Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Single Wire Transmission Experiment

  1. Jun 13, 2012 #1
    I've done an experiment for Single Wire Transmission using Steve Jackson's plans. I went through a series of tests to show what works and what doesn't work. I have demonstrated that the technology does in fact work but some claims towards how it works may be false so I have left it up to you guys to understand how this works exactly. I put out as much information as I could of my experiment so hopefully you have enough to work with when figuring out how it works.

    Here are the Youtube videos I made of the experiment:

  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 13, 2012 #2


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    That link doesn't work for me (perhaps because I'm on my phone) and a quick google only brings up illuminati conspiracy theories for Steve Jackson. Have you read the PF Rules to make sure this complies?
  4. Jun 13, 2012 #3
    I wasn't able to post a link so I took out the " www. " my youtube channel is "candy bish"

    as for the plans I copied I guess I'll attach the pdf I used. I'm not creating any conspiracies or anything. I simply did an experiment and showed the results and told you who I copied the replication plans from.
  5. Jun 13, 2012 #4
    Okay I attached the replication plans I used. It's a pdf.

    Attached Files:

  6. Jun 13, 2012 #5


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    As is said in the paper, it's an antenna, not a transmission line. Why are you calling it a transmission line?

    Also, I find the claim of "less than 1/r^2" power loss at 100m to be very hard to believe. Are you claiming to have tested this?
  7. Jun 13, 2012 #6
    In my videos I explain what I personally believe of how it works and I explain what the claims are. So I did some tests to see if there are waves being transmitted and it occurred for me that the receiver was not being powered by any sort of wave. I explained my theory but even with that I wasn't completely sure because I couldn't explain some other effects like taking the metal sphere off the receiver and keeping my hand near it to keep the LEDs lit.

    The main reason why I believe the receiver is not being powered by any sort of waves (and I didn't mention this in my videos because I realized it after), I separated the ground wire from the tesla coils and used salt water for the ground in separate cups. If it were being powered by waves it should turn on but the LEDs would only turn on if the salt water ground was connecting the ground wires of the two telsa coils.

    Check my videos out, if you are interested, then I promise it will be worth your while.
  8. Jun 13, 2012 #7


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    So you were not testing the claim of "less than 1/r^2" power loss at 100m? That would seem to be at the center of the paper's claims. At least the claim that would be the most controversial from a scientific point of view.
  9. Jun 13, 2012 #8
    Ok sorry I forgot to answer your question directly. I did test for inverse square law near the end but not for 100m. My wires couldn't reach anywhere near 100m but I did bring the tesla coils close to each other and tested the voltage difference. I also tested for the voltage for the tesla coils moved apart as far as I could (about 28 inches apart). there was only about 0.2 volts of difference and I think the little bit of near field which is going to come out of the coil and sphere added to the the voltage of the receiver when it was 5 to 6 inches away. I also put metallic plates in front of the receiver and transmitter (not at the same time) and there was no weakening of the voltage unless the metal plate actually touched the sphere.

    I suggest you see for yourself because it is easier to understand what happened by looking.

    Final answer: I don't believe the inverse square law applies in this experiment and I don't believe the receiving tesla coil is being significantly powered by any waves of any sort.
  10. Jun 13, 2012 #9


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I don't understand you last sentence (it seems to contradict itself). If the inverse square law doesn't apply for some reason, the receiving coil/antenna should pick up lots of energy from the transmitting antenna.

    And what do you mean that your wires are too short to space the TX and RX antennas 100m apart? They don't need to be connected to each other for "wireless" energy transmission, right?
  11. Jun 13, 2012 #10
    Okay and I realized I also failed to answer your question again.

    My answer: I am not testing the claim of "less than 1/r^2" power loss at 100m.

    The only thing I claim is that it is possible to send power to a receiver using only one wire without significant power loss. By one wire I mean one lead or in other words one strand of conductive material.

    What had occurred for me in my experiment is that the inverse square law did not apply or have a significant effect in the transfer of electricity. By "occur" I mean it is my personal belief based on what I saw in my experiment.

    My question for people is: how does this work exactly and on what principles?

    I have my own theory but even with that I don't know if it explains all the effects I saw. Therefore I am inviting anyone to view the experiment and explain me how it is working exactly.
  12. Jun 13, 2012 #11


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Forgive my lack of knowledge on this topic, but what is the single wire even used for if the power is being transmitted wirelessly?
  13. Jun 13, 2012 #12
    Well technically there is one wire in the transfer of electricity so it isn't truly wireless. One of the claims of this technology is that it can send power through the earth by substituting the ground wire for the earth itself. that being said, it may be possible to have one coil on one side of the earth and the receiving coil on the other side of the earth and as long as they are grounded into the earth the receiver can receive the electricity. It would "look" like it's wireless when really it's not. BUT I have not tested the earth as ground so I don't know if this claim is true. I haven't tested it because beased on my knowledge I would require voltage around the hundreds, being stepped up to voltage in the thousands.

    However, I have seen one person do this (send power through the ground with one wire) on Youtube but it was hard to see the set-up perfectly and we all know that Youtube cannot be a credible source. If someone could test this theory with clear and concise details, I think it would be interesting to see.
  14. Jun 13, 2012 #13
    If you watch my video I explain exactly how I believe it works. If you read the pdf I attached, it explains what claims are of how it works, which I don't fully agree with based on my results. The single wire is known as the ground wire.
  15. Jun 13, 2012 #14


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I watched about 90 seconds of your first video. The amount of useful information from that was zero, and the rambling presentation didn't give me any motivation to sit through the rest of it plus four more (or however many there are).

    The only things I got from "theory section" (Page 37 onwards) of the PDF link were (1) the author gets a pretty high score on the "crackpot index" at http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html and (2) apparently, I'm dumber than somebody's pet coyote.

    The "PESN open source project" webiste seems totally woo-woo (free energy, hydroxy generators, cold fusion, etc) - I'm not going to post a link here because I don't want to get an infraction from PF!
  16. Jun 13, 2012 #15


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Thanks for that, AlephZero. I think this thread is pretty much done, even for the S&D forum.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook