From: "Terrell W. Fritz"
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 13:20:35 -0600
Subject: Re: [TSSP] Article on Tesla coil performance
Hi Marco,
At 12:08 PM 7/15/2002 +0300, you wrote:
>Hello all,
>
>An article I wrote has been accepted and is scheduled for publication on
>Review of Scientic Instruments, Vol. 73, No 9, September 2002. It is
>named "Optimal performance for Tesla transformers" and presents a
>mathematical view of the process of changing L1, L2, C1 and C2 in order
>to achieve the best performance. It is based on several "classical"
>references, on my thesis and on Antonio's material too.
GREAT!! It is always a happy day when a Tesla coil paper shows up in the
"real" scientific literature!! Part of the problem is that there are so few
articles now, that new ones don't have much to reference. Journals like RSI
don't like references from "amateurs" playing with Tesla coils in the back
yard ;-)) It's wonderful that you have the ability to push coiling into the
mainstream scientific world!!
>
>I'm not mailing this to you to get more "shine". On the contrary, I
>would like to say a couple (3-4 ?) of things.
>
>1. I wrote the article only because my professor from the Helsinki
>University pressed for it (to get the department name on the print, you
>know...). I feel a little like a hore, producing paper material to be
>allowed to go on with Thor's business...
"Real science" seems to be 2 days doing an experiment and the spending the next
two years writing papers about it and digging up support for the next 2 day
experiment :-)) But that allows everyone else to have a good solid reference
to go forward. That is just the way all the high science works. It's a bit
too bad that so much of the real literature used "now" was written by Tesla...
We need all the new papers we can get!!!
>
>2. I feel a little bit ashamed because there are people like Paul,
>Malcolm, Terry, Antonio, and many others that have been doing enormously
>more thinking/working/acting on these matters than me. They would merit
>many times more than me to get their name on that paper. I made sure to
>mention all material used from Antonio's web site and publications. I
>also hope it is clear from the article that it was not my own research.
>I just put together other's work results and drawn / wrote down the
>conclusions.
Oddly, in the case of Tesla coils, the "state of the art" is so far behind most
types of science, that amateurs can really take advantage of being able to work
without needing the support of a big university or corporate R&D budget. If I
need funding, I just pull out my credit card ;-)) And, of course, we amateurs
don't answer to any boss :-))) Us little guys can work in the back yard on a
budget of $100 on state of the art problems. But our work is too easily lost
and forgotten!!!
We NEED that work to "somehow" make it up the chain to the real scientific
community too. Personally, I don't work on Tesla coils for any fame or
fortune, it's pure fun for me!! In fact, I would go nuts if I had to carefully
write up stuff to the strict standards of the scientific community. If I had
to beg a boss for $250 to buy a scope probe for a coiling experiment, you would
probably be reading about me in the front page of the paper "Tesla coil
experimenter electrocutes boss in fit of rage!!" :o)))
So to make a long story short, feel totally free to use any of "my" stuff in
papers and such without credit. I could care less. No beautiful women I know
read them anyway :o)) "You" really deserve the credit for getting anything you
can published!! I just look forward to reading a scientific paper I might have
a chance of understanding :o))
>
>3. I just wanted to be the first telling this to you to make clear the
>two above issues, before someone starts thinking I tried to divert
>someone else's glory on me.
No problem at all. "I" deliberately avoid the "glory game" because it just is
not worth it. Far better to play rather than worry about glory :-)) Of
course, be prepared for people asking if the results of you paper can be
applied to their odd field of science. Something like "Optimal interior error
estimates on nonuniform triangulations for constructing divergence-free finite
elements" ;-)) Somebody ask me if my little antibubble site and work would be
a demonstration of such principles and sent me a paper full of big equations
with many symbols I had never seen before. :-p Fortunately, being just a
little guy, I could reply "Hey buddy, there just soap bubbles..." without
having to worry about being properly scientific and trying to figure out what
the heck he was talking about ;-))
>
>Let me know if you have a different point of view on these matters,
>please :)
>
>
>At this link
>
>http://ojps.aip.org/servlet/HelpSystem?KEY=RSINAK&TYPE=HELP/AIPPOSTING
>
>you can find the (very short) "Web posting guidelines" for authors. I
>understand it so that I can put the PDF article (or a draft of it) on my
>Web page, if I include the required copyright notice. I think that means
>I can also email the same file to who I like if I include in my email
>the same notice.
>Please, could some of you (english mothertongue) check that page? Did I
>get it right? If the answer is yes I could, of course, put that article
>on my web for downloading.
I would be happy to look it over. I would also be happy to see the paper. I
am not sure how a "little guy" is supposed to get an article out of RSI these
days (maybe you can buy them off the web site)... I think the big boys have
paid subscriptions through institutions. Probably have to go dig the paper
copy out of the university library... Of course, if you are allowed to send
it, then it is easy. I read the guidelines and it looks like you can post it
as long as you link to the AIP with all the notices. I am sure you can send
private copies for peer review and proof reading purposes. The only real
concern would be if we could reference you paper on your site for the Tesla
list members. Hopefully, someone will know how all that messy stuff works.
Cheers,
Terry
>
>Best Regards
Maintainer Paul Nicholson, paul@abelian.demon.co.uk.