An interesting paper has just been published on arXiv about Tesla : https://arxiv.org/pdf/2212.04440
The author is not a physicist, and I will be more moderate than him. Tesla was a brilliant inventor, all his patents work perfectly. But this paper confirms what I have always said here: he was not a theorist, he did not understand the theory of electromagnetism, only the rules of engineering, he for example denied the electron, denied Hertzian waves, and his idea of transmission of energy at great distance is incoherent.
"
This scenario made him the perfect guru for adepts of conspiracy theories who want to believe that it is other scientists who destroyed his fame in order to hide from people the existence of some "free energy" that Tesla was supposedly trying to offer to the world"
This paper reviews all the crazy things we read about Tesla, especially on conspiracy sites. Here is the summary list. For the evidence, see the paper :
- "Thomas Edison stole from Nikola Tesla the invention of the light bulb." Myth
- "Nikola Tesla invented the laser." Myth
- "Nikola Tesla invented the electric motor." Myth
- "Nikola Tesla invented the AC current." Myth
- "Nikola Tesla invented the AC motor." Myth
- "Nikola Tesla invented the wireless communication." Myth
- "Nikola Tesla invented the transformer." Myth
- "Einstein was once asked what it was like to be the smartest man alive. He replied 'I don't know, you'll have to ask Nikola Tesla.'" Probably a myth, and should it be true, it would have to be understood as sarcasm.
While I consider Tesla brilliant as an inventor, some of the facts reported here put the story into perspective, and perhaps the way he ended up is a consequence of his behavior:
"
Tesla adopted pseudo-scientific views, was arrogant and aggressive toward other people's work, and completely missed the advances made in physics in the early 1900s, such as in Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. He certainly made technological contributions and inventions, but the path leading to an invention usually involves the contributions from numerous predecessors who deserve to be credited for their work."
The paper has an interesting take on Tesla's work however there are many mistakes.
QuoteVerdict: Myth. Tesla didn't invent the light bulb,
and Edison didn't steal the invention. Edison rightfully
bought the patent. He also improved the light bulb
greatly, so that it became useful and affordable to
everyone
I agree that neither Tesla or Edison invented the incandescent light bulb. However we can see the author is very biased because Edison didn't improve the incandescent bulb either his employee's did. In fact Edison was only given credit for personally inventing/improving a couple devices. This conclusion is also a clever form of biased misdirection because the incandescent bulb was never in question and it was the florescent bulb. Tesla was well versed with HV plasma in vacuum tubes and supposedly used an inner coating to improve illumination. So it was the fluorescent bulb not the incandescent bulb, lol.
QuoteVerdict: Myth. The laser is inherently a quantum mechanical device, and there is no way that Tesla could have
invented it with his erroneous views of classical physics.
Oh dear this is getting ridiculous. To my knowledge Tesla was never associated with laser technology obviously making the supposed claim absurd. In fact, Tesla made a claim of inventing a "particle beam". Key word "particle", relating to the rapid acceleration of metal powders into a coherent line or beam by electrostatic forces. Which of course, was right in line with all of Tesla's other research into HV phenomena.
Quote"Nikola Tesla invented the electric motor."
The electric motor was invented by Michael Faraday
in 1821, 35 years before Tesla was born[14].
Verdict: Myth. The electric motor was clearly invented
before Tesla was born
This is absurd and Tesla never claimed to have invented the electric motor. Tesla invented and patented the polyphase induction motor which revolutionized the industry. The technology was groundbreaking because it drastically improved efficiency and didn't have brushes to wear out.
Do I really need to continue because this paper is not only a complete joke but also littered with misdirection. It was obviously written by an amateur who knew little if nothing of what Tesla actually accomplished.
AC
Quote from: Allcanadian on 2022.12.09, 18:09:27
...
Oh dear this is getting ridiculous. To my knowledge Tesla was never associated with laser technology...
[]
This is absurd and Tesla never claimed to have invented the electric motor.
...
His name has been associated with lasers, because of the "death beam":
"
Nikola Tesla claimed to have invented a "death beam" which he called teleforce in the 1930s and continued the claims up until his death."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_ray
and also to the motor:
"
Tesla's AC Induction Motor is one of the 10 greatest discoveries of all time"
https://www.teslasociety.com/hall_of_fame.htm
I have the impression that you don't know much about him and what people say about him.
The paper I quoted is honest, there are all these myths about Tesla on the web, some of which he himself created and the rest of which are the work of incompetent fans.
Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.12.09, 20:47:02
His name has been associated with lasers, because of the "death beam":
"Nikola Tesla claimed to have invented a "death beam" which he called teleforce in the 1930s and continued the claims up until his death."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_ray
IMO more likely talking about the carbon button proto-laser experiments in the 1890's.
shorturl.at/gmryK (http://shorturl.at/gmryK)
and
https://www.tesla-book.com/did-tesla-invent-the-laser
Quote from: Hakasays on 2022.12.10, 02:46:39
IMO more likely talking about the carbon button proto-laser experiments in the 1890's.
shorturl.at/gmryK (http://shorturl.at/gmryK)
and
https://www.tesla-book.com/did-tesla-invent-the-laser
"They emit a uniform wavelength of light" C.C
Good examples. This is the kind of conspiracy talk you find around Tesla, so stupid and uncorrelated with any facts that there is nothing to answer.
Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.12.10, 11:33:05
Good examples. This is the kind of conspiracy talk you find around Tesla, so stupid and uncorrelated with any facts that there is nothing to answer.
Prejudice is making judgements without knowing the subject material. Much easier to speak than it is to study. ;D
If you were more versed in Tesla's 1880's-1900 work you would likely have understood the connection between Tesla, carbon/button lamps and laser tech. I can dig up a bit more info if you're legitimately curious.
(also know someone working on authentic replica Tesla carbon button lamps that is pretty well-versed in that era of work)
F6FLT
QuoteHis name has been associated with lasers, because of the "death beam":
"Nikola Tesla claimed to have invented a "death beam" which he called teleforce in the 1930s and continued the claims up until his death."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_ray
Wikipedia is not a credible source and most knowledgeable people understand the difference between a laser and a particle beam.
QuoteA laser uses light energy. A particle beam uses kinetic energy of atomic or subatomic particles. A laser will not produce secondary radiation other than heat. A particle beam can produce secondary radiation, including x-rays and other ionizing radiation.
Quoteand also to the motor:
"Tesla's AC Induction Motor is one of the 10 greatest discoveries of all time"
https://www.teslasociety.com/hall_of_fame.htm
Most knowledgeable people understand when some say "Tesla AC Induction motor" they mean the motor Tesla invented which is the Polyphase Induction Motor.
In effect, all your arguing is that most people don't really understand technology or the terminology which should be obvious. As such we could apply this same narrative to almost any inventors work which many also do not understand. What was your point again?...
AC
Quote from: Hakasays on 2022.12.10, 13:39:46
Prejudice is making judgements without knowing the subject material...
I agree. That's why I talk about conspiracy theories about all these myths around Tesla.
If some ignorant people really think that Tesla knew how to transmit energy at great distances or had a death ray, let them demonstrate it, or shut up.
Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.12.11, 10:39:57
I agree. That's why I talk about conspiracy theories about all these myths around Tesla.
If some ignorant people really think that Tesla knew how to transmit energy at great distances or had a death ray, let them demonstrate it, or shut up.
You will remain many steps behind if everyone else is doing all the research+experimentation for you.
The researchers+EE's with the most success actually replicating Tesla's work say we've only scratched the surface.
The ones without even an engineering background (like Rousseau as posted above) are the most eager to dismiss.
That by itself is quite an interesting dichotomy. ;D
F6FLT
QuoteIf some ignorant people really think that Tesla knew how to transmit energy at great distances or had a death ray, let them demonstrate it, or shut up.
Imagine where we would be if we told everyone including scientists to demonstrate every "theory" or shut up. In fact much in science is theoretical and has never been proven by demonstration.
It's also kind of ironic that your false belief Tesla didn't transmit energy or build a particle beam is just a theory. In fact, there were many credible eyewitness accounts of Tesla transmitting many kilowatts of energy over large distances with no wires. In fact many companies full of credible electrical engineers have now come forward and claimed they have Tesla's wireless power technology working.
Another aspect you have failed to understand is the notion of intellectual property. We know as a fact that literally thousands of big corporations and scientists are working on wireless power and particle beam technology as we speak. Anyone can find countless science papers and research on this subject proving it has merit and is of great interest. However the fact remains these big corporations are not in the business of demonstrating disruptive technology to the public. There in business to make a profit and disclosing there intellectual property to the public is not in there interests. Sorry but your nobody and don't need to know anything in there view.
Another reason you may never see this technology is the fact the best and the brightest people who can do things that actually matter are hired before they even finish university. There are countless people magnitudes more intelligent and capable than you will ever be and once there hired they have to sign NDA's and are never heard from again. So it's not a conspiracy and it's not as if advanced technology doesn't exist it's just dominated by big business and profits.
AC
Quote from: Hakasays on 2022.12.11, 17:16:10
You will remain many steps behind if everyone else is doing all the research+experimentation for you.
Those who would have done research for me are losers, as I still have to pay for my electricity. So now I do my own research, and their failures point me which way to avoid, like these myths around Tesla.
Quote
The researchers+EE's with the most success actually replicating Tesla's work say we've only scratched the surface.
...
This idea is also a myth.
Quote from: Allcanadian on 2022.12.11, 18:22:02
F6FLT
Imagine where we would be if we told everyone including scientists to demonstrate every "theory" or shut up. In fact much in science is theoretical and has never been proven by demonstration.
...
You're mixing apples and oranges. Scientists can speak, even about new and uncertain things, because they know how to express them in a refutable way. The work of scientists is refutable, not the myths around Tesla which are the affirmation of mere beliefs.
Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.12.11, 18:36:47
Those who would have done research for me are losers, as I still have to pay for my electricity. So now I do my own research, and their failures point me which way to avoid, like these myths around Tesla.
This idea is also a myth.
Not quite sure what you're getting at. Are you suggesting that because Tesla has 'fanboys' and myths associated that his work is somehow invalid/inaccurate?
If you don't feel there is anything of value, perhaps you just haven't explored deeply enough? Based on your responses thus-far I can see there are some pretty big gaps in your knowledge of Tesla's work.
F6FLT
QuoteYou're mixing apples and oranges. Scientists can speak, even about new and uncertain things, because they know how to express them in a refutable way. The work of scientists is refutable, not the myths about Tesla.
I know many scientists and your wrong on many levels...
First, scientists are people and still need a job just like anyone else. Key work "job" and it's there employer who determines what they can talk about and to whom usually through NDA's. Your not naive enough to think there just chatting about there work on advanced or disruptive tech to anyone do you?.
In fact most universities now have corporate sponsors or the newest prostitution of science becoming there own corporation. Universities cherry picking the best students, hiring them, forced NDA's and owning all the students work. I think your also getting confused about the kind of science in question. Nobody really cares about a scientist studying the mating habits of tree frogs but advanced or disruptive tech is a completely different matter.
The most obvious objection even a six year old could understand is that free energy, wireless power or particle beams obviously have military applications. Are you that naive that it never occurred to you any military with this kind of technology could own the battlefield. You seem to be living in a fairy tale world completely misguided as to how it actually works. Do you watch the news?, Russia is carpet bombing Ukraine out of existence for no other reason than to seize it's assets. It's about power, greed, big business and money. Russia is executing scientists who may be a threat to there business or military interests.
AC
Tesla's work has been misrepresented, misinterpreted, and used the the interest of others since his death (actually even before his death).
Anyone who truly researched Tesla, would know that many of his technical writings (several full trunks) were confiscated after his death, and that only some of these were returned to his relatives.
The US FBI vault has several of of Tesla's papers and notes and memos of their own FBI investigations, but when you look at them you will see that they are cherry picked and anything useful has been redacted (blacked out).
There is also some confusion about the notion of all scientists and science globally...
In the Western world and Europe science has a pretty free reign outside the context of energy or anything having a military application. However in many communist(Russia, China) or radicalized/fascist countries (Iran, Middle East) scientists are routinely thrown in prison or executed. In many radicalized or islamic countries the science must also agree with religious dogma or again the scientist is imprisoned or executed.
So this notion that any intelligent or scientific people can say whatever they want and do anything is grossly naive.
AC
Quote from: Grumpy on 2022.12.11, 20:41:36
The US FBI vault has several of of Tesla's papers and notes and memos of their own FBI investigations, but when you look at them you will see that they are cherry picked and anything useful has been redacted (blacked out).
Yeah, all of the declassified documents I've seen were 3rdhand documents ABOUT Tesla (IE: newspaper clippings). I'm not sure anyone has been able to find any of the confiscated documents written BY Tesla.
Ten trunks of missing notes+papers from a man with such incredible claims really helped to spurn the posthumous legend.
A few Tesla quotes about energy...
QuoteWe have to evolve means for obtaining energy from stores which are forever inexhaustible, to perfect methods which do not imply consumption and waste of any material whatever. I now feel sure that the realization of that idea is not far off. ...the possibilities of the development I refer to, namely, that of the operation of engines on any point of the earth by the energy of the medium.
QuoteWe are whirling through endless space with an inconceivable speed, all around us everything is spinning, everything is moving, everywhere is energy. There mart be some way of availing ourselves of this energy more directly. Then; with the light obtained from the medium, with the power derived from it, with every form of energy obtained without effort, from the store forever inexhaustible, humanity will advance with giant strides. The mere contemplation of these magnificent possibilities expand our minds, strengthens our hopes and and fills our hearts with supreme delight.
QuoteElectric power is everywhere present in unlimited quantities and can drive the world's machinery without the need of coal, oil, gas, or any other of the common fuels.
There should be no confusion about what Tesla was referring to here. An inexhaustible energy source present everywhere in unlimited quantities.
AC
Quote from: Allcanadian on 2022.12.11, 19:35:58
F6FLT
I know many scientists and your wrong on many levels...
...
Of course, you know everything about everything better than anyone else, you keep saying so. The pity is that you never provide any proof of this, only tall tales and conspiracy theories based on sophisms.
Why do you want to talk when nothing you say is operational? I don't think we are here to listen to preaching. So once again "If some ignorant people really think that Tesla knew how to transmit energy at great distances or had a death ray, let them demonstrate it, or shut up".
Quote from: Grumpy on 2022.12.11, 20:41:36
Tesla's work has been misrepresented, misinterpreted, and used the the interest of others since his death (actually even before his death).
...
Myth.
Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.12.12, 08:07:29
Myth.
I don't think you're enough of an expert on Tesla's works to make such a broad assertion.
As I said prior, There should be no confusion about what Tesla was referring to.
An inexhaustible energy source present everywhere in unlimited quantities.
In this respect paid shills from the energy and fossil fuel sector have been trying to minimize Tesla's work and these forums for decades.
https://grist.org/climate/how-the-oil-industry-pumped-americans-full-of-fake-news/
QuoteCreating a cloud of confusion around established science is one of their well-known tactics. Exxon and the coal industry knew about global warming as early as the 1960s; instead of telling the public, they spread doubt about the science behind it. That's just one facet of the fossil fuel industry's propaganda machine.
QuoteAstroturfing: What better way to counter grassroots activists than to fake your own grassroots group? This practice, called "astroturfing," was the brainchild of Daniel Edelman, a PR whiz who advised Mobil Oil, Big Tobacco, and many other companies in the mid-20th century. There are now hundreds of fake front groups backed by oil-funded lobbying groups
QuoteFalse equivalence: Herb Schmertz, who advised Mobil starting in the 1960s, took an aggressive stance toward the press. He'd attack any journalist or outlet critical of his company, arguing that they weren't hearing Mobil's side of the story, and then watch them overcorrect in the next edition.
It begs the question, what kind of sadistic person would sell out there own children, mankind and the planet for a few dollars as a paid shill?. In my opinion they would need to have literally no empathy or self-respect to lower themselves to that pathetic level. It's simply beyond my ability to reason how a person could get off on hurting others and revel in there own sadistic self-destruction.
It's strange because in the past I had supervisors who often told me to do something I knew was wrong and I always told them to go fuck themselves. It was easy and I didn't think much of it because my integrity was worth more than some loser or a job, jobs are a dime a dozen. So it's hard to understand how these paid shills could think so little of themselves and be so desperate. It's just beyond me...
AC
Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.12.12, 08:07:29
Myth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleforce
The idea of a "death ray" was a misunderstanding in regard to Tesla's term when he referred to his invention as a "death beam" so Tesla went on to explain that "this invention of mine does not contemplate the use of any so-called 'death rays.' Rays are not applicable because they cannot be produced in requisite quantities and diminish rapidly in intensity with distance. All the energy of New York City (approximately two million horsepower) transformed into rays and projected twenty miles, could not kill a human being, because, according to a well known law of physics, it would disperse to such an extent as to be ineffectual. My apparatus projects particles ...
Tesla claimed that his apparatus produced particles, so that sounds more like a particle beam of some sort:
My apparatus projects particles which may be relatively large or of microscopic dimensions, enabling us to convey to a small area at a great distance trillions of times more energy than is possible with rays of any kind. Many thousands of horsepower can thus be transmitted by a stream thinner than a hair, so that nothing can resist. The nozzle would send concentrated beams of particles through the free air, of such tremendous energy that they will bring down a fleet of 10,000 enemy airplanes at a distance of 200 miles from a defending nation's border and will cause armies to drop dead in their tracks.
Maybe this is why his technical papers are still classified or some other reason to hold and not release them.
In 1937, Tesla wrote a treatise, "The Art of Projecting Concentrated Non-dispersive Energy through the Natural Media", concerning charged particle beam weapons. Tesla published the document in an attempt to expound on the technical description of a 'superweapon" that would put an end to all war." This treatise is currently in the Nikola Tesla Museum archive in Belgrade. It describes an open-ended vacuum tube with a gas jet seal that allows particles to exit, a method of charging particles to millions of volts, and a method of creating and directing non-dispersive particle streams (through electrostatic repulsion).The treatise mentioned would make an interesting read if it were available online.
EDIT: found the treatise mentioned above, but have not read it yet.
https://teslaresearch.jimdofree.com/death-ray/the-new-art-of-projecting-concentrated-non-dispersive-energy-through-natural-media-briefly-exposed-by-nikola-tesla-circa-may-16-1935/
Nobody denies electrostatic repulsion, it is conventional science that has explained it. Electrostatic repulsion could be used to send a heavy object really far, even if magnetic guns are more effective at that, but in no case to send "beams of particles through the free air of such tremendous energy that they will bring down a fleet of 10,000 enemy airplanes at a distance of 200 miles".
So either Tesla did not understand electrostatic repulsion or the braking effect of air on particles (even cosmic particles of considerable energy are stopped by the upper atmosphere), or what he was talking about was something else and obviously it has remained a myth.
Mixing everything and anything to justify Tesla's extravagant statements or the conspiracy sites that report them can't prove anything, it is manipulation.
Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.12.13, 12:23:40
Nobody denies electrostatic repulsion, it is conventional science that has explained it. Electrostatic repulsion could be used to send a heavy object really far, even if magnetic guns are more effective at that, but in no case to send "beams of particles through the free air of such tremendous energy that they will bring down a fleet of 10,000 enemy airplanes at a distance of 200 miles".
So either Tesla did not understand electrostatic repulsion or the braking effect of air on particles (even cosmic particles of considerable energy are stopped by the upper atmosphere), or what he was talking about was something else and obviously it has remained a myth.
Mixing everything and anything to justify Tesla's extravagant statements or the conspiracy sites that report them can't prove anything, it is manipulation.
How well-versed are you on the 'stinging rays' experiments?
And what references did you you use to conclude such a system would be predominantly electrostatic?
I've not personally seen any 'death ray' designs from Tesla and I suspect the notes are still in some dark, moldy corner of an FBI evidence locker. Would rather see more data before passing broad judgement.
Quote from: Hakasays on 2022.12.13, 12:55:28
How well-versed are you on the 'stinging rays' experiments?
And what references did you you use to conclude such a system would be predominantly electrostatic?
I've not personally seen any 'death ray' designs from Tesla and I suspect the notes are still in some dark, moldy corner of an FBI evidence locker. Would rather see more data before passing broad judgement.
I'm not discussing anyone's beliefs, only the facts (a fact is a reality, therefore accompanied by evidence) and the logical relationships between them.
Do you have any?
In my opinion it's probably a good thing almost nobody has managed to figure out how any of Tesla's most advanced technology works. It goes towards the notion that a person should be intelligent enough to understand a technology and it's consequences before there allowed to use it. Like having to take a drivers course and test before being given a drivers license.
For example, I built working devices to prove what Tesla called radiant energy and matter are in fact real. However it's a dual edged sword, when a person becomes intelligent enough to understand advanced technology they should also understand why they should not tell everyone. They should be intelligent enough to understand no real good could come of it because it would eventually be weaponized by all the least intelligent people. It is the proverbial act of giving a child a loaded gun.
In effect this is why most of the people demanding they be given advanced technology are probably the last people it should be given to.
For example, most said nobody is stupid enough to start weaponizing drones but we all knew they would. Now the U.S., Russia and Ukraine are using weaponized drones soon to be made autonomous with AI. Soon were going to see squadrons of autonomous weaponized drones everywhere for whomever can afford them including your enemies. Let's be honest, everyone knew it was a train wreck but they did it anyways because there imbeciles.
So it's actually very beneficial there are so many misguided people like F6FLT who believe all this is impossible. The more the merrier I say...
AC
Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.12.13, 15:19:30
I'm not discussing anyone's beliefs, only the facts (a fact is a reality, therefore accompanied by evidence) and the logical relationships between them.
Do you have any?
Anyone making broad declarations I would ask about the level of depth they have on the subject. I'm just curious how deeply you've studied/replicated Tesla's work to consider yourself an expert,and what source materials you largely relied on to do so.
Quote from: Allcanadian on 2022.12.13, 17:39:09
For example, I built working devices to prove what Tesla called radiant energy and matter are in fact real. However it's a dual edged sword, when a person becomes intelligent enough to understand advanced technology they should also understand why they should not tell everyone. They should be intelligent enough to understand no real good could come of it because it would eventually be weaponized by all the least intelligent people. It is the proverbial act of giving a child a loaded gun.
AC
Proverbially, an overly-skeptical scientist might conclude that nuclear weapons are fake because they can't find plans on exactly how they are constructed anywhere online.
Quote from: Hakasays on 2022.12.13, 20:43:38
Anyone making broad declarations I would ask about the level of depth they have on the subject.
...
If you were to use your method, you would have to admit that academic theories are the best representations of the universe since they come from those who have the best "level of depth" on the subjects. For example, the scientists defined what electrons or magnetic fields are and all the concepts of physics, and were at the origin of all the technology used today, from electric motors to radio transmitters to nuclear power plants.
Just because some free energy joker will play with coils for years, and then produce a bunch of gibberish on the subject, doesn't make it relevant. Almost all free energy people use the words of scientists like "electrons" or "magnetic field" rather than creating their own concepts. They would be unable to do so, and in any case, it would be pointless, as scientific concepts are the most judicious.
Those who reject academic science are imitating it, but without understanding it. They should be more modest and study what works before theorising about what doesn't exist.
From what I read, neither you nor AC have any facts to support the myths about Tesla, only vague urban legends with no reproducible or measurable results except in the heads of those who believe them.
Again: I'm not here to discuss beliefs, only the facts (a fact is a reality, therefore accompanied by evidence) and the logical relationships between them.
Do you have any?
Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.12.14, 16:46:36
If you were to use your method, you would have to admit that academic theories are the best representations of the universe since they come from those who have the best "level of depth" on the subjects. For example, the scientists defined what electrons or magnetic fields are and all the concepts of physics, and were at the origin of all the technology used today, from electric motors to radio transmitters to nuclear power plants.
Just because some free energy joker will play with coils for years, and then produce a bunch of gibberish on the subject, doesn't make it relevant. Almost all free energy people use the words of scientists like "electrons" or "magnetic field" rather than creating their own concepts. They would be unable to do so, and in any case, it would be pointless, as scientific concepts are the most judicious.
Those who reject academic science are imitating it, but without understanding it. They should be more modest and study what works before theorising about what doesn't exist.
From what I read, neither you nor AC have any facts to support the myths about Tesla, only vague urban legends with no reproducible or measurable results except in the heads of those who believe them.
Again: I'm not here to discuss beliefs, only the facts (a fact is a reality, therefore accompanied by evidence) and the logical relationships between them.
Do you have any?
It sounds like your mind is already convinced that all of these myths about Tesla are urban legends and are all unfounded.
Yet you have not explored any of these myths with your own work. So, your conclusions are not based on your own work but based on the work (or lack of work) of others, much as the conclusions of believers in the myths are based.
No one should waste their time trying to convince you otherwise.
Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.12.14, 16:46:36
If you were to use your method, you would have to admit that academic theories are the best representations of the universe since they come from those who have the best "level of depth" on the subjects. For example, the scientists defined what electrons or magnetic fields are and all the concepts of physics, and were at the origin of all the technology used today, from electric motors to radio transmitters to nuclear power plants.
False Authority fallacy. Being an EE or physics expert doesn't necessarily confer experience researching or replicating the work of Nikola Tesla.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2022.12.14, 17:54:37
It sounds like your mind is already convinced that all of these myths about Tesla are urban legends and are all unfounded.
Yet you have not explored any of these myths with your own work. So, your conclusions are not based on your own work but based on the work (or lack of work) of others, much as the conclusions of believers in the myths are based.
No one should waste their time trying to convince you otherwise.
His style seems to infer that because Tesla has legends/myths associated that his actual work is somehow invalid/irrelevant. He mentions them a lot, but rarely anything written by Tesla himself. It makes sense that he would conclude everything is bunk/mundane because the bulk of data he's been exposed to is the low-tech fanboys and not actual replications or original source material. Something to be likened to argument-from-ignorance fallacy.
Also explains the propensity to use non-engineering, non-physics sources like Rousseau to make his argument. C.C
Quote from: Grumpy on 2022.12.14, 17:54:37
It sounds like your mind is already convinced that all of these myths about Tesla are urban legends and are all unfounded.
...
The burden of proof is on those who speak of Tesla's myths as realities. If you don't understand it yet, learn philosophy in addition to science instead of making a stupid remark because ad hominem.
Quote from: Hakasays on 2022.12.14, 22:33:16
False Authority fallacy. Being an EE or physics expert doesn't necessarily confer experience researching or replicating the work of Nikola Tesla.
It is even the opposite with the conspiracy theorists: the more competent you are, the more you are attacked since you demonstrate the immense stupidity of the discourse they hold. C.C
Quote
His style seems to infer that because Tesla has legends/myths associated that his actual work is somehow invalid/irrelevant. He mentions them a lot, but rarely anything written by Tesla himself. It makes sense that he would conclude everything is bunk/mundane because the bulk of data he's been exposed to is the low-tech fanboys and not actual replications or original source material. Something to be likened to argument-from-ignorance fallacy.
Also explains the propensity to use non-engineering, non-physics sources like Rousseau to make his argument. C.C
We are not here to listen to the ravings of preachers, gibberish, twisted conspiracy theories, denigration of competent people, and childish stories from people who entertain modern superstitions.
Produce facts, reproducible setups, measurements.
Hakasays
QuoteFalse Authority fallacy. Being an EE or physics expert doesn't necessarily confer experience researching or replicating the work of Nikola Tesla.
I think your correct and attribute the average critics lack of success to a variation of the Dunning–Kruger effect.
In my experience many critic/academics have low ability or experience actually building and testing real devices. They also tend to overestimate their ability or knowledge with respect to variations on any given concept or build. They falsely assume because most devices act in one way every device should act in a similar way ie, bandwagon/appeal to authority fallacy.
Many critics/academics also fall prey to what I call the "Edison effect". They would spend extended periods of time studying known phenomena in excruciating detail hoping to find a needle in a haystack. Spend endless hours doing math and equations supposedly to convince themselves no real experiments are even needed. As such many have resorted to a "simulated reality" in order justify there lack of experience or failures in reality.
However, the critics biggest liability is a lack of creativity in my opinion. I see many people doing exactly the same things over and over with no way out of the loop they seem to be stuck in. They seem to lack the ability to just stop, take an objective view of how they could change what there doing and proceed in a new direction. I had this same problem early on when I lacked a working knowledge and hands on experience. As many claim the task would seem impossible but only because they have run out of options on new ways to proceed.
How many here have been stuck in that scenario?. Staring at a patent, diagram or non-working build on the bench thinking "I have run out of options and there's nothing more to do here". That doesn't mean something is impossible it means we lack the proper perspective and creativity to find a new direction to proceed.
AC
Quote from: Allcanadian on 2022.12.15, 09:40:02
...
How many here have been stuck in that scenario?. Staring at a patent, diagram or non-working build on the bench thinking "I have run out of options and there's nothing more to do here". That doesn't mean something is impossible it means we lack the proper perspective and creativity to find a new direction to proceed.
AC
It means that at least this device does not work. That's the conclusion to be drawn, and that kind of conclusion is never drawn. No one (except me :) ) says that Bearden's MEG doesn't work, that Tesla's "death ray" never existed, or that his long-distance energy transmission doesn't work at long distances but only at short distances according to Maxwell's equations.
This is why there is no progress in free energy and why 99% of its actors are going in circles, they do not want to or do not know how to conclude.
F6FLT
QuoteIt means that at least this device does not work. That's the conclusion to be drawn, and that kind of conclusion is never drawn.
I'm super optimistic and all the critics falsely claiming fusion was impossible for decades were just proven wrong. We just keep winning and the critics just keep losing.
I think things are looking up, the west is making huge progress in clean energy while other primitive cultures like Russia and China are still living in the dark ages. Obviously we can't wait around for all the underachievers but we can sell them our clean technology. So ya, we won't be concluding anything anytime soon and there are so many opportunities it boggles the mind.
AC
@AC
Conventional science has always claimed that fusion will be possible, and it will be. When you have a theory as solid as relativity, still tested and confirmed a century after it was formulated, you can be sure that the difficulty is only a question of know-how, not of principle.
It is because nothing is concluded in FE that no progress is made, whereas conventional science makes progress. Conventional science has concluded that magnetic flux is conservative, so Bearden's MEG can't work as he describes it, so there's no point in wasting time on it, we have to move on.
This is why scientists are working on fusion to make it work, but not on Tesla's death ray, or Bearden's MEG as the idea is as incoherent as the pseudo-scientific jargon he uses about it.
The absence of a conclusion is an admission of ignorance, and nothing useful is built on ignorance.
Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.12.15, 08:35:34
It is even the opposite with the conspiracy theorists: the more competent you are, the more you are attacked since you demonstrate the immense stupidity of the discourse they hold. C.C
Why do you continue to deflect away from Tesla's actual works onto such topics? Is because all you have studied is the conspiracy sites and not Tesla's actual work?
Quote from: F6FLT
Produce facts, reproducible setups, measurements.
Appeal-to-ignorance fallacy. You're supposed to make the conclusive, declarative statements AFTER you have the facts, not before. :P
But I'll bite. ;)
For example, I have a close colleague that accidentally stumbled upon 'Tesla X-rays' reproducing some other experiments a couple years back. The tube is of a single-wire, and the waves have similar characteristics to X-rays, but the waves are much more powerful per-watt, do not appear to have the negative (ionizing?) characteristic of conventional X-rays, and the beam produced can be deflected/focused via magnetic fields.
The effects are still being mapped/characterized/studied, but it appears that conventional X-rays are either nonexistent or of a very small fraction in such a setup.
Based on his reports I suspect AllCanadian probably has experienced similar beam-like-emissions in his HV work.
Quote from: Hakasays on 2022.12.15, 13:37:42
Why do you continue to deflect away from Tesla's actual works onto such topics? Is because all you have studied is the conspiracy sites and not Tesla's actual work?
...
Read again, since after 6 days you still don't understand.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2212.04440
Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.12.15, 14:53:24
Read again, since after 6 days you still don't understand.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2212.04440
I would have assumed someone of your intellectual background would not be so interested in brief, 3rdhand biography from a non-technical author ;D ;D. False authority fallacy is always a danger when using 3rdhand sources.
I'm curious how much firsthand Tesla you've actually read+digested? How much do you know of 'Tesla X-rays' and their properties/replications?
F6 has proven that he is not worthy of the time it takes to argue with him. It's exhausting.
Philosophy, prove it, prove it, prove it, myth, blah blah blah...
Let me know if he ever says anything useful. Until then, he's on my ignore list.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2022.12.15, 15:42:06
F6 has proven that he is not worthy of the time it takes to argue with him. It's exhausting.
Philosophy, prove it, prove it, prove it, myth, blah blah blah...
Let me know if he ever says anything useful. Until then, he's on my ignore list.
Will-do. My foolish level of optimism occasionally pays off ;)
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge"
A better myth to discuss is the Philadephia Experiment, which supposedly involved Tesla, Einstein, and a few other prominent people.
let's see what i found in my old computer... O0
Quote from: chief kolbacict on 2022.12.15, 19:02:36
let's see what i found in my old computer... O0
O0
Love it :) Very simple, concise experiments that are directly engineerable and falsifiable. (even though some of the terms are a bit dated)
Hakasays
QuoteFor example, I have a close colleague that accidentally stumbled upon 'Tesla X-rays' reproducing some other experiments a couple years back. The tube is of a single-wire, and the waves have similar characteristics to X-rays, but the waves are much more powerful per-watt, do not appear to have the negative (ionizing?) characteristic of conventional X-rays, and the beam produced can be deflected/focused via magnetic fields.
The effects are still being mapped/characterized/studied, but it appears that conventional X-rays are either nonexistent or of a very small fraction in such a setup.
Based on his reports I suspect AllCanadian probably has experienced similar beam-like-emissions in his HV work.
I came to some strange conclusions based on my successful radiant energy/matter experiments.
From what I learned the phenomena falls somewhere between high energy particles and EM waves as we know them. As you imply, radiant energy can act like radiation but is not radiation as we know it. Radiant matter is similar in that it doesn't just carry a massive surface charge but also acts like an EM source in itself radiating EM energy. Like a mobile charge carrier which is also in oscillation radiating very short wavelength EM energy.
I think this is what confuses most people because the phenomena has extra properties most believe it shouldn't have. I eventually figured out how all this works but as I eluded in another post I'm not sharing because it could be weaponized like nothing we have seen to date. Were talking star wars type weapons and I want no part of that nonsense. I suspect that's why Tesla stopped his research and starting moving in other directions. Tesla got way to far too ahead of his time and realized this kind of advanced technology could destroy mankind. Weapons are for primates.
This video is very similar to my perspective...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJGCAWTgbn0
I went to space and discovered an enormous lie | Ron Garan
I also experienced a kind of "overview effect" which drastically changed my perspective. A sense of freedom and a connection with the universe and nature not dependent on society and it's beliefs. In my opinion it makes science and technology magnitudes easier and removes all the baggage most have to deal with. That's the thing isn't it?, everyone seems to want to force there own beliefs on us and we begin to lose our own sense of individuality.
Here's the real trick I found, when I go to the bench I'm not trying to prove anything to myself or others. I'm trying to learn something new and make progress for myself. The perspective always revolves around learning and discovering not proving anything. Proof is an illusion people make up to convince themselves they have reached an end but it's never an end only another starting point.
AC
chief kolbacict
Quoteэл_э1.pdf (538.06 kB - downloaded 14 times.)
Talk about deja vu, I literally have Tesla's static eliminator sitting on my bench right in front of me as we speak.
I invented it, or so I thought, this spring to eliminate the need for static straps on vehicles. In fact, my device looks identical to the one Tesla invented. That's kind of bizarre...
AC
Quote from: Grumpy on 2022.12.15, 15:42:06
F6 has proven that he is not worthy of the time it takes to argue with him. It's exhausting.
Philosophy, prove it, prove it, prove it, myth, blah blah blah...
I think I overestimated some of the people I spoke to.
If they don't understand that they are talking nonsense, without providing facts, logic or measurements, and that they also make personal attacks when asked to explain themselves, they should take up religion instead. Rational technical questions are clearly beyond them, as is the scientific method for dealing with them. It is not that their discourse is exhausting, it is that it is empty.
Quote from: chief kolbacict on 2022.12.15, 19:02:36
let's see what i found in my old computer... O0
Thanks for the history papers, Chief.
Tesla talks about near-field couplings, a completely conventional technique used today by wireless chargers and perfectly modelled by Maxwell's electromagnetism.
Tesla never understood the principle and convinced himself that he could transmit over long distances. As he despised those smarter than him in physics, he could not progress, and of course always failed in long-distance transmission.
For more than a century no scientist has believed in it, only Tesla bigots, whose fervour is matched only by their incompetence and of course their inability to produce any useful and operational device.
The answers of religions or conspiracy theories are suitable for those who do not understand anything about a field and only need simple explanations and magic stories, which is why they are so successful.
With the Tesla cult from some people today, we can see that we are no longer in science and technology, but in religion.
"This painting of Nikola Tesla was commissioned by the non-profit organization Tesla Science Foundation specifically as part of their project entitled "St. Tesla Petition" – a proposal to the Serbian Orthodox Church to canonize Nikola Tesla as a Serbian saint on the basis of many examples of his selfless acts so that Tesla could inspire scientists and engineers all over the world in a more spiritual way." C.C Q.E.D.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:St._Tesla.jpg
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fa/St._Tesla.jpg/1200px-St._Tesla.jpg)
Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.12.16, 08:28:20
For more than a century no scientist has believed in it, only Tesla bigots,
Dr. Corum believes in it. And Wesley too.
Quote from: chief kolbacict on 2022.12.16, 10:46:39
Dr. Corum believes in it. And Wesley too.
They would have succeeded in transmitting energy around the earth?!
There are many charlatans around free energy, starting with those who claim to reveal its secrets. Using the Tesla cult serves their selfish interests.
Just imagine where F6 would be if he had spent as much time reading Tesla as he's spent reading conspiracy theories, and sci-fi stories and other 3rd-party tales about him? ;D :D
https://teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/lectures/light-and-other-high-frequency-phenomena
http://www.onk.ns.ac.rs/Archive/Vol15/PDFVol15/v15n34p100.pdf
(Returning to the theme of the thread)
Myth: "Tesla Turbines are neat, but they spin far too fast, don't have any useful torque, and are not very efficient":
Reality:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQl1DQgXVkQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkGAKqG2qvU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThvV_xiFidY
Quote from: Hakasays on 2022.12.16, 13:25:08
Just imagine where F6 would be if he had spent as much time reading Tesla as he's spent reading conspiracy theories, and sci-fi stories and other 3rd-party tales about him? ...
I've read all his patents. They work, but it's conventional. But here, it's hard to read anything other than urban legends about devices he never patented, because they never worked.
It's a constant in the free energy movement to always prefer to believe the sensationalism of wonderful stories about devices that don't work.
Reality is too hard :)
Myth : Nikola Tesla discovered ,,very special radiation" or X-radiation
Reality: "X-radiation is referred to as Röntgen radiation, after the German scientist Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen, who discovered it on November 8,
1895."
That said, Tesla certainly produced some with the very high voltages he used. But X-rays are electromagnetic waves and Tesla denied them. That's a bummer. C.C
Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.12.16, 21:08:34
I've read all his patents. They work, but it's conventional. But here, it's hard to read anything other than urban legends about devices he never patented, because they never worked.
Thanks. The big gaps in knowledge make a
lot more sense in that context. All the lectures and peer-review papers and letters provide a lot of important context and information that did not end up at the patent office.
Quote
Myth : Nikola Tesla discovered ,,very special radiation" or X-radiation
Reality: "X-radiation is referred to as Röntgen radiation, after the German scientist Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen, who discovered it on November 8, 1895."
This is where knowing more than just patents would really pay off for you ;)
Following Tesla's work, we can see his presentations 1892-1893 were beginning to lead to experiments in evacuated bulbs with high voltage, high frequency impulses (figs 23, 27, 30, 31, 33):
https://teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/lectures/light-and-other-high-frequency-phenomena
Is it far-fetched to suggest that Tesla may have independently discovered 'shadowgraphs' and at least one form of X-ray between 1892 and 1896 given the pace of his work?
https://teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/images/drawing-illustrating-teslas-unipolar-vacuum-tube
We know for a fact that similar parallel discoveries had been made by both Edison and Humphry Davy in the similarly fast-paced era of electrical discovery, as well as Marconi's radio following Tesla's patents in the same era.
And directly following Roentgen, we find Tesla writing a paper on 'Roentgen rays' with extremely thorough work. Even with Tesla's mind-boggling pace he would have surely had a difficult time if all his experiments were performed in the couple months between patent and publication of his paper?
https://teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/articles/teslas-latest-roentgen-ray-investigations
With reports of clear shadowgraphs upwards of 45 feet, it would seem he even surpassed Roentgen's work by the 1896 (hence the fawning letter by Roentgen to Tesla some time later: https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4398.msg102641#msg102641 )
F6, since you are at least familiar with the patents, have you concluded that Tesla's 'radiant energy' bulbs/patents awarded were in-fact X-ray transceivers, or was it something else entirely?
https://teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/articles/nikola-teslas-radiations-and-cosmic-rays
Hakasays
https://teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/articles/nikola-teslas-radiations-and-cosmic-rays
Nikola Tesla's Radiations and the Cosmic Rays
Thanks for all the links, as we can see the massive amount of scientific research Tesla did in his lifetime is mind boggling. It's even more impressive when were speaking of so many discoveries across such a broad spectrum of scientific fields. I suspect most scientists today would only accomplish a fraction of what Tesla did in there entire career. Granted there was a lot to discover back in the late 1800's because not much was known.
AC
I found it astonishing when read how Tesla treated radio development during years as a fiction. Then I thought he just sent radio waves over single wire C.C is this how radio waves work today ? sending energy using displacement current ?
"teslauniverse.com" is a church and Tesla its God.
You don't see here the "massive amount of scientific research Tesla did" but the massive amount of myths attributed to Tesla.
Tesla was not a research scientist but an engineering master, there is a huge gulf between the two.
Place an ex-voto for him and light a candle, I'm sure he'll make OU appear in your setups. :)
Quote from: forest on 2022.12.17, 10:26:25
I found it astonishing when read how Tesla treated radio development during years as a fiction. Then I thought he just sent radio waves over single wire C.C is this how radio waves work today ? sending energy using displacement current ?
Best I can tell, Tesla didn't disagree with the experiments at the time, but his interpretation was that the conventional 'hertian' waves were
vastly inferior to the types of waves he felt he was working with. The theories at the time were fluid and evolving so it's hard to say exactly where the theoretical disagreements were.
Adrian Marsh is probably the most advanced researcher into displacement currents today, and we can both attest to the level of difficulty in balancing such systems for efficient transmission. His best results with careful tuning thus-far culminated in 500w single wire power transmissions through a 40awg wire with greater than 99.5% efficiency (100% measured):
https://www.am-innovations.com/category/experiments/experiments-single-wire-currents/
Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.12.17, 14:08:50
"teslauniverse.com" is a church and Tesla its God.
You don't see here the "massive amount of scientific research Tesla did" but the massive amount of myths attributed to Tesla.
Tesla was not a research scientist but an engineering master, there is a huge gulf between the two.
What I posted was original source material written by Tesla, no need for myth+mythology here :)
If one limits themself merely to patents, the knowledge and conclusions made could be quite handicapped indeed.
If you applied this 'patents-only' principle to Einstein's work you would miss all of his papers on Relativity, and if you applied it to someone like Oliver Heaviside you might conclude that Heaviside made no meaningful contribution to Electrical Engineering ??? ;D.
From Tesla's 685,958 patent:
Quote
"It is well known that certain radiations - such as those of ultra-violet light, cathodic, Roentgen rays, or the like - possess the property of charging and discharging conductors of electricity, the discharge being particularly noticeable when the conductor upon which the rays impinge is negatively electrified.
"My own experiments and observations, however, lead me to conclusions more in accord with the theory heretofore advanced by me that sourced of such radiant energy throw off with great velocity minute particles of matter which are strongly electrified, and therefore capable of charging an electrical conductor, or even if not so may at any rate discharge an electrified conductor either by carrying off bodily its charge or otherwise".
I wonder, has anyone besides Allcanadian managed to replicate the 'stinging rays' experiment, or found an interpretation as to action that may be occurring from a modern theoretical POV? ???
Quote from: Hakasays on 2022.12.17, 15:06:54
...
What I posted was original source material written by Tesla, no need for myth+mythology here :)
...
The problem, and not the least, is that what he has written, apart from his patents, are inconsistent dreams, and that he has not published anything scientific, only technical.
;)
Quote from: Hakasays on 2022.12.17, 15:06:54
I wonder, has anyone besides Allcanadian managed to replicate the 'stinging rays' experiment, or found an interpretation as to action that may be occurring from a modern theoretical POV? ???
I don't think the results of this experiment fit within "modern theoretical POV".
Doesn't really matter at this point in time...
POVs other than "modern theoretical POV" are perfectly acceptable, as long as they work.
Unfortunately, only "modern theoretical POVs" lead to operational technologies, not POVs from dreams that have never been rigorously formalised or tested with measurements.
We already know 'Tesla-style' X-ray tubes work:
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4398.msg102638#msg102638
That's his hand in the shadowgraph. :o It was actually stumbled-upon by accident, probably in much the same way Tesla and Rontgen discovered it. In colleague's case it was from anomalous Geiger counter readings quite some distance away from an experimental vacuum bulb circa 2019.
Does anyone have proposed experiments or questions regarding Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters? The discussion is probably worth an entire thread by itself.
I am quite curious as to the 'radiant energy' papers and patents and how they relate to this.
Were the 'radiant energy' patents in-fact elaborate/efficient X-ray transceivers, or are the beams created by these bulbs of a different nature than conventional X-rays?
We do know the beams produced from these tubes are much more coherent and directional, which does explain the range and why shadowgraphs produced with them tend to have such a high clarity.
It's my belief that Tesla's claims of a "medium" are valid, and that we can cause fields to move through this medium, and we can cause the medium to move.
The medium can be patterned, so to speak, by a field occupying the same space. Then this patterned field can be moved within this space to appear as if the patterning field is moving.
What I mean is you create a static magnetic field, for example, and then if you move the medium is the same space as this magnetic field, then it appear the static magnetic field is now moving.
The medium has inertia, and will continue to move once the driving forces are removed.
The medium can be reinforced by rotating it or standing waves.
Tesla stated that there is no energy in anything except what comes from outside it. To me, this means the energy in everything comes from this medium. If we can figure out this works, energy is everywhere for our purposes.
Physics without the medium is incomplete.
We can ignore the medium, or explore it.
The following is "hearsay":
There is a story, rumors, unfounded claims that there is a secret breakaway society. Search all you want and you will find little or nothing about it. Supposedly, they are that good at being secretive. They have their own military, and they have very advanced technology. Advanced propulsion and weapons. They have drones, saucer shaped, 23 feet in diameter, and over 800 of them in the 1980's. Their propulsion system somehow pushes against the mass of the earth, and is propellant-less. These drones can travel at 1/2C. They have particle beam weapons. The drone info I have on very good authority, but is still unproven.
The story is that this technology was part of Tesla's stolen notes and technical writings. As everyone knows these papers are still classified, so who knows what's really true.
There's more. This breakaway society is involved in everything, and is said to already have bases on other planets and moons in our solar system.
Lot's of fruit for great story telling...
The crap around Tesla is getting crazier by the day.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2022.12.18, 16:00:25
...
Physics without the medium is incomplete.
...
damnant quod non intelligunt
Hakasays
QuoteDoes anyone have proposed experiments or questions regarding Tesla's single-wire, cold-cathode emitters? The discussion is probably worth an entire thread by itself.
Indeed, I know of countless experiments regarding single-wire, cold-cathode emitters. T.H. Moray, Paul Correa (PAGD), Bruce Perreault and many others.
I will start a moderated thread to keep the gaslighting and misdirection to a minimum.
New thread...https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4406.0
AC
Quote from: Allcanadian on 2022.12.19, 21:43:08
...
Indeed, I know of countless experiments regarding single-wire, cold-cathode emitters. T.H. Moray, Paul Correa (PAGD), Bruce Perreault and many others.
None of these people have produced anything useful. Their pseudo-inventions are part of urban legends, and every new attempt to reproduce the claimed extraordinary effects, which always ends in failure, is confirmation of this.
Since the free energy movement prefers to maintain illusions rather than draw conclusions and move on to other things, it will continue to do so for decades. Why decades and not centuries? Because in a few decades, energy will no longer be a problem due to the progress of conventional science.
Quote
I will start a moderated thread to keep the gaslighting and misdirection to a minimum.
...
How lucky we are to have guardians of the temple of illusions, who know the right direction and fight the sceptics with censorship. The latter could dissuade the less clear-sighted from joining the world of illusions, and even shake the faith of blind believers, it is intolerable. :)
Analyzing Tesla's Radiant Energy patents, IMO we are left with two likely possibilities.
1 - Tesla's 'Radiant Energy' is in-fact X-rays, and the bulbs referenced are single wire cold-cathode X-ray tubes of Tesla's design.
2 - Tesla's 'Radiant Energy' is another type of ray entirely, different from X-rays but retaining similar properties (like penetrating soft tissues)
ref: https://patents.google.com/patent/US685958A/en
If Tesla's 'Radiant Energy' was in-fact a single-wire cold-cathode X-ray tube, it would be quite a novel technology, as it seems 120 years later that modern physics has not quite figured that out:
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/603739/whats-the-issue-with-inventing-a-cold-cathode-x-ray-tube
Only in the past few years have scientists managed cold-cathode X-rays, and I cannot find any references to single-wire tubes apart from Tesla's patents. And yet the patent and construction is relatively simple (and in-fact was rediscovered by accident).
Is this another case of 'science declared it impossible so they never bothered to check?' ???
Username "Darkspeed" has a bench and many posts on this forum. He explored Tesla's stinging rays and other effects with some success.
Spherics provided instructions for seeing effects of radiant energy (RE). He used 10kv which is too high for most people to experiment with. He mentioned another method of seeing an ether oscillation on a scope that requires only 50v, and charges a capacitor. There is an old video where Eric Dollard charges a cap with an an argon tube on the top of his Tesla Coil.
Attached is a pdf of everything Spherics said about RE.
Quote from: Hakasays on 2022.12.20, 14:56:51
Analyzing Tesla's Radiant Energy patents, IMO we are left with two likely possibilities.
1 - Tesla's 'Radiant Energy' is in-fact X-rays, and the bulbs referenced are single wire cold-cathode X-ray tubes of Tesla's design.
2 - Tesla's 'Radiant Energy' is another type of ray entirely, different from X-rays but retaining similar properties (like penetrating soft tissues)
...
The patent dates from 1901, 6 years after Rötgen discovered X-rays.
Generating these rays from high voltages, without a tube, is indeed a valid invention but not of the importance of a discovery. Tesla did not discover X-rays, contrary to the lies about him (an insult to his memory), which is why it was Rötgen who won the Nobel Prize, not Tesla.
Yet, Centraflow has a working device currently being tested and researched by a company that maintains nuclear reactors in GB.
So, you can stop acting like an "expert" now.
(fixed typo)
Quote from: Grumpy on 2022.12.20, 18:59:47
Yet, Contraflow has a working device currently being tested and researched by a company that maintains nuclear reactors in GB.
So, you can stop acting like an "expert" now.
When I read your comments, I feel like I'm on a religious forum where a preacher wants to impose what we should believe. I am not a naive believer. So until proven otherwise, as always in science, what is asserted without proof can be denied without proof.
I don't believe for a second that Centralflow would have anything. At best he believes he has something. I've been through this before, you had to show your credentials in order to be put on the spot, and it turned out that everything was based on a confusion between force and work!... C.C
It is not by repeating your leaps of faith that you will convince but by presenting us with the measurements you have made on this FE machine, and by providing us with the plan so that everyone can duplicate it.
I thought that was why we were on this forum. You don't understand what research is, and neither do those who keep their little secrets. Scientists share, that's why they succeed.
When you have nothing concrete to present, you either present falsifiable hypotheses or you keep quiet.
When censorship applies to my texts here, I would like to know by whom, why, and that it be reported. It seems to me quite dishonest to obliterate part of an answer without notice.
Thanks
I was told there is a zero tolerance policy for defamatory comments or statements ( as were you)
Which would submit our host to litigation or lawsuits ( it's in the terms of service agreement you "agreed to")
It's a non negotiable item ( our hosts susceptibility to liability caused by guests)
This has already happened here , and not first time it's been mentioned to you .
Yes I know you are well versed and can weave a nice tapestry of ... nasty ..
Try to refrain from that temptation ,
while it may feel refreshing for you to vent ...
Not at our hosts expense!
BTW
It's never censorship when you violate an agreement (terms of service in this case)
It's a consequence!
Please don't expect our host to try and test the boundaries of his liabilities ,( on your behalf ??) best to completely
Avoid this !
Respectfully
Chet K
Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.12.20, 20:13:45
When I read your comments, I feel like I'm on a religious forum where a preacher wants to impose what we should believe. I am not a naive believer. So until proven otherwise, as always in science, what is asserted without proof can be denied without proof.
Many, some scientist, believe we are living in some sort of simulation! Our reality is an illusion! Your beliefs are hollow as everyone else's.
Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.12.20, 20:13:45
I don't believe for a second that Centralflow would have anything. At best he believes he has something. I've been through this before, you had to show your credentials in order to be put on the spot, and it turned out that everything was based on a confusion between force and work!... C.C
It is not by repeating your leaps of faith that you will convince but by presenting us with the measurements you have made on this FE machine, and by providing us with the plan so that everyone can duplicate it.
I thought that was why we were on this forum. You don't understand what research is, and neither do those who keep their little secrets. Scientists share, that's why they succeed.
When you have nothing concrete to present, you either present falsifiable hypotheses or you keep quiet.
Yes, I'm quite sure the physicist working on the project are mistaken and the device is not self-running, without a known fuel source, in their laboratory. Perhaps the simulation we live in is broken. Once our simulated reality is fixed, the device will no longer work.
I don't care to convince anyone who's mind is already made up.
There are plenty of scientist that do not "share". They are not allowed to, or wish to protect their work. If work is published, there are reasons for this beyond mere "kindness".
In any event, if I succeed with my project, I will be sure to share it openly.
Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.12.20, 18:08:51
The patent dates from 1901, 6 years after Rötgen discovered X-rays.
Generating these rays from high voltages, without a tube, is indeed a valid invention but not of the importance of a discovery. Tesla did not discover X-rays, contrary to the lies about him (an insult to his memory), which is why it was Rötgen who won the Nobel Prize, not Tesla.
The timeline of Tesla's work is discussed in previous post: https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4398.msg102679#msg102679
I take it this means you are leaning towards the 'radiant energy' as being some form of X-ray in Tesla's work?
Any predictions regarding the frequency or coherence of the emitted rays?
Do you think it is more likely generating hard X-rays or 'soft' X-rays that are closer to the UV spectrum?
I'm not aware of any academic attempts to reproduce since the original 1900's patents. It seems odd that such a simple setup could have been missed for so, so long.. Perhaps they were convinced it was impossible and thus never bothered to check?
Griffin has more detailed notes about the setup here if you are interested in the science. I am in contact as well and can forward any experimental tests or ideas or questions anyone has
https://griffingbrock.com/2022/12/14/teslas-single-wire-shadowgraph-recreated/
(I have already recommended lead shielding and VERY safe distances when doing tests :-X)
Quote from: Chet K on 2022.12.20, 21:29:25
I was told there is a zero tolerance policy for defamatory comments or statements ( as were you)
Which would submit our host to litigation or lawsuits ( it's in the terms of service agreement you "agreed to")
It's a non negotiable item ( our hosts susceptibility to liability caused by guests)
...
First of all, you have not understood the meaning of my question.
I only ask that it be made clear in the text of the truncated answer, that a passage was removed, and the reason.
This is what is done in most forums. Example:
[passage removed here because it is defamatory] .
This is one of the practices that differentiates moderation from censorship. Normally there is no censorship here, only moderation.
Secondly, defamation here is not forbidden at all. We see it almost every day against academic scientists. Attributing the discovery of X-rays to Tesla when it is Röntgen who discovered them is defamation of him.
Thirdly, challenging what some people say is a common practice in real science, the academic science, where everyone accepts discussion as long as it is based on refutability. To assert that for such and such a reason, what so-and-so says makes no sense, is not defamation but analysis.
This is not defamation: "
A capacity needs charges to be loaded. This simple idea goes over Eric Dollard's head, who does not understand what he is doing. The only capacitors that are apparently "remotely" charged are charged because they are in ionized air." So why was this removed? Or you'll have to explain to me why the incompetents who repeat that Maxwell didn't understand anything about the longitudinal wave and that Tesla is right are allowed to express themselves here.
Finally, general comments that do not point to anyone in particular are not defamation. Example:
"
FE attracts crackpots from all over, since only a tiny fraction of the community understands the basics of physics and knows how to distinguish a scientific analysis by physicists, from the pseudo-scientific jargon of their imitators. "
So why was this removed?
If I made defamatory remarks, it was certainly not on the majority of what was removed, moreover without notification.
@Hakasays
I've been hearing about "radiant energy" for years. It is a generic term in which everyone puts what they want. It can be X-rays as well as radio waves, near field waves, beta radiation, longitudinal waves...
When those who talk about "radiant energy" will be able to define what exactly they are talking about, I think they will have been replaced by real scientists.
Whether a very high voltage is channeled through a single wire or not, makes no difference. Very high voltages generate X-rays, it is commonplace, it is even a warning indicated in the maintenance manuals of CRT TVs and on EHV equipments:
(https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4398.0;attach=46577;image)
http://monitor.espec.ws/download.php?id=134172
The old stories about Tesla are not relevant anymore.
F6
Quote
passage removed here because it is defamatory
End quote
It was made very clear by administrator in a non public
Discussion ( for all members )
That he had already suffered harm ( lawsuit threats ) from another members
Cavalier attitude towards his personal liability!
As already mentioned
Please do not expect our host to navigate his way
Through your litigious contributions!
The fix for members incurring liabilities at the expense of our host ( and most likely forums future) has also been mentioned in terms of service agreement !
So best to use your big brain and skill set in a means which is complimentary to science ( perhaps asking for empirical evidence or some experiments for scrutiny?
And less threatening to our forums future ,which BTW is really important to most of us ...
(As are many of your analytical contributions...( ( for clarity ..yes truly appreciated )
However...there is no scale to weigh contributions against risk here !
Respectfully
Chet K
@F6: Answers in the cold cathode thread so we can try to roll this one back onto topic:
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4406.msg102735#msg102735
As for "Myth v. Reality", we can at least safely say that Tesla made powerful discoveries and contributions regarding X-rays that were roughly coincident with Roentgen, some of which seem to have been lost (a single-wire, cold-cathode, high-efficiency X-ray tube).
We can also say that Tesla was probably the first high-ranking EE to warn the community of the potential dangers of X-rays, which may have saved tens of thousands of people:
https://teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/articles/tesla-hurtful-actions-lenard-and-roentgen-tubes
Hello,
Our group has been working for some time to see if we could make a difference in power generation. For quite a few years, we didn't make too much progress but did a lot of experimenting.
At one point, we stumbled upon some of Tesla's old papers. It was about coils for a heater. It looks like it was done, most likely, from Walter Russell's work. This coil design was different from any of the previous papers, which were the same as today.
It did take us a few years experimenting with a few different models, to find the best way to implement this coil into the electric motors. It definitely works much better then the coils we have today. Tesla left us with a lot of ideas, but the problem is, how can our brains grasp a different concept? Our understanding is, that everything we know about electricity, must be re-visited and started from the beginning. There is no myth or mysticism around his work.
What we see is that whoever is doing any work with electricity, will have to look into Walter Russell's work and we are going to put some videos very shortly explaining what we are experimenting with.
Best Regards
Quote from: Chet K on 2022.12.21, 13:50:20
F6
Quote
passage removed here because it is defamatory
End quote
...
My comments were not defamatory, unlike yours about me. You should learn the exact meaning of the term and its legal context before you censor.
As for all the hiding that people do by opening up non-public threads thinking they are geniuses with secrets to keep when it comes to childish nonsense, it's getting a little tedious.
We should know if we're here to share ideas and experiments, and progress, or if this is the place for idiots to play Tesla to make themselves look good to other idiots. These ridiculous and despicable practices are becoming exasperating, it is certainly not research but show.
Quote from: ourunity on 2022.12.28, 02:24:46
...
It did take us a few years experimenting with a few different models, to find the best way to implement this coil into the electric motors. It definitely works much better then the coils we have today. Tesla left us with a lot of ideas
...
What do you call "much better"?! In technique, we quantify.
The best electric motors today are more than 95% efficient, much better than anything Tesla did in his day. That doesn't mean that he didn't have merit, it means that we have made progress since then and that we absolutely don't need him anymore to make the best motors, which, like his, have never shown any OU.
We've already established that some Tesla technologies (like single-wire cold-cathode X-ray tubes and longitudinal waves) were lost to history. It's unclear what's left to be unearthed.
What is clear is that the only people that will make progress with rediscoveries are the ones that actually go digging. ;D
.
F6FLT
Quote
My comments were not defamatory, unlike yours about me. You should learn the exact meaning of the term and its legal context before you censor.
End quote
——///———-////———
F6
You Diagnosing a person as a "real psychopath" (while using their name) over the internet ..on this forum ?
Definitely not allowed here !
Regarding claims here by inventors... forum guidelines define protocols ,
Claims are to be supported by schematics etc etc for replication and verification!
Always been that way !
Calling names etc ...not how it's done here !
Respectfully
Chet
Ps
Regarding my assumptions that you had personal experience with all the
Techs you dismissed .... in your Christmas greeting from Santa !
My apologies..I had seen you write disappointments with various experiments or claims over the years!
Our view, after many days on the bench and experimenting, the knowledge of electricity in today's world, is very incomplete or even very poor. Walter's ideas that Mr. Tesla put on papers for practical use is now, after 80 years, in form. The easiest way to describe it is by looking at the planets. The planets have 2 poles and the equator. We know that there is only one law for micro and macro. Looking at today's coil, we see only two poles, why the difference?
The saying goes "copy nature". Nature creates hemispheres which unite into spheres. When you look into the periodic chart of elements, which have a blue and red side spectrum, our musical scale has notes which follow octave pressures. Our math starts from zero, ends in zero which is 10 and 9 octaves in between. Somehow, along the line, someone forgot to tell e motor manufacturers to copy what we know. The best is to ask or research, to find as much as possible, before one goes to the bench.
Most know of the Wright brothers story. The scientific and the engineering communities were screaming---- impossible. I believe stories like this belong to the last century. Our video is on You Tube under e-unity motor. Whoever wants to go further can check it out and give their honest opinion. Another video is in progress explaining what Mr. Tesla and Mr. Russell were trying to tell us. We are not claiming that we know everything, but it is a good start.
F6 --- you are right. We don't need Mr. Tesla, but --- we need his ideas!! It is boring to play in the same old pen.
K--- Every argument that is civilized is good. The problem arises when we have textbooks that are totally wrong. Until one works hard on the bench, experiments with new ideas, only then can one learn. When one starts to argue with their beliefs, without understanding how electricity works exactly, we run into a big problem.
HAPPY NEW YEAR TO EVERYONE!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Belief without action has no measure'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOkvz5jfZ6g
around 3:36 begins the claim of OU
Quote from: Chet K on 2022.12.28, 22:18:07
F6FLT
Quote
My comments were not defamatory, unlike yours about me. You should learn the exact meaning of the term and its legal context before you censor.
End quote
——///———-////———
F6
You Diagnosing a person as a "real psychopath" (while using their name) over the internet ..on this forum ?
...
Your comments are again defamatory. What you say is false, it is only your interpretation.
I never wrote what you attribute to me in quotation marks. It is a pure lie."Respectfully" that you put at the end of your inventions is hypocrisy, there is nothing respectful in what you say. I ask you to stop lying about me.
F6
I will not disrupt topic with your actual post
It will be placed in members only!
Note to ourunity
Are you open sourcing or ?
Respectfully
Chet K
Having the motor on You Tube is a sort of open source. Forums like this attracts individuals that are trying to do good for all. After creating something better and keeping it for one's self undermines its purpose. We believe that the more that are involved, the better. The field is so vast that financial gains lose importance.
Mr. Tesla worked on enhancement coils. Something like transformers with positive outputs. Vacuum tubes will come back with modification of new concepts. The ones that like to work will definitely have possibilities to be busy. Now we can have a very clear picture of what has been done to humanity when each tries to hoard as much as possible for themselves. I hope we have learned.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Belief without action has no measure'
Quote from: Chet K on 2022.12.29, 12:18:15
F6
I will not disrupt topic with your actual post
It will be placed in members only!
...
I replied there: https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4356.msg102936#msg102936
I was reading an old post in the forum and I would like to comment about a few things. This is the way I see gravity – gravity is the power and energy behind matter. It is a controller, balancer and surveyor. The idea of matter that is creating, is in gravity.
There were some writings about inert gases. There is 9 of them. They are seeds of life in the universe.
The atoms and matter do not mix. Whoever is working in that area, will have to consult a chemist.
How do we know that there was no 'big bang'? The old nebulas are dying stars. For our sun to reach that stage, which is the middle of its life now, it could take 50B years easily. You cannot put an old grandpa with much younger bodies in space.
Our atoms came from somewhere and ran in circles, the way the story goes. Round balls are 3D. 3D starts from the first octave, combines elements from the blue and red spectrums and is somewhere around the 4th octave a sphere is created.
In other words, all the concepts about electricity are totally incorrect or opposite to nature's processes. Radial motors are with us for over 100 years. The first mistake was using one side of the coil.
Secondly, not knowing how electricity works, we built our coils only for one side of the cycle totally ignoring the expansion side. Einstein made the same mistake with his formula! If someone wants to make a difference in the OU, they must know electricity.
Best Regards
-----------------------------------------------
'What you believe this is what you see. What you see this is what you get'