Jump to content

Talk:Tesla coil

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Shockeroo (talk | contribs) at 17:26, 22 June 2007 (→‎What do they actually DO?!). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconPhysics B‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Soft redirect to:Module:WikiProject banner/doc
This page is a soft redirect.

Nikola Tesla Experiments in Alternate Currents Suggested Link

Tesla Purpose

What is the purpose of the Tesla coil?

It doesn't need a purpose; it's designed to look awesome. Wunderbear 21:12, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

tesla effect

The June 7th revision by 204.56.7.1 again refers to a "Tesla Effect". On the same date, the same author also provided a new Wiki page that defines the Tesla_effect. However, the newly listed "effect" does not appear to fit the definition of an accepted scientific phenomenon, nor does it appear to be defined as precisely as all of the other effects currently listed in Scientific_phenomena_named_after_people. And, the new Wiki page that explains the "Tesla Effect" is not much help since it initially seems to imply a high voltage/capacitive effect, but then refers to electromagnetic induction. A Google search indicates a number of conflicting definitions for the term "Tesla Effect". And, virtually all of these references come from non-scientific/pseudoscientific sources. Although I can appreciate the author's attempt to honor Tesla in this fashion, I still recommend deleting reference to the "Tesla Effect" since it's ill-defined and is not an accepted scientific phenomenon in the league of other named scientific phenomena. Thoughts? Bert

don't delete; debunk.  :-) my philosophy. - Omegatron 16:33, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)
I have been searching for a coherent description of the "Tesla effect", and as Bert says (above), there's a lot of nutty stuff out there. However, I found an interesting extract from a book called "Lost Science" by Gerry Vassilatos that occupies about the last two-thirds of this web page. I think I understand what the extract is trying to describe, before it veers off into "alternative" physics about halfway through. It seems to be saying that the Tesla effect is what Tesla saw happening to resonant objects that fell inside the field of his pulsed EM transmitter - they developed high-voltage discharges whose amplitudes did not fall off with distance from the transmitter. He though that he had discovered a new kind of electricity that disobeyed Maxwell's laws, and even conservation of energy by the sound of it. He also thought that unipolar pulses of current were qualitatively different from AC, so that what he was seeing could not have been EM induction. We now know that pulses are just bundles of different frequencies of AC, so EM induction applies to them too. A modern physicist, reading between the lines of this account, would conclude that what Tesla saw was straightforward voltage multiplication in resonant LC circuits (the metallic objects he used as targets). By modifying their shapes to increase the multiplication, he was actually tuning them in to the transmitter. He went on to use this effect to build the Tesla coil. You could define the "Tesla effect" as electromagnetic energy transfer from one resonant air-cored coil to another.
An important aspect of the effect is that the transmitter was driven by pulses and not continuous AC. I suspect that this was because Tesla could not generate AC at high enough frequencies, so instead he used the pulses to trigger resonance in his primary coil (the transmitter). The resulting output must have been close to a continuous wave. I wish I knew what frequency he was working at - it would remove so much of the guesswork - but I suppose he had no way of measuring it. --Heron 21:14, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

These sources cite the "high voltage/capacitive effect",

  • Norrie, H. S., "Induction Coils: How to make, use, and repair them". Norman H. Schneider, 1907, New York. 4th edition.
  • Electrical experimenter, Janaury 1919. pg. 615

I will be adding other citation (as there are others) when I can. Norrie make reference to it's use in electrothreapy and lighting. There is a really good article about Tesla's wireless lighting that has the digram of the effect, written in Tesla's time .... it talk about his lighting effect (2 plates and a HVHF generator or another AC source; take his wireless bulb between the plates and it lights up) .

As to it not being like the other effects currently listed in Scientific_phenomena_named_after_people, it is list just like Edison's effect is listed.

Wardenclyffe Tower

The qualified statement "This type of coil may have been used as the basis for the Wardenclyffe Tower project" seems timid; if you have a look at the tower it is obvious. Waveguy

violet wand

The violet wand edit appears to advertise an unrelated subject.

There is no link between violet wand (Erotic electrostimulation) and tesla coil (electronics), save for the fact that one uses the other. Many thousands of objects use wood in their construction, but wood does not direct a reader to each. I believe it would be unlikley that someone looking into this aspect of electronics would appreciate being directed into an unrelared field.

On the contrary, the violet wand was a Nikola Tesla invention: a handheld Tesla coil connected to a gas discharge tube intended to be applied to the skin. His invention was an electrotherapy device which today is regarded as quack medicine. Numerous companies began copying Tesla's design, prompting Tesla's financial adviser to complain that Tesla was losing millions of dollars by not defending his invention. Tesla refused to pursue the copycats.--Wjbeaty 10:35, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)

Adjustments

  • quote "It is advisable to begin the adjustments with low-power and low-frequency oscillations" This sentence does not make sense. I agree with the low-power part. But the purpose of the adjustments (tuning) is to adjust the resonant frequency of the primary circuit to match the one of the secondary. Therefore, you don't run your coil at a lower frequency to make adjustments, but you run it at low-power to make frequency adjustments. Would you agree? (I open the discussion, and I'll change the sentence if I don't get a negative feedback...) Glaurung 12:58, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • While we build a tesla coil, calculation formulas is needed. But there was no formulas even the most simplest one.
  • Changed it Glaurung 07:22, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Changed it again Glaurung 30 June 2005 10:07 (UTC)

For anyone, curious this article is horribly out of date. I think I am going to start a re write. Eric Urban 04:30, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

skin effect

Skin Effect Edit: I did some significant rewording to correct a potentially dangerous misconception that Tesla Coil sparks are not painful because "skin effect" causes most of the current flow on the outside of the expeimenter's skin. This is a very popular misconception, but it can easily be proved as being false. The misconceptin could lead to injury or even death of careless or unwary experimenters. --Bert 17:07, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I also agree with Eric Urban that much of the text is out of date. Have added some verbiage about the nature of Tesla Coil discharges and did further edits to the Skin Effect area, making it a separate section. --Bert 15:00, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This article (and derivatives) is the only place where I've encountered a Tesla Coil being called "self-regenerative resonant transformer". Today, this device is more accurately known as a "dual resonant air core transformer" to reflect the fact that there are two coupled LC circuits. The source for the "self-regenerative" term is probably from one of Tesla's patents, but the term is really no longer used to decribe resonant transformers today. Perhaps we could acknowledge Tesla's terminology, but I'd recommend also indicating that the modern-day term for this device is a "dual-resonant, air-core transformer". Using the more accurate/modern terminology would also help researchers find other modern-day applications. Thoughts?--Bert 15:00, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

  • I agree. This article needs major re-work and organization. I was expecting much from Eric Urban's rewrite, but he apparently disappeared from Wikipedia before changing anything important. With some work, and additional pictures, this could even become a featured article. Glaurung 07:16, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)


Alternating current driven for transceiving

I removed this and placed a different explanation in its place. Tesla coils do not transceive. True, the secondary coil and its capacitor can be used in receive mode generally Tesla coils are not driven for such purpose given the poor radiation achieved.

Rewrite

I am beginning a rewrite as of 12/23/2004. Eric Urban 04:43, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I think you should write something about it on the article. Something like {{inuse}}, but not sure if that's for full rewrites that take time Kieff | Talk 14:03, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)

I suggest that all references to Nikola Tesla in the Tesla coil article refer to him by his full name to avoid confusion with the discussion of the Tesla coil itself. I am doing so in my rewrite.Eric Urban 03:17, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

  • The template {{inuse}} should be used for a limited amount of time. You can put it while you are editing the page to avoid editing conflicts. But you put that warning two days ago and you haven't edited the page since. So I would suggest you remove it and put it back when you will really be ready to edit the page. Glaurung 08:14, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Tesla coils feature in the Command and Conquer series of strategy computer games, as a weapon on the Soviet side. What sort of heading could be added to this article in order to mention this? Something like "In entertainment"? –– Constafrequent (talk page) 03:14, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

sure. - Omegatron 04:04, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)
try putting it under the "Tesla coils in popular culture" heading... when someone makes it Cal 1234 15:10, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)

waveform

i'd love to see a waveform of the output of a coil. I imagine it's a high frequency wave periodically decaying exponentially? triggered each time it sparks? - Omegatron 16:37, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)

It's actually considerably more complex than that since the energy in the secondary builds over a number of cycles, and the output waveform is dependent on when the primary spark gap stops conducting ("quenches") and whether or not there are discharges that are also removing energy from the secondary. See the following sections of Richie Burnette's site for some of the gory details:

Happy reading, --Bert 18:10, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

So that's a Tesla coil!

There's a cool looking photo of a tesla coil in action somewhere in the middle of the article, but it should be on top of the page! Putting it on top, as happens with other articles with nice to-the-point images, makes the whole article more inviting and overall enjoying to read. So trust me, it'll look better once I put it on top! Kreachure 22:09, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

thumbs up!

Tesla's coils

Couldn't we get one of those pictures of actual Tesla's coils for the top of the article? What are their copyright status? ☢ Ҡieff 17:26, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Transmission

The placement of the spark gap versus the capacitor in the tank circuit does not significantly alter the operation of a Tesla Coil. In either position, the capacitor is initially charged to the spark gap's breakdown voltage via the AC supply transformer. In either configuration, the gap will break down at the same voltage, and in either configuration, current will suddenly ("disruptively") begin flowing through the gap, discharging the tank capacitor through the primary winding. Tesla utilized both circuit configurations, but he also came to recognize that placing the spark gap across the AC supply transformer reduced high frequency voltage stress on its windings. Modern Tesla Coils use this same configuration, and many enthusiasts also add low pass RC filters between the gap and AC transformer so as to provide further protection. This is particularly important when using relatively fragile Neon Sign Transformers (NST's). The prior wording that discussed marked differences between the two circuit configurations is not borne out by experiment and is also poorly worded. The longitudinal wave and radiant energy material is unsupported and speculative. Bert March 19, 2006

The longitudinal wave and radiant energy material is unsupported? Have you read his patents and other writings? It's not speculative. Tesla repeatedly talks of "radiant energy". "The true wireless" was made possible by Tesla's concentrated attention on the production of a powerful induction coil and the invention of the oscillation transformer (eg., the Tesla Coil). Longitudinal waves are "non-Hertzian waves" or not traverse waves. 204.56.7.1 14:51, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe Tesla ever refered to "Longitudinal waves". This term seems to be a latter day invention. In any event, my revisions of March 19, 2006 were directed towards wording that implied profound differences between having the spark gap, or the tank cap, across the HV supply transformer in a Tesla Coil. Tesla NEVER claimed anything like this and, in fact, he utilized both circuit configurations (and many others) during his research. The wording that I changed also had severe POV problems in addition to being outright wrong. Tesla did, in fact, propose using what we would now call electrostatic induction to change the voltage on Earth's self-C via the Wardenclyffe facility. What Tesla said, his patents, and the laws of physics are not always consistent. Bert 17:07, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
1st, I would lean to support your contention that Tesla claimed anything like that ... I'd have to look into it though to fully support that .... and, yes, he utilized both circuit configurations (and many others) ...
2nd, did Tesla propose using what we would now call electrostatic induction to change the voltage on Earth's self-C via the Wardenclyffe facility? Yes, for the most part ... but there was much more to it (what you state is a bit of simplification, IMHO) ....
Now, did Tesla ever talk about "Longitudinal waves"? Yes ...
In "Tesla see evidence radio and light are sound" ... "It is true that many scientific minds envisaged the theory of a gaseous aether, but it was rejected again and-again because in such a medium longitudinal waves would be propogated with infinite velocity. Lord Kelvin conceived the so-called contractile ether, possessing properties which would result in a finite velocity of longitudinal waves. In 1885, however, an academic dissertation was published by Prof. De Volson Wood, an American, at a Hoboken institution, which dealt with a gaseous ether in which the elasticity, density and specific heat were determined with rare academic elegance. But, so far, everything pertaining to the subject was purely theoretical."
In "Roentgen rays or streams" ... "It is significant that, with these and other facts before him, Roentgen inclined to the conviction that the rays he discovered were longitudinal waves of aether."
In "Nikola tesla tells of new radio theories; Does Not Believe in Hertz Waves and Heaviside Layer, Interview Discloses" ... "I had maintained for many years before that such a medium as supposed could not exist, and that we must rather accept the view that all space is filled with a gaseous substance. On repeating the Hertz experiments with much improved and very powerful apparatus, I satisfied myself that what he had observed was nothing else but effects of longitudinal waves in a gaseous medium, that is to say, waves, propagated by alternate compression and expansion. He had observed waves in the aether much of the nature of sound waves in the air."
These were done off a quick search ...
Lastly ... I agree that Tesla's experiments, his patents, Tesla's quotes, and the "laws" of physics are not always consistent (with that latter more in error with phenonomena) ...
134.193.168.243 19:55, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The "alternate configuration" schematic really just confuses the article. If you would like to delete it and re-word the article around that deletion, be my guest. I just drew it up to illustrate the assertion that Bert has since debunked. --Jim, K7JEB 05:24, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The "alternate configuration" schematic is applicable. Tesla utilized both circuit configurations, the precise one pending his application. 134.193.94.71 22:23, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tesla's purpose?

What is the purpose of the Tesla coil? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.155.46.32 (talkcontribs)

here and there, where a high voltage low current high frequency is required, a Tesla transformer (resonant, air core, double tuned) can be the easiest way to provide it, I have seen one example of an airborne pulsed radar using such a power supply. HOWEVER, 99.9% of the TCs in the world are built for the hell of it, because they can be built, for the wow factor and because they look pretty. If I want a kick and do it by buying a 42" home theatre system, anybody with money can do that. But to build a TC I need skill, and how many people have that?NeilUK 07:53, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For what did Tesla use this invention? The present entry doesn't say. The TC wasn't created to be a spark generator, although that aspect did figure historically. Let's start a list:

1. power supply for physics research into high voltage at high frequencies. It competed with the Induction Coil in early physics labs at various universities.

2. high power radio transmitter. Tesla was trying to transmit around the entire Earth, and Marconi only succeeded transmitting over long distances when he started using the so-called "Tesla oscillator." All the early "spark transmitters" were tesla coils with a wire antenna connected to the output.

3. high-volt driver for wireless fluorescent lighting. Tesla lit his turn of the century NYC lab with fluorescent tubes.

4. power supply for x-ray tubes of extremely high output intensity.

5. induction heater

6. medical diathermy (heats flesh, Tesla's company sold these units)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Wjbeaty (talkcontribs)

Unclear diagram of tesla coil and description

I find it difficult to understand the initial diagram of the Tesla coil and the description following it. First of all, the parts should be labeled, if not in words, with letters with references by the text. Second, a step-by-step description of what happens with each component at each stage of every cycle is necessary to understand how it works -- where current is flowing, where induction takes place, etc.

The section entitled "Description" needs diagrams to explain the text. I cannot understand using the text alone.

Responsible rewrite still needed

2007.1.6 Documented SSTC & VTTC. Some of this article is pretty neat and some is terrible, mainly at the beginning. It seems as though there's a lot of quoting from Tesla's communications or patents, and he wasn't trying too hard to be understood by most of the people who are going to read the article. Was the person who wrote that even a coiler, I wonder, or just for some reason moved to do some transcription? One vote for slash and burn, by anybody who's going to do it right.

There seems to be a lot of ambiguity about whether an "extra coil", or "magnifier", design is being discussed in the Tesla-ese, as opposed to a classical, two-winding setup. If we're going to talk about Tesla's work specifically, lets do it well.

And yes, Tesla was an ordinary man, he took out some patents on things that don't work (and on some that do), he was very histrionic, and let's continue to avoid pseudoscience.

72.72.37.51 02:04, 7 January 2007 (UTC)Packer[reply]

OK, I couldn't take it anymore. I started reading the top of the article again, and some of it's comprehensible, even though it needs lots of illustration and is a touch boring. However, some of it seemed to have been edited badly, producing nothing coherent. I worked it around and fleshed it out rather extravagantly, but what I removed was minimal; I think it had been added by somebody who hadn't read or understood what they were altering.

I left in language I didn't like, out of politeness, but at least somebody can read the thing now.

72.72.37.51 00:44, 14 January 2007 (UTC)Packer[reply]

The "current understanding" is that energy does not have charge? How far are we going to take this? The Earth is "currently believed" to be spheroidal? I'm an epistemological nihilist myself; I don't think I know my own name, but this kind of thing is taken as read, you don't incessantly say that we don't know this or that when it's as likely as the nose on your face. Before you challenge basic science, it could be preferable to study it.

72.72.37.51 07:15, 22 January 2007 (UTC)Packer[reply]

Added explanation of what a patent wasn't. I refrained from repeating what I have read, that the US Patent Office, specifically in response to Tesla taking out many patents of very dubious merit, instituted a requirement that a working model be submitted with each patent application, which requirement was rescinded some decades later.

WELCOME to the Wiki Physics folks!!! 72.72.103.19 06:37, 25 February 2007 (UTC)Packer[reply]

You know, the Tesla cultist(s) who keep transcribing stuff into this article that they don't understand are making the whole thing look like a joke. I suggest they build and operate whatever they want to talk about, then talk about it!

72.72.103.19 04:54, 26 February 2007 (UTC)Packer[reply]

Maybe we should abandon "Tesla Coil" to the cultist(s) who keep transcribing material that they don't understand, and that the vast majority of visitors won't understand, which has essentially ruined the article, and start a new article for all the other material; perhaps we could call it "Tesla Coiling", but something like "Tesla Coil, Modern" is also a possibility. In fact, calling it simply "Coiling" might help a lot to prevent unwanted edits. I just think that this article is a lost cause because of these transcriptions.

72.72.99.194 01:01, 1 March 2007 (UTC)Packer[reply]

"High frequency electrical current" ?

What are you guys, retarded? What would you measure that in, precisely? Hertz-amperes? Charges*cycles per second squared? Is it some form of acceleration, then?

Not that everyone doesn't already expect scientific illiteracy from Wikipedia. Thanks, Jimbo, for making a medium where any idiot can pretend to have 4 doctorates, or 40 doctorates, or whatever, and fleece you, and by extension, the rest of the unwashed masses that make this site their home pages. Obviously the best person to ask for information about Tesla Coils is the first person you meet on the street corner, because that's exactly who is contributing to Wikipedia. --76.209.58.121 06:10, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Atlanta Ga experiment on population?

This section:

"In Atlanta GA, USA, students at Morehouse College have constructed a 32ft tall, 4.5 gigawatt coil to demonstrate potential biological effects of high voltage current on human populations. It was designed by Dr.Andrew Hedrick, also of Atlanta, and funded by a grant from Harpo Productions. It is reported that during operation, people within a 20 block radius of the device can feel the hair on the back of their necks stand up, and small sparks can be seen jumping between the teeth of people."

Has to be absolutely untrue for several reasons. There's no way any college kids could have built a 4.5 GIGAWATT coil. That would be more power output than most nuclear power plants are capable of. Using the current standard equation for predicting tesla coil output, that would result in sparks 6700 feet long from the top of the coil. That probably would have been noticed, and made significant national and international news. Not to mention because of all the nearby people that would kill, both by lightning strikes, and anyone with a pacemaker.

I also call into question the idea that any university could get permission to do experiments on a human population, especially those that involve high voltage electricity flying through the air, and sparks jumping between people's teeth. And as noted above, anyone with a pacemaker would die after it malfunctioned due to the extreme radio transmissions from the coil.

Reception citations

Need citations. Putting them under each bullet. J. D. Redding

  • The secondary coil and its capacitor can be used in receive mode.
  • The Tesla Coil can also be made to utilize atmospheric electricity.
    • Plauson, U.S. Patent 1540998 , "Conversion of atmospheric electric energy". Jun. 1925.
    • U.S. Patent 0685957 - Apparatus for the utilization of radiant energy - N. Tesla
    • U.S. Patent 0685958 - Method of utilizing of radiant energy - N. Tesla
  • Tesla stated that the output power attained from these devices was low.
    • Noted that this was only via Hertzian methods
  • There are, to date, no commercial power generation applications that use this technology.
    • Noted that this was only via Hertzian methods
  • The power levels achieved by Tesla Coil receivers have, thus far, been a small fraction of the output power of the transmitters.
    • Noted that this was only via Hertzian methods
  • Various public demonstration of such technology, by any individual, group, college or university, industrial concern, government agency or laboratory or other entity of various kind have been reported.

I wonder if most, or all, of this section shouldn't be moved to Wireless energy transfer? Bert 14:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC) Some could be, but the majority should be left here. J. D. Redding[reply]

OK... The discussions/references pertaining to Tesla's Radiant Energy patents in the "Reception" section have nothing to do with Tesla Coils. Their presence in an article about Tesla Coils is confusing and off topic. A Tesla Coil resonator can indeed serve as reception device to detect rapid changes in local electrostatic or magnetic fields, and coupling can be inductive, capacitive, or conductive (base driven), and energy transfer can be via near field and/or far field effects. However, Tesla's Radiant Energy patents describe relatively slow charge collection on electrically isolated plates via atmospheric electricity, charged particles, or other sources of ionizing radiation, with the charge being SLOWLY accumulated across a low leakage high voltage capacitor. These patents, and the associated radiant energy discussion, have nothing to do with the description, design, operation, or theory of Tesla Coils. The Radiant Energy patents/discussions have nothing to do with the "Tesla Antennas" either (which is an RF device). Tesla coils utilize energy transfer between two (or more) tuned resonant circuits. Tesla's Radiant Energy patents show a variety of simple capacitor storage circuits including some that switch the charged capacitor to drive loads (either directly, or via an _untuned_ transformer). The entire radiant energy references and discussion might better fit in [Wireless power]] or perhaps {Wardenclyffe Tower]]. In any event, it does not belong here. Bert 16:59, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Tesla coil receivers" were an application of Tesla coils. Their presence in an article about Tesla Coils is clarifying the uses of his coils and on topic. A Tesla Coil resonator can indeed serve as reception device. Tesla coils can slowly charge electrically. These patents, and the associated radiant energy discussion, have everything to do with the description, design, operation, or theory of Tesla Coils and "Tesla Antennas". J. D. Redding 17:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC) (BTW., the material was added due to "citation needed" fact tags. This rectifies the situation of needing the references. J. D. Redding)[reply]

OK... Please show WHERE (in the Radiant Energy patents) tuned circuits are employed? Explain just HOW can a base-grounded resonator (the definition of a Tesla Antenna) can "charge up" slowly? WHERE is the connection between the Radiant Energy patents (using isolated plates to slowly charge a HV capacitor (via charged particles from cosmic rays, x-rays, beta particles, etc.) and the theory/operation of Tesla Coils? I fail to grasp how a slow accumulation of DC on a HV capacitor bears ANY relationship to an RF-excited Tesla Antenna or a Tesla Coil. Adding citations that do not relate to Tesla Coils does NOT improve the accuracy and understandability of this article - it detracts and potentially confuses readers. Bert 18:35, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


The U.S. Patent 0723188, Method of Signaling, and U.S. Patent 0725605, System of Signaling, call for a elevated transmitter capacitance and a corresponding receiver. There is a top node, a earth electrode, and a transformer (with the primary or secondary, depending on the use, connected to a condenser). Transmitting, it's a impulse generator. Receiving, it's a impulse accumulator. The phrase "vibrate in synchronism" is key in U.S. Patent 0685953, Apparatus for Utilizing Effects Transmitted from a Distance to a Receiving Device through Natural Media. The "effects" are "radiant energy effects".

In U.S. Patent 0685954, Method of Utilizing Effects Transmitted through Natural Media may be from an "independent source" at a distant transmitting electrical energy (say a transmitter or a natural source). The isolated plate is the top terminal consisting of a metallic frame in the shape of a toroid. It can slowly charge a capacitor after a step down transformation (lowering the voltage, increasing the current). Notice in U.S. Patent 1119732, you can have a capacitor ... and this structure can be used as a reciever instead of a transmitter.

I can go on ... but this will do for now ... J. D. Redding 18:53, 6 April 2007 (UTC) (ps.,Tesla also states that U.S. Patent 0685957, Apparatus for the Utilization of Radiant Energy, is related to U.S. Patent 0577671, Manufacture of Electrical Condensers, Coils and Similar Devices.)[reply]

Appendium:

  • U.S. patent 7,053,576 states this system in more complete terms. J. D. Redding 19:49, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Abstract "transmitter and a receiver both incorporating Tesla coils"
    • Page 10 "The transmitter and receiver each preferably comprise a Tesla coil" ...
    • Page 14, "Eventually, in his power transmission system, he would replace this transmit-ter with a Tesla coil, and place an identical receiving coil at the receiving [...]"

Telluric Currents

Removed statement about Telluric currents in entry paragraph since it does not pertain to actual Tesla Coil operation. Bert 23:53, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do they actually DO?!

I skimmed this entire article checking the introduction and contents twice, and was left with no idea

1) Why these things were/are built

2) What they actually do

I feel this should be rectified. Shockeroo 17:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]