Talk-Polywell.org

Pulled out a Tesla book I have, Tesla's Science of Energy, edited by Thomas Valone. Realized there was a chapter I hadn't read yet, and so dove in. I like that I can understand most of what's in the book, the only part I can't is the paper he put in on longitudinal waves(Robert Bass), but that's some funky math anyway.

Anyway, chapter ten is by Oliver Nicholson, who spoke of some effects Tesla recorded, but most people discount--having a self sustaining generator, and superconduction in Tesla coils.

He does a pretty good job switching from ether theory(you have to understand Tesla was using ether when designing stuff, not electrons) to electrons/quantum theory, and explaining what he thinks was happening in layman's terms.

He said to look at electrons in a conductor as a fluid, rather than a cloud of billiard balls. This eases the idea of looking at the current as a wave instead of a particle flow. The "superconduction" wasn't the conductor, as we normally think, but possibly a change in the current itself.

Rather than mess with materials, would it make sense to instead look at generating a current that superconducts, rather than a conductor that does?

At the least it should make for an interesting experiment. Even if it fails.

(Whats the line? "If you don't have at least a 50% chance of failure, it isn't research.")

not sure how that would translate.

to be "superconducting" in the sense that is meant today, would be to have a region of space that responds a certain way to currents / changes in currents. (which interact with, at least, the boundary of that region.)

and the only way it can respond in any relevant sense is electromagnetically.

so if you're talking about a "current" being superconducting, you're talking about a current in a region of space, where said current spatially changes in a certain way in response to electromagnetic fields impinging upon it.

now electronmagnetic fields can only act one way: that way defined by - in classical electromagnetics: maxwell's equations - and in quantum electrodynamics: the dirac equation.

so the only way they're going to respond differently than they usually do, is if the solution to those equations is atypical. and the solution to those equations is defined solely by their local quantum electrodynamic environment.

which, excepting some extremely high energy or low energy state (i'm talking quark soups or bose-einstien condensate), is going to be made up of bosons and fermions in their naturally (or fairly naturally) occurring near-equilibrium energy states (namely, atoms, and at a higher level, molecules). which is traditionally called "matter", or "material".

Quod ergo demonstratum.

Superconduction is effectively a "condensate" of bosonic electron aglomerates. Regular electrons are fermionic and subject to the exclusion principle. Bosons are not. If there were a fluid of bosonic electron pairs (call them Cooper if you wish) then they would not interact with the fermions in the conductor per-se. Thus they would superconduct.

Or not.

KitemanSA wrote:Superconduction is effectively a "condensate" of bosonic electron aglomerates. Regular electrons are fermionic and subject to the exclusion principle. Bosons are not. If there were a fluid of bosonic electron pairs (call them Cooper if you wish) then they would not interact with the fermions in the conductor per-se. Thus they would superconduct.

Or not.

so its their spin that's the problem? ah, but i still think the holes left by the much slower moving bosons would have to be in coherence. unless you have pure electrons - but then you have a plasma, which is, in a sense, superconducting already.

I can't help it ... I wonder what Johan would say about this idea?

He pointed out in the book that the Colorado Springs coil ran at a minimum of something like 100 amps at 20 million volts or so. It was known he was kicking absurd amounts of power into it. He showed some math, and was calculating something like 19 MeV minimum, IIRC. What do electrons start doing at that point?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2287316/valon ... nergy-2002

Didn't realize the book was online. Paper is chapter ten, page 179. He explains it much better than I could without copying verbatim.