Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by klubnl.pl (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u2) with ESMTP id x2AB80m8002747 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 12:08:07 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1h2wCp-0002Io-Jv for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 11:01:23 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1h2wBp-0002IP-Fd for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 11:00:21 +0000 Received: from emout02.email.it ([212.97.34.18]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from ) id 1h2wBk-00055i-Iv for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 11:00:18 +0000 Received: from emout02.email.it (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by emout02.email.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F1B582186 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 12:00:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from x220.localnet (unknown [82.84.64.66]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by emout02.email.it (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 593BD82183 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 12:00:14 +0100 (CET) From: Claudio Pozzi To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 12:00:14 +0100 Message-ID: <2743859.o4Vf0SrW0I@x220> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.1 (Linux/3.16.0-4-amd64; KDE/4.14.2; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <5C8430BD.9030002@posteo.de> References: <435595266.2127766.1552155007472@mail.yahoo.com> <5C8430BD.9030002@posteo.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: -0.4 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Saturday, March 09, 2019 10:31:41 PM you wrote: HI Stephan, the proposed experiment with two 10 meters antennas is interesting but... ...is this an electromagnetic (Maxwell) transmission or an electrostatic (Coulomb) transmission? Content analysis details: (-0.4 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [212.97.34.18 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (smtp01[at]email.it) 0.2 FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT Envelope-from freemail username ends in digit (smtp01[at]email.it) 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 MIME_QP_LONG_LINE RAW: Quoted-printable line longer than 76 chars X-Scan-Signature: 8ef4a81364122235fe02382f88e82dd6 Subject: Re: LF: Re: Re Loomis? & ... 12.47 Hz Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="nextPart2404239.qAMy2e8ePf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=5.0 tests=FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS,HTML_50_60, HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --nextPart2404239.qAMy2e8ePf Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On Saturday, March 09, 2019 10:31:41 PM you wrote: HI Stephan, the proposed experiment with two 10 meters antennas is interesting but.= .. ...is this an electromagnetic (Maxwell) transmission or an electrostati= c=20 (Coulomb) transmission? 73 de Claudio IK2PII > Hi Jim, >=20 > I hope you don't mind that i'd like to share the email with the > reflector, because i've a thought that might be interesting. >=20 > In my view, the Loomis experiment it is rather the detection of a > changing current (charge per time) on the RX site. The changing curre= nt > is coming from a change in the static electric field, caused by the > shortcutted 'TX' antenna. Something like a current divider. >=20 > In 2010/2011 i've done VLF transmissions on my own, using a 300m > vertical kite antenna (having a special licence for that altitude). T= he > antenna capacity was about 1.5 nF. During an experiment in the summer= > time there was a short moment when the vertical wire was floating. It= > quickly charged up to some kV, which was quite noticable when i=20 catched > and touched the wire then!! Since that time i carefully kept the wire= > grounded during such experiments. > So, it means that the wire charged up, so there must be some=20 continuous > charge flowing onto the wire and, if the wire would be grounded > permanently, you could probably measure a more or less stable current= ,=20 i > guess it would be some 100 uA. > Now imagine someone else would rise a grounded kite in a few meters > distance. This would certainly affect the current flowing in my kite > wire. The farer both 'antennas', the lower expressed the effect will = be > and the higher the antennas, the stronger it will be expressed. >=20 > I think the effect would be much better expressed by measuring the > voltage across a 1 MOhm resistor instead, which could be done by usin= g=20 a > scope and some overvoltage protection! > Actually an interesting question: In the summer time, which DC voltag= e > could be measured over a 1 MOhm resistor when connecting to a large E= > field antenna and ground? > And, a next step: If i let my antenna charge up (floating) and then > discharge it in exact time intervals, say each second, then i should = see > something at 1 Hz on a suitable receiver. This would already come clo= se > to the experiment i'v done. I'm just replacing the 'natural charge > source' by a high voltage power supply and modulate that voltage (wit= h=20 a > sine wave, not rectangular). >=20 > So, to answer your question, i think that Loomis experiment was not > dedicated ELF, it was rather a broad-band spectrum that was radiated,= > since the charged antenna was discharged immediately. For a real ELF > transmission i would say that the carrier frequency has to be at ELF,= > not the modulating frequency. OK here you might say the carrier > frequency is 0 and it is AM modulated... >=20 > Try to repeat the experiment! Use smaller antennas and shorter > distances. Could be interesting :-) Rise two 10m high wires in 10m > distance in an open field. Connect one of them to a scope (1 MOhm=20 input > resistance), protect the input with a glow lamp. Keep the other wire > floating. Select 1 second/div. If there is a thunderstorm coming and = you > can see a rising DC level on the scope, then do a shortcircuit on the= > other wire. I bet you will see the voltage dropping on the scope. >=20 > 73, Stefan >=20 > Am 09.03.2019 19:10, schrieb James Hollander: > > Hi Jacek and Stefan, I=E2=80=99d like to suggest that while I can=E2= =80=99t say for > > sure there weren't ELF frequencies received in the Loomis experimen= t > > of 1866, I=E2=80=99m hesitant to reach the conclusion ELF was used = by > > Loomis because of the following questions. > > 1) If the transient current that flowed when Loomis=E2=80=99 transm= itter > > circuit was closed probably lasted only a few milliseconds, wouldn=E2= =80=99t > > the modulation frequency content *exceed at least the upper ELF > > boundary 30Hz* as impressed on the =E2=80=9Ccarrier=E2=80=9D? > > 2) With a 600=E2=80=99 long TX antenna and only a galvanometer fed = by similar > > height RX antenna, wouldn=E2=80=99t any radio waves that might have= been > > received be shorter than 10x the wavelength for which a 600=E2=80=99= TX > > antenna is a quarter wavelength? 10x(600=E2=80=99x4)=3D24000=E2=80=99= or about 8km.=20 If > > the wavelength is less than about 8km, wouldn=E2=80=99t the =E2=80=9C= carrier=E2=80=9D > > frequency content exceed about *37 KHz*? > > 3) Nevertheless, one might say, if galvanometer deflected temporari= ly > > in Loomis=E2=80=99 system, it must have detected some near-DC conte= nt=20 unless > > some nonlinear element were in the receiving circuit. If I Fourier > > Transform a damped DC transient, what is the frequency content? > > 4) If there were DC transfer, wouldn't we say it's in the nature of= a > > current charging an atmosphere-ground capacitance through the=20 ground > > resistance, not radio in near field ELF? Or should we say the meani= ng > > of =E2=80=9Cfrequency=E2=80=9D in this case becomes so fuzzy that L= oomis both did and > > didn=E2=80=99t use ELF? > > 5) If indeed Loomis communicated any ELF, can=E2=80=99t one still r= adically > > distinguish the 12.67 Hz experiment at DK7FC as involving a very > > narrow band continuous wave with 227 hours integration of this > > continuous wave to detect it and make it separable from other waves= > > that could be generated in the ELF band? > > I=E2=80=99m new to the subject of ELF, and would appreciate any wor= ds of > > wisdom you=E2=80=99d like to give. > > Vy 73, Jim Hollander W5EST > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jacek Lipkowski > > To: rsgb_lf_group > > Sent: Sat, Mar 9, 2019 4:28 am > > Subject: Re: LF: RE: RE: Almost touching the ground... | 12.47 Hz > >=20 > > Actually a similar experiment to Stefan's has been done already, an= d=20 at > > much lower frequencies (almost 0Hz :): > >=20 > > http://aerohistory.org/Wireless/loomis.html > >=20 > > In this case the power supply is from the cloud electric field and > > probably had quite a few more kV than Stefan's. > >=20 > > Please note the DX distance. > >=20 > > VY 73 > >=20 > > Jacek / SQ5BPF > >=20 > >=20 > > *From: DK7FC To: rsgb_lf_group > > > > Sent: Tue, Mar 5, 2019 12:50 pm Subject: ELF: Almost touching the > > ground... | 12.47 Hz > > Hi ELF friends, During the last 2 weeks i've done another experimen= t > > on ELF, this time > > on 12.47 Hz, the 24 Mm band (wavelength 24057 km). Again i've=20 crossed > > the local distance of 3.5 km. That's the lowest frequency i've ever= > > been and it feels like i can see the ground already :-) The dimensi= ons > > of everything down there are extreme. I've integrated 227 hours of = a > > carrier transmission into one spectrum peak, it is shown in the =0D=0A =0D=0A --=0D=0A ZE-Light e ZE-Pro: servizi zimbra per caselle con dominio email.it, per tutti i dettagli =0D=0A Clicca qui http://posta.email.it/caselle-di-posta-z-email-it/?utm_campaign=3Demail_Zimbra_102014=3Dmain_footer/f=0D=0A =0D=0A Sponsor:=0D=0A Idee regalo classiche o alternative? Trova l'offerta migliore in un click=0D=0A Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=3D13327&d=3D10-3=0D=0A --nextPart2404239.qAMy2e8ePf Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"

On = Saturday, March 09, 2019 10:31:41 PM you wrote:

 

HI = Stephan,

the= proposed experiment with two 10 meters antennas is interesting but...<= /p>

 

...= is this an electromagnetic (Maxwell) transmission or an electrostatic (= Coulomb) transmission?

 

73 = de Claudio IK2PII

 

 

 

>= ; Hi Jim,

>= ;

>= ; I hope you don't mind that i'd like to share the email with the

>= ; reflector, because i've a thought that might be interesting.

>= ;

>= ; In my view, the Loomis experiment it is rather the detection of a

=

>= ; changing current (charge per time) on the RX site. The changing curre= nt

>= ; is coming from a change in the static electric field, caused by the

>= ; shortcutted 'TX' antenna. Something like a current divider.

>= ;

>= ; In 2010/2011 i've done VLF transmissions on my own, using a 300m

>= ; vertical kite antenna (having a special licence for that altitude). T= he

>= ; antenna capacity was about 1.5 nF. During an experiment in the summer=

>= ; time there was a short moment when the vertical wire was floating. It=

>= ; quickly charged up to some kV, which was quite noticable when i catch= ed

>= ; and touched the wire then!! Since that time i carefully kept the wire=

>= ; grounded during such experiments.

>= ; So, it means that the wire charged up, so there must be some continuo= us

>= ; charge flowing onto the wire and, if the wire would be grounded

>= ; permanently, you could probably measure a more or less stable current= , i

>= ; guess it would be some 100 uA.

>= ; Now imagine someone else would rise a grounded kite in a few meters

>= ; distance. This would certainly affect the current flowing in my kite<= /p>

>= ; wire. The farer both 'antennas', the lower expressed the effect will = be

>= ; and the higher the antennas, the stronger it will be expressed.

>= ;

>= ; I think the effect would be much better expressed by measuring the

>= ; voltage across a 1 MOhm resistor instead, which could be done by usin= g a

>= ; scope and some overvoltage protection!

>= ; Actually an interesting question: In the summer time, which DC voltag= e

>= ; could be measured over a 1 MOhm resistor when connecting to a large E=

>= ; field antenna and ground?

>= ; And, a next step: If i let my antenna charge up (floating) and then

>= ; discharge it in exact time intervals, say each second, then i should = see

>= ; something at 1 Hz on a suitable receiver. This would already come clo= se

>= ; to the experiment i'v done. I'm just replacing the 'natural charge

>= ; source' by a high voltage power supply and modulate that voltage (wit= h a

>= ; sine wave, not rectangular).

>= ;

>= ; So, to answer your question, i think that Loomis experiment was not

>= ; dedicated ELF, it was rather a broad-band spectrum that was radiated,=

>= ; since the charged antenna was discharged immediately. For a real ELF<= /p>

>= ; transmission i would say that the carrier frequency has to be at ELF,=

>= ; not the modulating frequency. OK here you might say the carrier

>= ; frequency is 0 and it is AM modulated...

>= ;

>= ; Try to repeat the experiment! Use smaller antennas and shorter

>= ; distances. Could be interesting :-) Rise two 10m high wires in 10m

>= ; distance in an open field. Connect one of them to a scope (1 MOhm inp= ut

>= ; resistance), protect the input with a glow lamp. Keep the other wire<= /p>

>= ; floating. Select 1 second/div. If there is a thunderstorm coming and = you

>= ; can see a rising DC level on the scope, then do a shortcircuit on the=

>= ; other wire. I bet you will see the voltage dropping on the scope.

=

>= ;

>= ; 73, Stefan

>= ;

>= ; Am 09.03.2019 19:10, schrieb James Hollander:

>= ; > Hi Jacek and Stefan, I=E2=80=99d like to suggest that while I ca= n=E2=80=99t say for

>= ; > sure there weren't ELF frequencies received in the Loomis experi= ment

>= ; > of 1866, I=E2=80=99m hesitant to reach the conclusion ELF was us= ed by

>= ; > Loomis because of the following questions.

>= ; > 1) If the transient current that flowed when Loomis=E2=80=99 tra= nsmitter

>= ; > circuit was closed probably lasted only a few milliseconds, woul= dn=E2=80=99t

>= ; > the modulation frequency content *exceed at least the upper ELF<= /p>

>= ; > boundary 30Hz* as impressed on the =E2=80=9Ccarrier=E2=80=9D?

>= ; > 2) With a 600=E2=80=99 long TX antenna and only a galvanometer f= ed by similar

>= ; > height RX antenna, wouldn=E2=80=99t any radio waves that might h= ave been

>= ; > received be shorter than 10x the wavelength for which a 600=E2=80= =99 TX

>= ; > antenna is a quarter wavelength? 10x(600=E2=80=99x4)=3D24000=E2=80= =99 or about 8km. If

>= ; > the wavelength is less than about 8km, wouldn=E2=80=99t the =E2=80= =9Ccarrier=E2=80=9D

>= ; > frequency content exceed about *37 KHz*?

>= ; > 3) Nevertheless, one might say, if galvanometer deflected tempor= arily

>= ; > in Loomis=E2=80=99 system, it must have detected some near-DC co= ntent unless

>= ; > some nonlinear element were in the receiving circuit. If I Fouri= er

>= ; > Transform a damped DC transient, what is the frequency content?<= /p>

>= ; > 4) If there were DC transfer, wouldn't we say it's in the nature= of a

>= ; > current charging an atmosphere-ground capacitance through the gr= ound

>= ; > resistance, not radio in near field ELF? Or should we say the me= aning

>= ; > of =E2=80=9Cfrequency=E2=80=9D in this case becomes so fuzzy tha= t Loomis both did and

>= ; > didn=E2=80=99t use ELF?

>= ; > 5) If indeed Loomis communicated any ELF, can=E2=80=99t one stil= l radically

>= ; > distinguish the 12.67 Hz experiment at DK7FC as involving a very=

>= ; > narrow band continuous wave with 227 hours integration of this

>= ; > continuous wave to detect it and make it separable from other wa= ves

>= ; > that could be generated in the ELF band?

>= ; > I=E2=80=99m new to the subject of ELF, and would appreciate any = words of

>= ; > wisdom you=E2=80=99d like to give.

>= ; > Vy 73, Jim Hollander W5EST

>= ; > -----Original Message-----

>= ; > From: Jacek Lipkowski <sq5bpf@lipkowski.org>

>= ; > To: rsgb_lf_group <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>

>= ; > Sent: Sat, Mar 9, 2019 4:28 am

>= ; > Subject: Re: LF: RE: RE: Almost touching the ground... | 12.47 H= z

>= ; >

>= ; > Actually a similar experiment to Stefan's has been done already,= and at

>= ; > much lower frequencies (almost 0Hz :):

>= ; >

>= ; > http://aerohistory.org/Wireless/loomis.html

>= ; >

>= ; > In this case the power supply is from the cloud electric field a= nd

>= ; > probably had quite a few more kV than Stefan's.

>= ; >

>= ; > Please note the DX distance.

>= ; >

>= ; > VY 73

>= ; >

>= ; > Jacek / SQ5BPF

>= ; >

>= ; >

>= ; > *From: DK7FC <selberdenken@posteo.de*> To: rsgb_lf_group

>= ; > <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>

>= ; > Sent: Tue, Mar 5, 2019 12:50 pm Subject: ELF: Almost touching th= e

>= ; > ground... | 12.47 Hz

>= ; > Hi ELF friends, During the last 2 weeks i've done another experi= ment

>= ; > on ELF, this time

>= ; > on 12.47 Hz, the 24 Mm band (wavelength 24057 km). Again i've cr= ossed

>= ; > the local distance of 3.5 km. That's the lowest frequency i've e= ver

>= ; > been and it feels like i can see the ground already :-) The dime= nsions

>= ; > of everything down there are extreme. I've integrated 227 hours = of a

>= ; > carrier transmission into one spectrum peak, it is shown in the<= /p>

>= ; > attachment in 1.25 uHz. This carrier could have transferred an E= bNaut

>= ; > message of nearly 100 characters.

>= ; >

>= ; > The ERP was 50 attowatt or -163 dBW and the antenna current was = 170 uA

>= ; > only, despite about 5 kV antenna voltage.

>= ; >

>= ; > I'm now trying to put a step below 10 Hz but the RX antenna beco= mes

>= ; > less efficient with each Hz. 73, Stefan

 


=
=0D=0A

----
=0D=0A ZE-Light e ZE-Pro: servizi zimbra per caselle con dominio email.it, per tutti i dettagli clicca qui
=0D=0A
=0D=0A Sponsor:
=0D=0A Idee regalo classiche o alternative? Trova l'offerta migliore in un click
=0D=0A Clicca qui
=0D=0A =0D=0A
= --nextPart2404239.qAMy2e8ePf--