Static Eliminator

Radio Record, Volume II, Issue 44, 17 May 1929, Page 4

Static Eliminator

Is It a Hoax? IN the appearance of the striking announcement from Invercargill that an inventor there had managed to succeed in his effort to provide a device for eliminating static from radio reeeiving sets, we telegraphed to an Invercargill correspondent asking him to get in touch with the inventor and give us full information of the allegedly successful device. Our correspondent is a competent newspaper man, well skilled in the art of locating "persons wanted." "After several days’ inquiry amongst patent agents, local radio enthusiasts, and all likely sources, our correspondent informs us that he is quite unable to locate the inventor of the alleged static eliminator. Discussion of the so-called invention has been entered into with lowgl wireless enthusiasts, and the consensus of opinion is that the matter is impracticable. It is even hinted that the thing is a hoax, more especially as the inventor has failed to give the leagt indication of the nature of his apparatus. At this stage, we make no statement whateyer as to the invention. We issue, however, a specfic invitation to ihe inventor to come forward and give the radio world some details of his invention. After the original announcement was made, an Invercargill paper published ee following matter. Careful reading of this, however, leaves us very nearly ay wise as we were before, and we, with listeners, still await details of the invention. A further step in introducing to the world a local man’s invention, which is claimed to elminate static and interference in wireless sets, was taken on Saturday, when a gentleman enabled the inventor to patent fully the idea.

In conversation with a "Times" reporter, the fortunate inventor, while wishing to remain anonymous for the present, gave a general idea of the difficulties to be solved. "In modern radio communication," he said, "the limitation to the distance that can be covered satisfactorily by a given transmitting station is imposed entirely by the inability of the receiving station to distinguish a signal, music or speech, from disturbing noises from other transmitting stations and from atmospherics. Weakness of the received oscillation by itself is not a limitation, for this can be amplified as much as desired after cutting out the amplification of disturbances and atmospherics by means of one of the devices. The most difficult disturbance to be coped with is that due to nature -the so-called static, stray or atmospheric. Some interferences are due to electro-magnetic waves radiated by charges such as those practically employed in spark radio transmitters. Others are due to gradual charging of the antennae from electric charges in the air such as are carried by snowflakes, followed by sudden charges of high-tension cables. This is the true static and is elminated by another device. "Radio receivers frequently interfere with each other," he continued. "The modulation of the transmitter oscillation by the voice prevents harp tuning of the receiver. It is in this respect that the device is most revolutionary. It can nevertheless be placed in any set on the market. By a successive series of treatments, the waves finally reach the speaker in an abgolutely clear reception, all static having been cut out."