Wireless electricity and charging?

Originally posted by googlefudge
Yes but he was also delusional and mentally unstable.

He was eccentric but not mentally unstable. Where is your source?

Originally posted by Metal Brain
He was eccentric but not mentally unstable. Where is your source?

I seem to remember getting into this with you before.

Tesla was widely regarded as having gone off the rails in his old age with both senility and
OCD as well as potential bi-polar disorder clouding his judgement.

That said all that is irrelevant because science has moved on since then and we know an
awful lot more than he did. Smart people can be wrong without mental disorders (which he
clearly had) particularly when they become obsessed with something.

Tesla was brilliant, but also, especially towards the end, often wrong.

This does nothing to undermine his achievements, which were great.

World wide wireless power transmission like Tesla proposed is not a viable proposition.

Originally posted by googlefudge
I seem to remember getting into this with you before.

Tesla was widely regarded as having gone off the rails in his old age with both senility and
OCD as well as potential bi-polar disorder clouding his judgement.

That said all that is irrelevant because science has moved on since then and we know an
awful lot more than he did. Smart people can ...[text shortened]... reat.

World wide wireless power transmission like Tesla proposed is not a viable proposition.

You may be right, but how do you come to that conclusion? Can you show me that the wireless energy that he would transmit would be lost at a greater percentage than electrical wires for example? Where is the convincing data?

Originally posted by Metal Brain
You may be right, but how do you come to that conclusion? Can you show me that the wireless energy that he would transmit would be lost at a greater percentage than electrical wires for example? Where is the convincing data?

Umm, take a course in physics.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
You may be right, but how do you come to that conclusion? Can you show me that the wireless energy that he would transmit would be lost at a greater percentage than electrical wires for example? Where is the convincing data?

Because I studied physics, and can apply common sense.

If you broadcast energy everywhere that has to be less efficient than guiding it carefully to
exactly where you need it.

Also it's one thing to remotely power a fluorescent light bulb, which electrical speaking is
quite robust, it's another to power things like mobile phones and computers which have
microchips in them which are rather fragile.

To power the world in the way he suggested would require that all sensitive electronics be
heavily shielded.
And frankly given the amount of energy we are talking about here fragile electronics probably
includes people.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Because I studied physics, and can apply common sense.

If you broadcast energy everywhere that has to be less efficient than guiding it carefully to
exactly where you need it.

Also it's one thing to remotely power a fluorescent light bulb, which electrical speaking is
quite robust, it's another to power things like mobile phones and computers w ...[text shortened]... the amount of energy we are talking about here fragile electronics probably
includes people.

Has this been verified by experiment? The concept is that the energy would bounce between the earth and ionosphere like it was a microwave oven. You would think efficiency would have been a consideration by Tesla. I thought he did experiments to test all of those things.

The obvious flaw I saw is that it was not a profitable venture for capitalists. It was like a big energy charity to the world. That is how Tesla thought. He didn't think of self serving things. That was probably his biggest flaw. He was too giving by nature.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Has this been verified by experiment? The concept is that the energy would bounce between the earth and ionosphere like it was a microwave oven. You would think efficiency would have been a consideration by Tesla. I thought he did experiments to test all of those things.

The obvious flaw I saw is that it was not a profitable venture for capitalists. I ...[text shortened]... think of self serving things. That was probably his biggest flaw. He was too giving by nature.

You don't understand this, because you are a conspiracy nut and don't understand logic and reason.

Tesla got it wrong, it doesn't work, that is why people don't do it.
Their is no conspiracy, people don't not use this because they are bad capitalists who just want to
make money, although how you would pay for this is a non-trivial question, they don't use it because
it wouldn't work.

And using your own analogy, think what happens to stuff inside a microwave oven.
Now imagine the entire planet as a microwave oven.
Now realise that this idea is bloody stupid and wont work.

Originally posted by googlefudge
You don't understand this, because you are a conspiracy nut and don't understand logic and reason.

Tesla got it wrong, it doesn't work, that is why people don't do it.
Their is no conspiracy, people don't not use this because they are bad capitalists who just want to
make money, although how you would pay for this is a non-trivial question, they do ...[text shortened]... e planet as a microwave oven.
Now realise that this idea is bloody stupid and wont work.

Why the insults? Was that really called for? Do you feel better now?

I never claimed there was any conspiracy in any way. I never claimed Tesla was going to use the same electromagnetic frequency as a microwave oven either. You seem to think you can read minds. Maybe you are the true nutcase.

What I do know is that short wave radios receive broadcasts from the other side of the world and nobody gets cooked alive you bloody idiot! Furthermore, I never claimed it would work. All I was doing was trying to understand why Tesla thought it might work and hoped you would help me understand why a brilliant genius could make a huge mistake that is unlike him. I know you claim he was mentally unstable but you have nothing to support that claim other than your bias against his brilliant work.
If everybody listened to idiots like you we would still be stuck in an age with no alternating current. I recall that when Tesla suggested his brilliant idea of using alternating current to his college professor he was told it would never work and it was bloody stupid. That's right, Tesla's teacher was an unimaginative and primitive dolt just like you! Fortunately for the world, people chose Tesla over that egomaniac Edison who was unwittingly holding back the modern electrical age by waging a propaganda campaign against AC.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Why the insults? Was that really called for? Do you feel better now?

I never claimed there was any conspiracy in any way. I never claimed Tesla was going to use the same electromagnetic frequency as a microwave oven either. You seem to think you can read minds. Maybe you are the true nutcase.

What I do know is that short wave radios receive broadca ...[text shortened]... unwittingly holding back the modern electrical age by waging a propaganda campaign against AC.

First that wasn't an insult but a statement of fact, you have demonstrated many times on these forums including
very recently that you believe in conspiracies for which there is no evidence and huge quantities of evidence against.
This mindset you demonstrate on a regular basis is also apparent in the type and style of your posts on this topic,
and is why I said you wouldn't understand why this was so.

Radio communication uses tiny amounts of power to transmit signals, the system you are talking about would need to
broadcast VAST amounts of power. It wouldn't operate on the same frequency as a microwave, but would nonetheless
deliver huge amounts of heat to the environment as well as inducing huge electric currents in anything vaguely looking like
an ariel, so tall buildings for example.

As someone said earlier go study physics.

I explained that anyone can make mistakes, including geniuses, and he claimed many things before he died that we know
don't work. This is especially true for people with obsessions, as aptly demonstrated by you with your conspiracy theories.

I actually have quite a good imagination, which is why I can work out why this idea wont work, and can see how geniuses
make mistakes.

You appear to hero worship Tesla, which is clouding your judgement.
As I said, he did some great work, and the fact that towards the end of his career he went down several blind alleys in his
research does not diminish his other triumphs.

Incidentally you might want to reconsider calling someone a bloody idiot when that is against the forum rules, they are right,
and you claim to be 40 years old and as such should be above such things.

Originally posted by googlefudge
First that wasn't an insult but a statement of fact, you have demonstrated many times on these forums including
very recently that you believe in conspiracies for which there is no evidence and huge quantities of evidence against.
This mindset you demonstrate on a regular basis is also apparent in the type and style of your posts on this topic,
and ...[text shortened]... they are right,
and you claim to be 40 years old and as such should be above such things.

The conspiracy theories I have presented on this forum are are not something you have shown convincing evidence against. In fact, I don't remember you trying to present any evidence in any of my threads or posts.
You are one of those guys that believes what is least threatening to your belief system and you don't have the courage to challenge any of them the way sh6 has. At least he has the guts to try instead of avoiding a serious debate with me.
I have proposed no conspiracy theory on this particular thread. In fact, I agreed that Tesla was probably wrong but simply was curious to find out where he went wrong. That didn't stop you from wildly jumping to the conclusion that I thought Tesla was right though.
I think I just touched a nerve with you long ago because (contrary to what you claim) I have presented some evidence in the past that has you struggling with cognitive dissonance. You are one of those guys that would rather run away and try not to think of such things than attempt to prove it wrong with evidence.
If you are so sure I can be proven wrong in those other threads why not do so instead of running away like a scared little girl?
By the way, what frequency was Tesla intending to broadcast and why would lots of energy be wasted as you have claimed? There has to be scientific numbers out there regarding that. HAARP alone must have that information. What are the numbers? Please try to resist poo pooing on my questions just because you don't like them. Try facts instead of throwing a big fit about unrelated threads. Or simply join me on the 911 thread and prove why that whatreallyhappened.com link is false. It is pretty straight forward with the claim the Bin Laden confession is not Bin Laden at all. Should be a piece of cake for you if it really was Bin Laden.

Don't run too far and fast. You might put your panties in a bunch running like a little girl.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
The conspiracy theories I have presented on this forum are are not something you have shown convincing evidence against. In fact, I don't remember you trying to present any evidence in any of my threads or posts.
You are one of those guys that believes what is least threatening to your belief system and you don't have the courage to challenge any of th ...[text shortened]... n't run too far and fast. You might put your panties in a bunch running like a little girl.

The frequency is utterly irrelevant.

Inverse square law, learn it.

And I am not about to join in trying to argue you out of your stupid conspiracies of which the 911
conspiracy is about the most revolting simply because you jump up and down and call me chicken.

I know I'm not, and you are being idiotic.

And because you are being idiotic (and childish, seriously act your age) and wont listen to reason
there is no point using reasoned arguments.
I see others making reasoned arguments against you and you ignore them, why would I think you
would pay any more attention to me? What's the point?
Also as it would simply be a case of me proving you wrong as all the facts are against you there is no
interest in it for me, nothing for me to learn or gain, just simple repetition of the same arguments that
have been debunked a million times over.
And I haven't been following you around 'not responding' I went and checked out your past posts
during this conversation.
Heck I am sure you even believe we didn't go to the moon, you're that crazy.

So call me chicken all you like, I don't give a damn, and neither does anyone else I respect or care about.

If you want to understand why Tesla's idea was wrong, learn physics, it will become patently obvious.

So grow up, learn scientific skepticism, and learn some real physics.

Originally posted by googlefudge
The frequency is utterly irrelevant.

Inverse square law, learn it.

And I am not about to join in trying to argue you out of your stupid conspiracies of which the 911
conspiracy is about the most revolting simply because you jump up and down and call me chicken.

I know I'm not, and you are being idiotic.

And because you are being idiotic (an ...[text shortened]... ently obvious.

So grow up, learn scientific skepticism, and learn some real physics.

I know physics. Anybody who has checked out my posts on this science forum knows that. Even Kazet knows that very well. He just likes to make feeble attempts to pretend I don't to annoy me. I know the inverse square law well and learned it long ago.

It is laughable that you say you are sure I don't believe man landed on the moon. I believe nothing of the sort. How long has it been since Newton invented calculus? Over 300 years? Don't insult my intelligence.

Run away feeble minded coward. You might be able to outrun your cognitive dissonance for a little longer.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Has this been verified by experiment? The concept is that the energy would bounce between the earth and ionosphere like it was a microwave oven.

Hell, yeah. You try and sit inside a microwave oven, see how you like it.

Richard

Originally posted by Metal Brain
The conspiracy theories I have presented on this forum are are not something you have shown convincing evidence against.

This is the fundamental problem with conspiracy nuts.

They want the unprovable thoroughly disproved, and when that disproof is brought forward they deny its validity merely because of the source, or because it doesn't disprove everything in one go, or because it is printed on blue paper. It is impossible to get any solid facts into a conspiracy nut; any which contradict his favourite conspiracy, no matter how silly, are discounted out of hand.

This is not how science works, and it is not how the real world works. If you want to make a far-reaching, controversial claim, you provide conclusive proof for it. Not "pretty strong evidence" - real, solid, indisputable proof. We can find merely strong suggestive evidence for the undeniable fact that Elvis Presley is still alive, and is in fact a Grey One currently inhabiting Obama's body. Real proof is harder to come by.


The same applies here. You believe this scheme would work. Everybody who understands physics tells you you have your numbers wrong. Given this state of affairs, it is up to you to prove - not claim, prove - that it works. Not, I cannot repeat this enough, not the other way around.

Richard

Originally posted by Metal Brain
What I do know is that short wave radios receive broadcasts from the other side of the world and nobody gets cooked alive you bloody idiot!

So, in addition to not understanding physics, you don't know how a radio works.

For your information, what is received by a short-wave radio from the other end of the world is not enough to power a lightbulb, or a telephone, or even a led lamp. It is just enough to trigger a flop in a single transistor, and that signal then gets amplified inside the radio using real power taken from another source.
What you hear on your radio is not the energy transmitted from Australia. It is energy taken from a battery inside the radio, or from the power mains, or if you're cool enough to have a Bayliss radio, from your own hard work. All the signal from the other side of the world does is modulate that local energy.

By the way, standing close to a radio transmitter is generally not recommended, particularly if you're carrying electronically sensitive equipment. How would that scale to a transmitter strong enough to actually power anything?

Richard