Re: Light bulbs

[William Beaty <billb@ESKIMO.COM>]

On Tue, 24 Aug 1999, paul o johnson wrote:

> If this surprises you, you have never read "A Light in the Dark," reportedly
> published by the Physics Department at Texas A&M University, the first
> paragraph of which states:
>
> "For years people have believed that electric light bulbs emit light. However,
> Aggie scientists at College Station have proven otherwise. Electric bulbs don't
> emit light, they suck dark. Thus, such bulbs should be called dark suckers. The
> dark theory, according to a TAMU spokesperson, proves the existence of dark,
> that dark has greater mass than light does, and that dark travels faster than
> light."


I don't recall if I mentioned this here, but I have recently evolved a
"crackpot theory" of my own: the idea that radio antennas "suck energy".

This only applies to antennas which are far smaller than the wavelength in
question, and it only applies to antennas which are connected to a
resonator (such as a coil and capacitor.)  Yes, I'm serious.  The ideas
explain how tiny atoms with diameter << wavelength of light can interact
so strongly (think of a cloud of low-density sodium vapor creating an
absorbtion band in a spectrum.  How do such tiny atoms do that?!)
They also explain how Tesla intended to receive "wireless power" without
using immensely long 1/4-wave wire antennas.

I found some papers on the topic, and when I discovered that one of them
was by Chris Bohren (clouds in a glass of beer), I no longer had any
doubts that the phenomenon was real.

...well, maybe I still have 0.01% doubts.

:)

See: http://www.amasci.com/tesla/tesceive.html



((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))))))))))))))))))))
William J. Beaty                                  SCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb@eskimo.com                                  http://www.amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits          science projects, tesla, weird science
Seattle, WA   206-781-3320          freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L