One of the pivots upon which Lyne's entire phony "theory of electropropulsion" turns, is his idea that by making the physical length of the secondary of a Tesla coil equal to 1/4 of the operating wavelength, one can produce high voltage D.C. instead of A.C. His theory depends on this because, says he, Tesla's flying machine requires high voltage D.C. in the front of the ship.
This is, quite simply, the most absurd scientific idea I've ever heard. Anyone who has ever dabbled in amateur radio knows that this is ludicrous. Look at a quarter wave antenna. Does it produce D.C.? Obviously not, or it wouldn't function correctly. I don't know how gullible people actually have to be to believe this guy.
As has already been noted by others, Lyne can't even get his electrical terminology correct. He says that one must "tune [the Tesla coil] to 1/4 wavelength." This is wrong: to tune a circuit means to adjust its capacitance and inductance to put it in a state of resonance with another circuit. Lyne should've instead said that the physical length of the secondary wire must be made equal to 1/4 of the operating wavelength. This is exactly how Tesla alwalys explained it (for instance, in his Colorado Springs Notes).
Back to his idea that at 1/4 wavelength a TC will produce D.C., in a vein attempt to refute someone else who has discovered his lies, Lyne wrote the following:
In another slanted argument (citing Wikipedia), Daniel referred to a drawing from Nikola Tesla's patent #723,188, Method for Signaling (from page 197, my book Pentagon Aliens) stating that an oscillating high frequency electromagnetic dipole, tuned to three-eights (or one-quarter) wavelength, produces only "an A.C. node". This flies in the face of the fact well-documented (from a standard electrical engineering text) in the first edition of my 1993 book Space Aliens From the Pentagon-
"...an oscillating electric dipole consists of two equal and opposite charges of dipole moment p, where p oscillates sinusoidally with time. A dipole which is tuned to 3/8th (or 1/4, the same) will continue to throw out energy even when the conditions are reversed, because there is a time lag between changes in charge and current distribution. " (5)
So Daniel's "node" is not really there, and what results is negative electrostatic discharges, D.C. in sign. Most schlubs would assume that the dipole is "supposed" to produce an A.C. node, but it does not do so at sufficiently high frequency, because of this phenomenon, which Tesla knew about in the 1890s, which is why he called his single terminal ("pancake")coil "...my method for producing direct current with an alternating current."
I'd first like to remark that citing wikipedia, as the man who wrote this refutation against Lyne did, is better than citing nothing at all, and instead saying that you know tons of people whose names you cannot reveal, as does Lyne! Lyne doesn't understand that the reason Tesla made the length of his secondary coils 1/4 of the operating wavelength was so that the points of highest voltage on the secondary would be on the free terminal. He obviously doesn't know that in a Tesla coil secondary, there are waves of voltage on the wires, which reflect, producing standing waves of voltage. In other words, the voltage and current vary from point to point on a secondary. Thus, Tesla made their length 1/4 of a wavelength so that the point of highest voltage would be on the terminal. Read, for instance, what Tesla said in his Patent #645,576 (System of Transmission of Electrical Energy):
"The length of the thin-wire coil in each transformer should be approximately one-quarter of the wave length of the electric disturbance in the circuit, this estimate being based on the velocity of propagation of the disturbance through the coil itself and the circuit with which it is designed to be used...By such an adjustment or proportioning of the length of wire in the secondary coil or coils the points of highest potential are made to coincide with the elevated terminals D D' and it should be understood that whatever length be given to the wires this condition should be complied with in order to attain the best results."
He says nothing about A.C. turning into D.C. here. In fact, these coils HAD to produce A.C., in order for his system of wireless transmission to work. Next, Lyne cites a text which he claims supports his idea the a 1/4 wave secondary will produce D.C. What's weird is that he calls his citation "well documented," when, in actuality, all he cited was the name of the book and author - no page number, no chapter, nothing! Now this is the laughable part. The quote Lyne provided in his self-defense was totally altered from what one reads in the book. Lyne left out parts, and also added parts that are not even in the book! When I saw what he had done, I was hysterical laughing. This is the quote Lyne gives (without any page number):
"...an oscillating electric dipole consists of two equal and opposite charges of dipole moment p, where p oscillates sinusoidally with time. A dipole which is tuned to 3/8th (or 1/4, the same) will continue to throw out energy even when the conditions are reversed, because there is a time lag between changes in charge and current distribution. "
The first sentence he gives from this quote, does actually appear in the book, on page 154. The WHOLE quote is:
"In theory, an oscillating electric dipole consists of two equal and opposite charges of dipole moment p where p oscillates sinusoidally with time as shown in Fig. 9.6. In practice, an oscillating current in a conducting wire is equivalent to an oscillating dipole as indicated in Fig. 9.7."
Okay, all nice; but this proves nothing for Lyne. The second sentence is where the lies come. The words, "A dipole which is tuned to 3/8th (or 1/4, the same) will continue to throwout energy even when the conditions are reversed," ARE NOWHERE TO BE FOUND IN THE BOOK. These words were cunningly added by Lyne to mislead. Do you not see how evil this man is? Simply go get the book for yourselves to verify this. Note for example, how he uses his incorrect terminology "tune to 3/8th," instead of saying that the "length is made 3/8 wavelength." No electrical engineer would speak like this. Further, notice how he says "continue to throw out energy." That is exactly how Lyne speaks, and is proof that he totally doctored this quote. So the first half of the second sentence was made up. The last part of the second sentence, however, was indeed taken from the book. It reads: "...because there is a time lag between changes in charge and current distribution." This was taken from page 155, and is part of the ORIGINAL, non-altered quote, which Lyne used in his disgusting book. I will get back to that in a moment, but let me summarize:
1) The quote Lyne just gave in his re-refutation to Daniel, supposedly from the book by Robin L. Armstrong, was altered by him.
2) Lyne took two real quotes from the book (on pages 154 and 155), and put them together with a sentence that is of his own writing, to make this fake quote.
Lyne finishes this part of his "refutation," by saying:
Most schlubs would assume that the dipole is "supposed" to produce an A.C. node, but it does not do so at sufficiently high frequency, because of this phenomenon, which Tesla knew about in the 1890s, which is why he called his single terminal ("pancake")coil "...my method for producing direct current with an alternating current."
Ah, yes, the old "my method for producing direct current..." quote. Let me ask you, Mr. Lyne, where in all of Tesla's papers is this quote? I've looked everywhere, and I have never been able to find it. Where is it? Well, folks, I'll tell you that it is nowhere. The quote was made up by Lyne; Tesla never said or wrote it. That is why he provides no citation for it. If I am wrong then simply prove it, and end everything by showing the quote. But no, you obviously cannot and won't. And, as I said before, you will say things like "I have it but I'm not giving it to you," to distract from the fact that you simply cannot answer the question because you are a liar.
Now, what, you may ask, of the non-altered quote from that same Armstrong book, which Lyne originally gave as support of his theory? Here is the quote in its entirety:
"Since electromagnetic effects are not transmitted instantly from point to point in space...there is a time lag between changes in charge and current distribution on the dipole," which "...allows some of the energy to continue flowing outward even though conditions at the dipole may have changed to indicate an inward flow of energy...as if some of the electric and magnetic field has become detached from the dipole or 'shaken off' by the oscillation."
What Lyne did here, is very simple to explain. Lyne purposely misinterpreted the quote to suit his own agenda. This quote, was not at all talking about part of the A.C. waveform getting "shaken off" so that it becomes D.C. Instead, what the author was doing was discussing electromagentic radiation, and getting ready to introduce the concept of "retarded time." It has nothing to do at all with what Lyne says it means. Retarded time means that once launched, an EM wave will take a finite time to propagate from the source to a detector. A specific electromagnetic disturbance, once "detached" (radiated) from the source, propagates outward at the speed of light and is no longer affected by anything the radiating source does afterwards. The radiating source could even disappear, but the wave created by the initial disturbance will still propagate outward at the speed of light. This independence of source behavior was what Armstrong was referring to for a launched EM wave.
Very simply, Armstrong was saying that since an EM wave has a finite velocity, it takes time to reach a detector, so that even if conditions at the source change, the wave will still exist. This is observed every night in looking at the stars. Stars far away are emitting electromagnetic radiation. Since it takes a finite time for this radiation to reach us, what we are seeing in the sky is what the star looked like in times past. In other words, the star may not even exist anymore, but since the radiation is independent of the source (star), we still see it.
Lyne, as I said before, is so conceded, trying to portray himself as some prodigal, genius inventor, whose inventions everyone is out to steal. And yet, judging by this mere incident, one can see that he really truly is stupid. His "science" is his own fleeting fantasies.
