4 lambda sphere antenna, the size of the sphere is such that it matters how it is feeded. The feed should be at the centre.

                    If you do not feed it at the centre, you would have to take a much smaller sphere, which would mean that you have to use much higher voltages to get the same amount of radiation. See for example:

                    longitudinal waves

                    Technology of Tesla require high potential source (up to millions Volts) that produce high frequency oscillations. Terminal that create the longitudinal wave is the spherical metal surface (sphere capacitor).
                    And remember that Tesla worked in the kHz bands, which does not seem such a good idea to me if we want to aim for a succesfull moon-bounce while having to do without a power plant in our back yard....

                    Also do not be fooled by the numerous pages about Tesla's Wireless Transmitter, like for example the kits and such sold by Prof. Meyl:
                    ETZS-Shop - Hardware


                    It is a small-scale replication of Tesla's Magnyfing Transmitter, which is NOT supposed to radiate at all!

                    It is designed to PREVENT radiation!

                    See my earlier post:

                    Originally posted by lamare View Post
                    Tesla illustrated this himself in an article "THE TRANSMISSION OF ELECTRICAL ENERGY WITHOUT WIRES" on March 5, 1904, which you can find at:
                    Transmission of Electrical Energy Without Wires

                    He used the following illustration to show the difference between electromagnetic radiation (either "Herzian" or longitudinal, btw) and his system:

                    The text in the upper part of the picture reads:
                    Electromagnetic Hertz waves radiated horiontally from vertical conductor, slightly affected by conducting Earth surface.
                    ENERGY UNRECOVERABLE
                    Now why is this so important? Because no matter what kind of waves are transmitted from the vertical conductor, with or without a sphere on top, the energy radiates away in all directions and is therefore lost for all but a very small fraction!

                    This same picture is also printed in Eric Dollard's book, with the following comment:
                    Tuks DrippingPedia : Theory Of Wireless Power

                    It can therefore be seen that while the transmission of transverse waves involves the spraying of energy, with its consequent square law diminishment of energy density, and no hope of retrieving the unused energy, the Tesla system involves the direct connection of transmitter and receiver, via the pulsating lines of electric induction. Therefore, the transmitter and receiver are rendered as one apparatus.

                    Now finally, back to your questions. First of all, yes, there are longitudinal waves being transmitted/exchanged between the transmitter and reciever balls. The point is that these radiate in all directions, no matter whether they are electromagnetic (Herzian) waves or Tesla's longitudinal waves. Both kind of waves diminish very rapidly when not quided such as to form a standing wave, because the energy is sprayed into space in both cases!!!!

                    In Tesla's own words:
                    Nikola Tesla On His Work With Alternating Currents -- Chapter IV
                    I prefer to reduce those waves in quantity and pass a current into the earth, because electromagnetic wave energy is not recoverable while that [earth] current is entirely recoverable, being the energy stored in an elastic system.
                    So, to sum this up:
                    Yes, longitudinal waves as well as transversal waves are transmitted by your sphere/coil arangement. And yes, you can detect them at some distance and use them to transfer energy over a small distance. The point is that this kind of energy radiaton should be avoided as much as possible, because all energy radiated into space is wasted can cannot be recovered. And the energy gain that Tesla found, and which is why he called his invention the "Magnifying Transmitter", is to be found in the higher order resonance standing wave in/along the "ground" connection between transmitter and receiver.

                    So, the critical component in a magnifying system is the "ground" connection between transmitter and receiver, which should be in higher order resonance and non-radiating. And that is the essential difference between the transmission of energy "trough the air" and Tesla's system.
                    Btw, the term scalar wave is an oxymoron. Dollard:
                    Tuks DrippingPedia : Energetic Form Posts

                    I had a young student from Korea visit me a few years back. He had no problem understanding the basic concept of producing an energy synthesizing apparatus, because his mind was uncontaminated by all of the Bedini/Bearden falsehoods. The term Scalar Wave is an oxymoron, as scalar is part of the propagation constant that is NOT A WAVE! (Idiots!)


                    The disinformers have convinced you that this whole quantity (RB + XB) is scalar, RG is the only scalar component. It is DC and has NO FREQUENCY, no WAVELENGTH and thus NO WAVE!

                    SCALER = NO WAVE

                    GET IT???
                    So, let's call the beast by it's proper name from now on: Longitudinal Dielectric Wave. No Magnetic component! No Scalar. It's a wave...

                    So, now we know what we are talking about, it is clear that the actual transmission of HF longitudinal waves using low-voltages is basically unexplored territory. All the TMT replications currently out there are completely different beasts, because the spheres they are using are not designed as antenna.

                    So, what we are facing is most of all the question of how to design our transmitter sphere antenna. It should have a radius of 1/4 lambda and should be fed from the centre of the sphere. With such a configuration, the antenna hopefully behaves pretty much like a normal 1/4 lambda antenna from the point of view of the transmitter. And that is important, because we need to have the proper impedance in order to get the energy from our transmitter into our antenna.

                    Yes, you can use much smaller spheres and use the big hammer method with high voltages as Tesla did. If you want to do that: good luck.

                    But if you want to get something working with a normal transmitter: go for a 1/4 lambda sphere.

                    Now let's take a look at what Monstein and Wesley did:
                    Monstein, Wesley - Observation of scalar longitudinal electrodynamic waves(2002).pdf

                    They used a frequency of 433.59 MHz, with an equivalent EM frequency of 276 MHz. When we feed that in a wavelength calculator (Frequency Wavelength Calculator ), we get a wavelength of about 1.1 m or 1/4 lambda of 27 cm, while they used a sphere with a radius of 30 mm, which would be about 10% more than 1/4 lambda. And apparantly that works pretty well, including the way they feed it, which is at the centre indeed.

                    How nice. The theory matches the practical implementation for a change.

                    Last edited by lamare; 11-05-2011, 10:39 PM. Reason: typo, added link


                    • #11
                      After a discussion on a Dutch radio amateur forum, which hopefully leads to contacts with some people that may actually be able to pull this off, I concluded that a sphere antenna actually needs to have a n * 1/2 lambda radius.

                      The Dutch discussion is here:
                      Zendamateur.COM - Toon onderwerp - Wie voert de eerste longitudinale moon-bounce uit??

                      It may also be possible to use other shapes of antenna. The essential difference between transversal and longitudinal modes is this:

                      a) a difference between propagation speed with a factor pi/2 regardless of the medium;
                      b) "open" versus "closed" feedline.

                      One end of the antenna, wether a sphere or a straight wire, is always open. That's where you per definition get a voltage node. At the feed point, you get either a voltage or a current node, depending on wether or not the feed point is able to "float" freely with regards to it's potential.

                      Normally, the feed is connected to a more or less fixed potential, so you get a current node at your feed. Since Eric Dollard used capacitive coupling in his longitudinal demonstration, I concluded that you need to have a voltage node at your feed, which you can achieve by capacitively coupling your transmitter to the feed point.

                      The interesting thing is that because of the factor pi/2 (1.57) the resonance frequencies of longitudinal vs. transversal modes are that different that your eventual configuration gets a clear preference for one of these modes at the desired frequency. In other words: you can suppress the transversal mode substantially with proper design.

                      So, in order to make a longitudinal transmitter antenna, you need to make an n * 1/2 lambda antenna *and* you have to make sure that *both* ends of your antenna are "open" with respect to the applied potential, so hardly as little current as possible flows between your transmitter and your antenna, which results in the magnetic (transversal) components of your wave being supressed to a substantial degree.


                      • #12
                        Posted this on the jk_wireless Yahoo group:

                        Yahoo! Groups

                        I have been theorizing on how to build a system for the transmission of longitudinal waves, after I found this article wherein a succesfull practical proof of concept is described:

                        Since it was reported by Dollard that the propagation speed of longitudinal waves is a factor pi/2 (1.57) larger than the propagation speed of transversal waves, I figured a demonstration of longitudinal moon bouncing would be THE final chapter for Einstein's relativity nonsense, so I started a thread at the EF to see how far we can come with that:

                        Most important conclusion so far is that your sphere has to have an n * 1/4 lambda radius in order for it to resonate like a dipole antenna, since with a n * 1/4 lambda radius, you basically have an infinite array of 1/2 wave dipoles....

                        Now if you want to calculate the wavelength for the frequency you are designing your transmitter for, you can simply calculate the corresponding transversal frequency by dividing your longitudinal frequency by pi/2 (1.57). I calculated that for the values reported in the paper:


                        "They used a frequency of 433.59 MHz, with an equivalent EM frequency of 276 MHz. When we feed that in a wavelength calculator ( Frequency Wavelength Calculator ), we get a wavelength of about 1.1 m or 1/4 lambda of 27 cm, while they used a sphere with a radius of 30 mm, which would be about 10% more than 1/4 lambda."

                        And apparantly that works pretty well. Interesting detail is that they feed their sphere from the centre, where you have a current node, just as what you have with a normal 1/4 lambda dipole, so you can drive it with a normal transmitter. (oops, that should have been: "a normal 1/2 lambda dipole" or "a normal 1/4 lambda wire antenna")

                        If you drive it from the outside, you drive it at a voltage node, which means you drive it with high voltage, low current. Dollard used capacitive coupling in his longitudinal experiment, so that is probaly the way to go if you want to feed your sphere at a point at the outside. It may be a good idea to use a trimmer cap between your coil and your sphere, so you can tune the whole setup.

                        I realize this gets a bit confusing. What should it be now, n * 1/2 lambda or n * 1/4 lambda??

                        All right. Now the outside of your sphere is per definition a voltage node. You get these every 1/2 lambda.

                        If you want to drive your sphere from a normal transmitter, which is designed to feed a normal dipole or 1/4 lambda antenna at a current node, you need to feed your sphere from the centre and it needs to have a radius of n * 1/4 lambda in order to get your current node at the centre in order to keep your transmitter happy.

                        If you want to drive your sphere from a transmitter capable of driving a dipole at a voltage node (basically: high voltage, low current), you can either use a sphere with a radius of n * 1/4 lamda and drive it from the outside, or you can take a sphere with a radius of n * 1/2 lambda and drive it from the centre.

                        At this moment it still has to be determined how to drive an antenna at a voltage node exactly.

                        Eric Dollard's experiments suggests that capacitive coupling to a normal transmitter may work. A transmitter like Tesla's TMT probably also works very well, because it's coil is in a self-resonance mode and normally you use the already "open" side of the coil to drive your sphere. So, if you match the size of your sphere to the oscillation frequency of your TMT when oscillating without any capacitive load at the top, you're probably O.K.
                        Last edited by lamare; 11-05-2011, 10:32 PM. Reason: oops


                        • #13
                          In that forum someone made an interesting remark, antennas we know radiate or at least should radiate a small, none existent according to maxwell equations, portion longitudinally. This alone is interesting to know and has been mentioned in distinti's "new electromagnetism theory".

                          page 19
                          I believe there's a more in depth derivation in some other pdf.

                          Also why are you worrying about standing waves on the surface of the sphere. What are the frequency ranges you had in mind? If the sphere is small and frequency has meter long wave lengths then it should be a none issue no? Even if you had a huge sphere and high frequency the standing waves on the surface would or should still emit longitudinal waves. Just like a standard antenna emits transverse waves while its length is multiple times the length of the underlying wave.
                          Last edited by broli; 11-05-2011, 10:49 PM.


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by broli View Post
                            Also why are you worrying about standing waves on the surface of the sphere. What are the frequency ranges you had in mind? If the sphere is small and frequency has meter long wave lengths then it should be a none issue no? Even if you had a huge sphere and high frequency the standing waves on the surface would or should still emit longitudinal waves.
                            Jus try getting low frequency sounds, like a 100 Hz sine wave, from a loudspeaker designed for high frequencies (tweeter) or just any speaker with a very small cone and you know what I mean....

                            For the moon-bounce project, we need high gain antenna's and considerable power, so we need to use sattellite dishes as antenna, fed with a sphere. Since readily available dishes have a diameter of in the order of 1 to may be 5m, I am aiming for high frequencies, at least 500 MHz or so.
                            Last edited by lamare; 11-05-2011, 10:55 PM.


                            • #15
                              I'm not knowledgeable in that field.

                              But what would the difference be between one large surface and many small individual patches covered over a large surface. The boundaries of these small patches do not connect but all are connected to the center of the sphere. Wouldn't that eliminate the standing wave issue on the sphere?