Thanks for the link, Phil! I've read that presentation before. You'll notice on one of the pages it says "Longitudinal waves, devoid of magnetic component, emitted from a spherical antenna have been yet observed in past."
The key operator is "devoid of magnetic component." And from what I understand, to make it devoid of magnetic component, you've got to utilize the voltage transient impressed upon the spherical antenna when the LMD wave races to the top/center of transmitter coil and crashes into the antenna. The TME wave will follow afterward in the wake of the LMD. If you let the TME wave take over, you'll introduce the magnetic component and you don't have a pure scalar wave transmission anymore.
I'm going to think out loud here, because I've hit so many brick walls in my work, that I am scratching at the doorposts for the right direction go in next. My brain is bleeding! So don't get too confused by what I'm saying. Anyone who reads this, should ust look at the problems I point out and use them as food for thought. Or give me the answers if you have them! :)
The one thing that has frustrated me beyond belief in studying all this stuff, and doing my own bench tests (of which have all been failures thus far), is that you'll notice people use "standing waves" and "stationary waves" terms loosely and throw them around as if a standing wave is automatically the magic creature to get all these scalar energy and OU type effects. I see no reason to think that this is the case. You can have a TME standing wave in the system and get none of the scalar effects.
I have aquired quite a bit of knowledge on these waves through painstakingly study of cryptic information presented by others. And I've been thinking about making a presentation in the form of a PDF on this matter. But I'm extremely hesitant to do so since I have not yet built a working scalar system with scalar effects. I could be completely wrong in everything I say and don't have a platform to stand on.
There are two problems with my setup. Firstly, it COULD be that I have not built large spiral pancake secondaries. I use conventional cylindrical coil like conventional Tesla. Meyl actually claims Tesla Coil builders prefer the cylindrical coil out of ignorance. He seems to indicate that pancake transmitter/receiver is the preferred design. However, I won't praise him as the authority on everything either. His material is rather cryptic and hodge-podge. He's got his own take on everything, and I don't believe everything he says is correct. I have seen absolutely no argument or evidence ever to convincingly show that a cylinder coil won't work. Also consider that Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter was NOT a pancake coil.
I have small pancake secondaries but they function in the several Mhz range and I do not have the equipment to operate them. I should have made them bigger.
The second possible problem which I believe is actually the real problem is that I have always operated my systems at TME frequency. From what I gather, the TME frequency SHOULD be the frequency of the ring-down you see on an oscope view of circuit after you pulse the circuit with a very short pulse. The sinusoidal ring-down is the NET result of the LMD and TME waves at work in the system, but in particular, I believe that the ring-down will more-or-less represent TME propagation. The TME wave is limited by electrical propagation along the line conductor below the speed of light. The LMD wave is a transient effect in space caused by the capacity between conductors. Notice that this LMD wave will jump across conductors and race through a coil faster than the TME or ordinary current can keep up.
Here's the ironic thing that I am 90% certain I am correct about and had to figure it out myself as anyone might roll something over in his mind until the full mechanics come together:
1. When the antenna is charged, you have a difference of potential between the antenna and ground. As a result, the antenna will naturally want to discharge.
2. The antenna will begin to discharge. The beginning of current flow is the formation of the leading edge of the TME wave. Notice this wave will more-or-less follow the conductor in the form of current.
3. As soon as TME wave begins to propagate, you now have voltage drop in the antenna. The voltage drop is instantaneously felt by nearby conductors. This is the cause of the LMD wave formation!! It is ironic that this wave will race ahead jumping across the conductors and reach the ground AHEAD of the TME wave. In fact, since its accelerated, it will only get farther and farther ahead of the TME wave the longer the coil is. It is ironic that the LMD wave occurs as the effect of the discharge and TME formation, yet the LMD wave can propagate faster than the TME wave.
Noone anywhere seems to have pointed this out in the way I just explained. And yet, my mechanical explanation seems to most clearly (at least in my eyes) explain how you get OU effects and broken symmetry with this superluminal velocity wave. The LMD wave is able to produce disturbances in other circuits and other parts of a given circuit before the exciting charge ever reaches that part of the circuit.
I will give credit to Alex Petty for helping to form my view. He seems to have an extremely good perspective about superluminal effects and even the math behind them.
Now all this stuff could be a bunch of nonsense really when it comes to the Donald Smith and Kapanadze devices, but I don't think so. I think its got real merit and directly applies. Why? Because I haven't seen anyone (and I have asked and asked and probed) EVER be able to properly explain how these devices cause OU. The best I've seen came from Arunas (Lithuania) T-1000 claiming that its not a critical issue to get obsessed with specific coil geometries -- what matters most, he said, is breaking symmetry with a standing wave. Ok? So? I've built a system that has standing waves -- did it break symmetry? ABSOLUTELY NOT. My system doesn't work! Building standing waves isn't enough. You can still get magnetic and dielectric coupling effects where anything you do to the load is still felt by the source. And personally, I can't see anyway to avoid this other than by using superluminal velocity waves that cause a time-separation between the exciting source charge and the effect in the load.
If anyone's familiar with Vladimir Utkin's work, please speak up (vladimir has a document on the web that demonstrates all kinds of ways to supposedly break symmetry and get OU effects). I've studied his PDF a whole lot and even corresponded with him. And he always gives me really poor answers and acts like I'm the one who doesn't get it. I point blank asked him if he achieved OU on his desk, and he didn't respond. There is a very good chance I have not properly implemented the designs he explains. I hope the problem is only on my end.
I am going to add one thing that might blow everything I said out of the water.
When I was pooring through some material last night, I did notice a claim that Tesla set his recievers up to charge capacitors and timed the capacitors to discharge between the pulses they received. The claim did NOT say whether those discharges happened after every single pulse or only after N number of pulses. It did, however, say, that Tesla had a lot of trouble keeping the timing of these discharges correct.
I will point out that the charging of a capacitor automatically changes the resonant frequency of the reciever (Hence the need to discharge it). This has been a huge pain in the neck that I have found with my devices. In order to have the system work at all, I believe the capacitor must be discharged after EVERY pulse. The output must be completely isolated from the recieving circuit as much as possible. This dilemma is why Donald Smith devices have been so confusing for people to figure out. Its one thing to create a standing wave or resonant condition. Its a completely different thing to impart the magnified energy to a load without losing the parameters of resonance. This is why you see wanna-be replications running light bulbs and resistive loads. A resistive load doesn't change teh capacity or inductance of the circuit. Anybody can build a resonant circuit and stick a resistor or lightbulb in there. Few have done more than that.
The way I see it, its a pain in the neck to store up any significant amount of power in a capacitive form. The energy has got to be imparted to a load and used up on demand, to clear the path for more energy to flow in from the resonant circuitry. The condition for resonance must be maintained!
Had to post one more thing. Glad Phil called attention again to this pdf from Handwerker.
Handwerker goes out of his way to point out this:
Thereare two different main resonance frequencies f0 and f1, where f1= 1,57 .f0; for instance f0= 1 MHz and f1= 1,57 MHz; the relationship is therefore: f1 = f2 * pi/2
But your scope doesn't show two resonant frequencies. Hence, the fact that I concluded the ring-down frequency must be the TME frequency and the one I mistakenly used in all past attempts.