--- Colin Quinney <[email protected]> wrote:
> Podkletnov voltage range was between 500 KV to 2 MV.
> Below 500 KV they did
> not report. My assumption is that it starts
> penetrating above that voltage.
> IOW, I'm wondering if below 500KV the penetration
> effect either doesn't
> work, or it was too weak to report.. .
> (They also reported up to 10,000 amps, but I don't
> think we need to go that
> high in amperage!)
500kV is a bit high to come by...I am sure I could do
it, but that would take some work. The physical size
of a pulse generator or multiplier would become fairly
large.
I haven't read Podkletnov's paper on this, but I'll
assume the 10kA was peak pulsed current of the
discharge. Depending on the time scale involved,
that's not unreasonable to achieve.
> I would replace Podkletnov's Superconducting magnet
> "emitter" with one of
> those small 50 MGO NIB permanent magnets- to
> utilize as your "emitter". The
> shape of that emitter NIB magnet may be important,
> but if it's small and
> round enough it may not need any focusing
> electromagnet surrounding it at
> all. Or maybe it will, but try it with a small
> spherical magnet first . The
> larger main focusing electromagnet however will
> probably still be required.
> Perhaps using Morton's AND Podkletnov focusing
> methods (combined) is best?
I'll get the Podkletnov paper and have a look, so I
better understand what you're suggesting.
> The discharge path in the Morton setup turns 90
> degrees just before hitting
> the anode. The Podkletnov beam however was directly
> in-line to the anode.
> Which technique works best may require
> investigation.
Well, I've tried with direct (straight line) spark,
and with it making the 90 deg turn at the end. No
change in observed effect was found.
> Even if you discharge from a spherical surface,
> power it > 500 KV and a much
> larger current and I'm not sure how many methods can
> get us there. Do your
> caps total 500 KV ? No matter how we get the higher
> voltage and higher
> current it will have to be a capacitive discharge to
> get the kind of power
> required, power for that short interval of spark
> discharge. The shorter the
> interval, the greater the instantaneous power.
Yes, but the discharge here is capacitive in and of
itself. The sphere has some capacitance, some tens of
pF, as does the strike plate. The fact that each
discharge would throw tiny 'sparkles' of orange away
from the strike plate (apparently tiny little
incandescent bits of steel) tells me there is some
reasonable current involved.
As far as the original Morton effect is concerned, it
seems that we are far beyond VdG territory here, what
with the beefier nature of my power supplies. I can't
see any fundamental difference between charging the
sphere with a VdG (very low current charge pump) or
doing the same with the multipliers (far higher
current charge pump).
Only difference beyond charging current I can see is,
the VdG sphere would be charged from the interior
surface, whereas my sphere is charged from the outer
surface. I can't see any reason this would make a
difference, but maybe I am wrong?
--Kyle
