Daniel, Is it worth considering the possibility that superoscillations or "rogue waves" are occurring?
It's possible to generate extremely large transient signal peaks and steep slopes, using band-limited signals - even when all of the components are low-frequency, low-amplitude sinusoids. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superoscillation) BTW, the Energetics' "SuperWave" stimulus looks to me like it's guaranteed to produce such excursions. -- Lou Pagnucco Daniel Rocha wrote: > There has been extensive commentary on Vortex-l about the magnetic > anomaly, in a thread started by Peter Gluck. > [...] > I agree that this is the impression that was conveyed by the > announcement in Kim's presentation. However, we now have information > confirming some of what Rocha had said earlier, that the field was > measured as "peak." This is not a DC field. It is still remarkable as > a peak measurement, but it does become a little easier to explain. > [...] > It appears that Ed errs here. The stimulation is not AC, it is pulsed > DC. However, Ed is pointing out that if the device operation is > disrupting electronic equipment -- Defkalion claims it shut their > phone system down, apparently until they started shielding the > reactor, including using mu-metal -- it could certainly disrput a > gaussmeter. > > Using a peak measurement would be highly vulnerable to this. A DC or > RMS AC display would be less vulnerable, but major RF noise could > scramble almost any electronic device unless it is specially designed > to be immune. > > For "pulsed DC," and assuming Defkalion is using the same stimulation > still -- and apparently the Tesla figures were from last year or even > before -- see slide 15, > http://www.slideshare.net/ssusereeef70/2012-0808-niweek-defkalion-technical-presentation-j-hadjichristos > [...]
