Loading AI tools
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
I tried to improve the organization, by placing the Van de Graaff generator as a "modern generator", because the original idea used electronic excitation instead of friction of influence (although it can be built in those ways too). 146.164.26.90 13:21, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
There is a lot of information, but the article needs better organization. For examples, The note about the Van de Graaff generator should be on a particular section about modern electrostatic generators, as the original idea is not of a friction generator, although it can be built in that way. Lorente generator is a friction machine. The works of Felici should be added. Pseudoscience references should be removed. 146.164.26.90 12:55, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
(a) Reddi, you invest large amounts of your time, to add all these patent links. But is it a good idea? Do you know of any general discussion of this topic?
(b) Speaking of electrostatic generators as great classroom experiments, do you, or does anybody else, remember the two-dripping-bottles-spark-generator? I unfortunately don't even remember the name.
Pjacobi 08:31, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
(a) patent links? yes (atleast till the subarticles can be made to move them too ... and ... it good to know the history of the devices (patents give one record of historical lineage [not to mention the details of operation of certian devices] ...)) ... discussion? No ... i'll look around though if you want.
(b)Lord kelvin had a water system that dripped IIRC. I'll come back if I find the name of it. Sincerely, JDR 16:25, 6 December 2005 (UTC) (PS., the thing is "Kelvin's Thunderstorm; Lord Kelvin's water-drop electrostatic generator" ... BTW, this device helped Kelvin develop some of his aether theories and knot theory IIRC.)
20/12/2005 Reddi appears to insist on the entry about the "Testatika" machine, that is a semi-religious device surrounded in mystery and pseudo-science, very different from the other machines, that are completely documented, easily understandable, and reproducible. All the informations about this device are repetitions of the same original text, with imaginary detais added. It was never reproduced or described in a way that makes sense.
These generators have been used, sometimes inappropriately and with some controversy, to support various fringe science investigations. In 1911, George Samuel Piggott received a patent for a compact double machine enclosed within a pressurized box for his experiments concerning radiotelegraphy and "antigravity". Much later (in the 1960s), the Testatika was built by German engineer, Paul Suisse Bauman, and promoted by a Swiss community, the Methernithans. Testatika is an electromagnetic generator based on the 1889 Pidgeon electrostatic machine, said to produce "free energy" available directly from the environment and which cannot be depleted (so it is available in effectively unlimited quantity). 204.56.7.1 21:30, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Clarification and more elaboration is needed by someone well versed in the subject to explain the Related recent machines. I removed the inline request for non-deletion as well as corrected some grammatical mistakes.
Why is there a picture of a plasma globe on this article? The caption beneath it says '...a "plasma globe", that does not use static electricity)'. As pretty as they are, surely they are not relevant here since don't use static electricity? Kate (talk) 15:00, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
The article as it reads is unfair on Guericke. The sentence "It ... was not intended to produce electricity (rather cosmic virtues)" in particular is funny but conveys the wrong impression. Guericke explicitly says his globe produced "electric attraction". Guericke may have believed that gravity and electricity were the same or related, since previously he compared the force produced by his globe to that of gravity. The text of Guericke was in Latin and in Latin the word virtus has a different meaning than in the English word virtue. In Latin it means power or force. Guericke refers to the virtus conservativa, which he says produces what we call our sense of weight (gravitas). So it was his term for the power of gravity. That term, the force of gravity, had not been invented before and there was no better word for it but that was clearly what he meant by virtus conservativa. He says that it operates between the sun and planets and attracts bodies to the earth. That is a very different picture from saying that Guericke believed his globe produced "cosmic virtues". The meaning that phrase conveys in English is completely wrong. In a different place in that book, Guericke explicitly said that "the attraction of the sulphur globe, mentioned in the earlier chapter, is the same as electric attraction" after referring to Gilbert's work on electricity, which was the only previous major work on the subject. The relevant passages are translated into English in Heathcote's article, quoted as a reference. That sentence about the globe's purpose being that of producing cosmic virtues should be deleted or appropriately edited. Skamnelis (talk) 15:37, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Electrostatic generator/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
There is a lot of information, but the article needs better organization. For examples, The note about the Van de Graaff generator should be on a particular section about modern electrostatic generators, as the original idea is not of a friction generator, although it can be built in that way. Lorente generator is a friction machine. The works of Felici should be added. Pseudoscience references should be removed. 146.164.26.90 12:57, 15 March 2007 (UTC) |
Last edited at 12:57, 15 March 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 14:19, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Why is it that the early machines like Hawksbees could not be used for communication over distance in the manner of the telegraph? Wires could be connected; that is how they charged the Leyden jar. So why not a really long wire? Perhaps a note could be added about this. Thanks LastDodo (talk) 16:02, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:53, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links.
There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate.
Minimize the number of links. Trim links per policies and guidelines. See talk. -- Otr500 (talk) 15:56, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.