Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 12:09:02 +0100 (CET)
From: Jacek Lipkowski <sq5bpf@lipkowski.org>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
In-Reply-To: <75f11157-5e1c-4402-6aa2-4c1a364620d7@freenet.de>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1903101158210.22616@mailn.lipkowski.org>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1903021056370.22616@mailn.lipkowski.org> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1903021853290.22616@mailn.lipkowski.org> <5C7AD93E.8010402@posteo.de> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1903031913120.22616@mailn.lipkowski.org> <5C7CEF81.5080302@posteo.de>
 <000201d4d2ce$4aa091c0$dfe1b540$@go2.pl> <5C7EC39A.5070903@posteo.de> <6DB8451D7F3D3947A5918808A59621EA315303E3@servigilant.vigilant.local> <044601d4d43e$749bb790$5dd326b0$@comcast.net> <5C803777.8070401@posteo.de> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1903091117390.22616@mailn.lipkowski.org>
 <435595266.2127766.1552155007472@mail.yahoo.com> <5C8430BD.9030002@posteo.de> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1903100945390.22616@mailn.lipkowski.org> <75f11157-5e1c-4402-6aa2-4c1a364620d7@freenet.de>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (DEB 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: LF: Re: Re Loomis? & ... 12.47 Hz
Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="17435139-1969617588-1552216143=:22616"
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org

  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

--17435139-1969617588-1552216143=:22616
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT

The HV triodes are a good idea (PD500?).

Maybe a GPS-synchronized rotary spark gap?

VY 73

Jacek / SQ5BPF


On Sun, 10 Mar 2019, Wolfgang Büscher wrote:

> Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 11:05:20 +0100
> From: Wolfgang Büscher <dl4yhf@freenet.de>
> Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
> To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
> Subject: Re: LF: Re: Re Loomis? & ... 12.47 Hz
> 
> Greetings,
>
> How about using an ancient high-voltage "ballast" triode, as used in colour 
> TVs ? They may emit some X-rays when fed with anode voltages above 30 kV (no 
> risk, no fun) but they are very rugged. I have rescued some of them from the 
> junk because of the nice large anode gap. They always sat in a large metal 
> cage near the flyback transformer, along with the HV rectifier tube.
>
> 73,
>   Wolf .
>
> On 10.03.2019 09:58, Jacek Lipkowski wrote:
>> I haven't tried this with 300m kites, but even ordinary low-band dipoles 
>> can charge quite quickly if they are high enough, so 100uA seems to be a 
>> good approximation. This is already comparable with the 170uA you're 
>> getting at 12.71Hz now (and which will be lower at lower frequencies).
>> 
>> The only problem is the switch, but a high voltage vacuum relay (or a few 
>> in series with a piece of fiberoptic for controlling each of them) should 
>> be sufficient upto a few Hz.
>> 
>> Also note that the more charge in the atmosphere, the more ERP you get. But 
>> it also gets more dangerous. No risk no fun on the "loomis band" :)
>> 
>> VY 73
>> 
>> Jacek / SQ5BPF
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sat, 9 Mar 2019, DK7FC wrote:
>> 
>>> Date: Sat, 09 Mar 2019 22:31:41 +0100
>>> From: DK7FC <selberdenken@posteo.de>
>>> Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
>>> To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
>>> Subject: LF: Re: Re Loomis?  & ... 12.47 Hz
>>> 
>>> 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 current 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). The
>>> 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 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 continuous 
>>> 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 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 using a
>>> scope and some overvoltage protection!
>>> Actually an interesting question: In the summer time, which DC voltage 
>>> 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 close to 
>>> the experiment i'v done. I'm just replacing the 'natural charge
>>> source' by a high voltage power supply and modulate that voltage (with 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 
>>> 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 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.
>>> 
>>> 73, Stefan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Am 09.03.2019 19:10, schrieb James Hollander:
>>>       Hi Jacek and Stefan,     I?d like to suggest that while I can?t say 
>>> for sure there weren't ELF frequencies received in the Loomis
>>>       experiment of 1866, I?m hesitant to reach the conclusion ELF was 
>>> used by Loomis because of the following questions.
>>>       1) If the transient current that flowed when Loomis? transmitter 
>>> circuit was closed probably lasted only a few milliseconds, wouldn?t
>>> the modulation frequency content exceed at least the upper ELF boundary 
>>> 30Hz as impressed on the ?carrier??
>>>       2)  With a 600? long TX antenna and only a galvanometer fed by 
>>> similar height RX antenna, wouldn?t any radio waves that might have been
>>> received be shorter than 10x the wavelength for which a 600? TX antenna is 
>>> a quarter wavelength?    10x(600?x4)=24000? or about 8km.   If the
>>> wavelength is less than about 8km, wouldn?t the ?carrier? frequency 
>>> content exceed about  37 KHz?
>>>       3)  Nevertheless, one might say, if galvanometer deflected 
>>> temporarily in Loomis? system, it must have detected some near-DC content
>>> 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
>>> ground resistance, not radio in near field ELF?  Or should we say the 
>>> meaning of ?frequency? in this case becomes so fuzzy that Loomis both
>>> did and didn?t use ELF?
>>>       5)  If indeed Loomis communicated any ELF, can?t one still 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 waves
>>> that could be generated in the ELF band?
>>>       I?m new to the subject of ELF, and would appreciate any words of 
>>> wisdom you?d 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 Hz
>>> 
>>> 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 and
>>> 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 the 
>>> ground... | 12.47 Hz
>>> Hi ELF friends,        During the last 2 weeks i've done another 
>>> experiment on ELF, this time
>>> on 12.47 Hz, the 24 Mm band (wavelength 24057 km). Again i've 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 dimensions 
>>> of everything down there are extreme. I've integrated 227 hours
>>> of a carrier transmission into one spectrum peak, it is shown in the 
>>> attachment in 1.25 uHz. This carrier could have transferred an
>>> EbNaut 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 becomes less 
>>> efficient with each Hz. 73, Stefan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>
>
--17435139-1969617588-1552216143=:22616--