Tesla Talk

[vidar]

Nikolay Tesla was no doubt one of the greatest scientists in his time. This video is interesting<br />Documentary on the missing secrets of Nikola Tesla: <br />http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5834867580747017149&q=tesla<br /><br />There are several issues worth talking about both technologically and economically.<br /><br />Tesla’s vision of wireless power distribution certainly raised several questions at the time. Was it possible, what social and technical changed would that make? I suspect Tesla to promote the idea most of all to boost a technological implementation of high-voltage power-distribution. He would benefit greatly on that. At least, that’s how it turned with other technologies like, el-cable distribution, broadcasting, internet, mobile-phones and water distribution. It was hard to implement pay-pr-use at the start, but not for long. Now we’re hooked and the business flourishes.<br /><br />DC vs. AC, or Edison vs. Tesla, must have been a bitter rivalry. No doubt AC had a greater future than DC. I find it shocking to see Edison demonstrate how lethal AC is, by plug a dog to the conductors. Pavlo’s dog must have been a spoiled pet in comparison. Didn’t he think that the audience saw that the actor, not the technology, did the harm? Scientists’ business ethics can be questioned.<br /><br />Tesla’s Peace-ray was soon called the Death-ray. Still we haven’t managed to make such ray guns yet, though the fear of them has been there since. Now the rays are most known from sci-fi movies. Still I wonder, haven’t we come up with anything feasible yet? Anyway, Tesla’s x-ray, also called Röntgen rays, became Wilhelm Röntgen’s credit. The RADAR probably saved Britain from more grave damages and losses in ww2.<br /><br />Most strange is that he claim to have been communicating with Mars and the thought waves were possible. I thing H. G. Wells must have listen very wel

 

[ebort]

bit of information here on the Beebs news site also..<br /><br />http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6129460.stm<br /><br />this would make electric cars extremely flexible...no heavy batterys etc..?

 

[vidar]

That's a great one, - I'd love to have wireless power on my laptop.<br /><br />Here is an other one: Fast Electric Car<br />http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3624337653720181416&q=tesla+car<br />http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7745185113933785378&q=tesla+car<br />Impressive.<br />

 

[vidar]

Tesla was definitely wrong if he really though he heard communications from Mars. Personally I question if he simply tried to give a warning about Soviet powers, in a sci-fi way.<br /><br />Funny how aliens have changed colour in the previous century, in the beginning red, then green, and nowadays grey.

 

[qso1]

I actually had an experience with the Soviet warning stuff back in the late 1980s. I knew a guy who was ultra conservative and a big proponent of keeping ahead of the Soviets militarily. Most of the time what he said made sense. But one day he told me the Soviets had developed scalar weaponry, some of which was based on research by Tesla, so he said. He insisted these weapons were responsible for bringing down a Canadian airliner in 1985 and Challenger in 1986.<br /><br />I read some of the literature he had. The Canadian airliner was said to have had an orange glow around the engines before coming down. I'm not suprised at that but I didn't think scalar weaponry. I figured engine fire. As for Challenger. I'm satisfied with the Rogers Commission findings on that.<br /><br />I told the guy then that if the Soviets were this advanced...just relax, Reagan is no longer the President. Gorbachev is!<br /><br />Of course, the Soviet Union is no more which seems to be another indication scalar weapons did not exist.<br /><br />Tesla strikes me as one of those folks that was probably a genius but really was too far ahead of his time to actually be able to develop some of his more advanced ideas. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[vidar]

qso1<br /><br />Tom Bearden claims that the reason why the general science has reached so short in electromagnetic technologies, is simply because most public books are wrong about it. <br />Tesla was right. <br />There are a few people really understand its nature. <br />You might find this interview interesting:<br /><br />Rare interview with Tom Bearden on the forgotten work of Nikola Tesla <br />http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6044955461813547423&q=tesla<br /><br />It seems that there can be such a thing as an E weapon as well as A, B and C. <br />But I don’t share his fear of possible future E-B weapons. <br />Plague warfare is as old as the Bible.<br />

 

[qso1]

So far with exotic weapons...the cost barrier as I call it has gotten in the way. Much of what was known as the Reagan era Star Wars technologies never got developed as far as we know...and I have good reason to believe they were not developed. In part because they are too easy to counter with cheap countermeasures. Space based laser deflection mirrors for example, could theoretically be made useless by simply rendezveouing near the mirror and throwing sand at it...or blasting its highly polished smooth surfaces with thrusters.<br /><br />Tesla seems more legendary nowadays. And it may be some of his ideas were incorporated into both American and Soviet space based weapons proposals but the proposals probably proved too expensive to be practical, especially for the Soviets and their moribund economy. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[vidar]

E-technology and weapons were probably too expensive at the time, prior to nuclear reactors and mobile generators. Tesla’s experiments were only possible because he had free energy for a while. But both money and energy supply was shut down after he demonstrated the potential powers of the Wardenclyffe Tower (1901 – 1917), just outside New York. It scared a lot of people, Edison included. <br /><br />Tom Bearden mentions the Tunguska event in 1908. No one knows the cause to the blast that devastated an area of 2150 km^2. Luminal effects were observed at the other side of the world for days. Some claims it was a meteorite, or even an ufo. However, there was no meteorite crater or fragments at the site. There are speculations that the Wardenclyffe tower could have caused the blast. I don’t believe so. But there could have been a similar tower at the site, that the Russians were testing. That must have scared a lot of powerful people all over the world especially in ww1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event#The_Wardenclyffe_Tower<br /><br />I think it was Arthur C. Clarke that once said about the star wars program, that emptying a bucket of nail in orbit would also knock out a satellite. That’s much cheaper.<br />

 

[qso1]

Any explosion powerful enough to knock down so many trees is powerful enough to produce a blast crater. Tunguska was so remote it was 20 years before any scientific investigation made its way into the area. It was also swamp from what I recollect which probably made a crater difficult to detect.<br /><br />As for scaring anyone. This is hard to imagine in a world full of egotistical power hungry people who need only get the tools to absolute power. But as you mentioned, you said you didn't believe this Wardenclyffe tower caused the blast and unless or until proven otherwise, Tunguska was produced by meteoric/asteroid/cometary impact IMO.<br /><br />Clarke has the right idea. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

The Tunguska asteroid exploded at approximately 20 miles above the earth's surface, which is why there was no crater. The trees were knocked down by the blast effects (moving air) which do not excavate the surface <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

I knew it was an airburst but didn't realize it exploded that high, thanks. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[vidar]

That’s right I don’t think Tesla’s Wardenclyffe tower in New York caused the blast in Tunska. <br />However, I think it’s possible that the Russians tested similar devices in Siberia/Tunska.<br /><br />The asteroid theory does not explain all the phenomena; like the geomagnetic effects that caused compasses to deviate periodically three days before the blast; the ‘split in the sky’ and several ‘thunderbolt’ during the blast-period; and the worldwide nightglow several days after the blast.<br />I don’t find it unlikely that the Russians were ahead the Americans in testing out such devices, and failed.<br /><br />There is lots of information about it on the internet; a good place to start is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event<br /><br />Taking the hypothesis further;<br />If Tesla was allowed to test the full potential of the Wardenclyffe tower; what powers could it produce and what would be the effect to the surroundings?<br />

 

[qso1]

vidar:<br />The asteroid theory does not explain all the phenomena;<br /><br />Me:<br />While it is possible that there was some other cause for the event, geomagnetic effects on compasses could still be the result of some natural phenomenon associated with such a large object exploding above the ground, scattering its mass all over. The Apollo 8 crew reported local gravitational differences which were later referred to as mass concentrations or mascons. Thought to be the result of excessive masses of material on or beneath the lunar crust.<br /><br />Split in the sky and thunderbolt could easily be the result of eyewitness accounts of a phenomenon much less understood in 1908 than it is now. AFAIK, there is no documented photographic evidence of any split sky of thunderbolt phenomenon.<br /><br />What exactly is a split in the sky? Sounds cool, dramatic, but what exactly does it mean?<br /><br />There was reportedly a butterfly pattern to the felled trees as a result of the blast. Nobody understood why...until nuclear bomb tests produced similar effects.<br /><br />The afterglow could have been from massive forest fires. For now, I tend to agree with the celestial body impact theory.<br /><br />vidar:<br />Taking the hypothesis further; <br />If Tesla was allowed to test the full potential of the Wardenclyffe tower; what powers could it produce and what would be the effect to the surroundings?<br /><br />Me:<br />We should be able to validate or refute some of the theory by building another Wardenclyffe tower and seeing what the effects would be, or calculating the effects to some extent. I'm no expert on this but sometimes it seems myths are built up around certain historical figures and devices then are passed down through the generations. These kinds of stories I take with a grain of salt, but they probably contain at least a grain of truth for what thats worth.<br /><br />If anything, seems to me if the Russians were able to build something that could cause a Tunguska in 1908...the <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[nyarlathotep]

>>"Space based laser deflection mirrors for example, could theoretically be made useless by simply rendezveouing near the mirror and throwing sand at it"<br /><br />Easiest way would be to slap a large explosive canister of ball bearings onto the third stage of a Topol.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Can you provide a reference for the magnetic effect you describe?<br />I don't understand what you mean by "split in the sky".<br />If you mean thunder, by thunderbolt, an airburst certainly explains that.<br />And the amount of dust injected into the sky would explain an number of worldwide atmospheric effects <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

BTW, I do have to check on my reference. It may have been 20 km, but 20 miles stuck in my head. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

"There was reportedly a butterfly pattern to the felled trees as a result of the blast. Nobody understood why...until nuclear bomb tests produced similar effects."<br /><br />Another logical explanation which was demonstrated by experiments indicated that a low angle approach produces that very pattern, which is also supported by observations of the path. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[vidar]

Qso1 and MeteorWayne<br /><br />Firstly I must say; I do not claim that there was a Tesla-like experiment going on in Siberia/Tunsca at the time. Therefore, what is published on the internet about theories and observations are not my personal stand. However, I am very intrigued by the possibility of such an event.<br /><br />Most of my sources are based on Wikipedia, and the references above. One should also note that Russia had a revolution, two world wars and cold war that have interfered with public documentations much. Even though there were no wars, anyhow the cause of the event, it would have been kept secret by any authority. <br />The witnesses are mentioned in: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event#Select_Eyewitness_Reports<br />And ‘Geomagnetic effects as one aspect of the Tunguska event’<br />http://www.galisteo.com/tunguska/docs/zhur_us.html<br /><br />If the Russians were ahead of the Americans with E-weaponary science prior to the ww1, it does not mean that they were ahead in nuclear science half a century later. If they were able to make E-weapon, they failed, and must have concluded that they could not control such destructive forces.<br />

 

[MeteorWayne]

I'll look at the two links one at a time.<br />The "split in the sky" <i> as described </i>is entirely consistent with a bolide in the atmosphere.<br />No unusual explanation is necessary.<br />That's exactly what a low altitude chunk of an asteroid looks like.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

MeteorWayne:<br />Another logical explanation which was demonstrated by experiments indicated that a low angle approach...<br /><br />Me:<br />Correct, an as I recall, the angle calculated was approx. 30 degrees. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

vidar:<br />Firstly I must say; I do not claim that there was a Tesla-like experiment going on in Siberia/Tunsca at the time. Therefore, what is published on the internet about theories and observations are not my personal stand. However, I am very intrigued by the possibility of such an event.<br /><br />Me:<br />I understand your not claiming anything. I think we are all intrigued by such possibilities and since none of us were there to actually witness the cause. We have only our various references to go on and other possible causes have been mentioned in credible references such as wiki.<br /><br />My reason for being skeptical of E weapons is that something the size of the Wardenclyffe tower would have to be producing some kind of a nuclear reaction to produce the same after effects as an incoming meteor would...but thats just me. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

I seem to recall 5 miles but my reference was a Discovery Channel special on Tunguska and I don't have access to that on a regular basis. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

After digging it up, I am now reading the article in Astronomy and Astrophysics.<br />The conclusion they came to was 10.5 +/- 3.5 km, so you appear to be right on the money with your recollection! <br /><br />Nice neurons, buddy! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

Thanks, I'm suprised any of my neurons still work. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[vidar]

According to: <br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla#Directed-energy_weapon<br />Tesla worked in early 1900 with the directed-energy weapon. It should charge particle with millions of volt and could theoretically shoot down 10 000 planes at a distance of 200 miles. A mechanism for generating such tremendous electrical force was also accomplished according to Tesla. But both US and European war department turned his project down. <br /><br />That does not mean the Russians did not try.