Is free energy possible. Was Tesla right?

[nordicwarrior]

Agitated, I see one problem with your calculations right off the bat. You're using numbers found at surface level (25-65 micro Teslas). Nikola knew that his towers had to link to the upper atmosphere where the vast majority of the "juice" exists.

I do like your effort though. What do your numbers show if he was able to capture electric/magnetic energy at the altitudes where we see the Northern and Southern lights?

 

[agitated]

Ah, right, Then lets go to the ionosphere, where Tesla thought contained net Charge, which we now know that it doesnt.

But cosmic rays aside, then lets calculate the magnetic energy density at the ionosphere!!!

turns out, the farther away you are from the earth, the weaker the magnetic field is, which makes sense, the farther a piece of metal is from a magnet, the weaker the force is. You can test it out with your own fridge magnets.

Now back on track, the Earth's magnetic field at the ionosphere is typically around 25 nT (nano Teslas), thats right, unfortunately, its soo weak that its in the nano range, the 0.000000001, about 100 times weaker than on the surface of the Earth

Now to calculate the energy density of the magnetic field around the ionosphere.
25*10^-9/(2* permeability of free space) = 2.487*10^-10 J/m^3, about 6.76 million times weaker than on the surface of the earth. It is that many times smaller because energy density increases or decreases exponentially. I know thats not what you wanna hear, but unfortunately its the truth :/



sorry for the condescending tone, idk how else to write it out

Tesla did have a great mind, and the scientific community DOES acknowledge him A LOT. We have an SI unit named after him, for the magnitudes of magnetic fields. In case you don't know, ahving an SI unit named after you is the greatest honour in the world of science. Its even better than a nobel prize!
Tesla never actually planned on giving the world free power, he had an idea where the government or another philanthropist could possibly give free power to the people via wireless transmissions. however, no one was really willing to pay the electric bill for an entire city, let alone an entire country.

I actually know mroe about Tesla than i do of Edison, despite the contrary. I have 2 physics textbooks and 5 engineering textbooks. all of them mention Tesla, only 1 of the physics ones mention Edison, I really don't understand how the Tesla fad about no one ever acknowledging him came from.

 

[nordicwarrior]

...But cosmic rays aside...

=>Extreme faceplant<= Cosmetic rays are the key to the entire concept.

But hey thanks for giving props to Tesla... I'm glad he shows up in your textbooks.

**EDIT**
I guess that sounded a bit condescending as well.

But seriously, Tesla's idea treats the Earth as a giant magnetic interacting with the Sun's energy. His thinking involves concepts like solar wind and current sheets. I don't have a PhD in Electrical Engineering so I can't explain Parker Spirals, Birkeland Currents, and the ballerina skirt shape thing... but I'm going to go out on a limb and state Tesla probably had a better grasp of these factors than you and I put together.

His towers were constructed with the idea of arcing incredibly high in the sky to connect with the aforementioned currents and that's why each tower had such an enormous metallic "root system".

 

[agitated]

Tesla thought that that Cosmic rays had net charge, we know that's not true now since it would be devastating to our satellites, and a lot more stuff would not make sence in space if it did. We also know our ionosphere much better than Tesla did. A simple college graduate will probably know more than Tesla did.

Now what I mean by difference in knowledge is... well google "Atlas Cern" and that should tell you enough

and as for our knowledge of ionospheres, just compare the F22 or F35 to the Wright biplanes. Atlas Cern and F22s sorta put the Tesla coil and the Wright biplane to shame

Also, I think its quite absurd if we can find free energy and no one is investing in it. Look at CERN, the European government spent $$$$$$$$$$ on that thing, and for what? the Higgs Boson. What can the Higg's Boson do for us now? absolutely nothing (it will be useful in the future but for now...). So if the governments and private investors were willing to donate $$$ to something thats absolutely useless for us right now, why not invest it into free energy? It just doesn't make sense.

Also, not every rich person is a giant douche, take Gates for example. Bill Gates, who sells software, has nothing to do with the electricity company. He donated $$$$$$$$$$$ to charity, most notably investing on a cheaper vaccines for Africa. Gates is also a futurist, if there was a way to get cheap free energy, I would think that someone would have tried, and someone would have donated to it.

 

[nordicwarrior]

We can't really know all of what Tesla understood because so many of his papers were made Top Secret by the U.S. government (and are Top Secret to this day).

And regarding Atlas Cern... Tesla felt that we didn't need to break the atom, that it was both dangerous and foolish. He saw that we are surrounded by energy and that we only needed to find a way to attach a harness to it. I think Tesla would be greatly disturbed by Cern.

 

[agitated]

but I'm going to go out on a limb and state Tesla probably had a better grasp of these factors than you and I put together.

Unfortunately, I must disagree. Although Tesla is many times smarter than I am, I can safely say that I know much more about the universe than he did. My evidence is just to compare Atlas Cern to His tower, or the F22, F35 to the wright biplane.

Tesla had many ideas, like microwaving humans so that you only had to heat the people up instead of inefficiently heating up the entire house.

But these were just infeasible. Tesla didn't know a bunch of things that are very clear to us now.

I'll make another example.
calculus used to be taught at a graduate level, considered some advanced stuff. Now, I learnt Calculus in highschool! and I taught myself some of the rudimentary bits before that too!
Physics barely existed outside any university. Now I can go on youtube and learn quantum mechanics! People in Tesla's (including Tesla himself) time didn't even know, or were just at the verge of discovering quantum mechanics, much less the ionosphere.

For now, free energy only exists in solar energy, wind power and hydropower. possible in the future we can get Nuclear Fusion.
"Solar power is the energy of tomorrow, Nuclear fusion is the energy of the future" Michio kaku


I would bet money that if Tesla was alive today, and he was interested in free energy, he'd be working with solar panels, or given that he's such a futurist fanatic, he'd probably work with nuclear Fusion. DEFINATELY Not Cosmic rays or the magnetic field of earth.

 

[agitated]

We can't really know all of what Tesla understood because so many of his papers were made Top Secret by the U.S. government (and are Top Secret to this day).

Again, I find it would be quite ridiculous but I would admit that I could be wrong. The US can have his inventions as top secret, but the fact is, it really wouldn't matter much.

I bet all of us have flown on a plane before, if cosmic rays did have net charge, or the Earth's magnetic field was strong enough for free energy, flying would be MUCH more dangerous.

As for the rumours of his Death Ray. Yes, everyone tried to make a death ray around ww2, however the US invested in something much more powerful, the atom bomb. The atom bomb could do everything that Tesla's death ray claimed to be able to do, and much more.

Tesla won over Edison for AC power, but Einstein won when it came to deadly weapons with the atom bomb.

You might argue that the atom bomb is radioactive and the death ray probably isn't, but The deathray also uses radiation. It shoots radiation at the enemy, not electricity (cuz thats not how electricity works). So in a way, its the equivalent of a small nuclear weapon.

If I were a weapons investor, I'd put money on a nuke, not a deathray.


Edit:
Sorry, i dont mean to rant on you. There are many reasons to hate the US government right now
But I don't think free electricity should be one.
Tesla was a great mind and he was very much acknowledged for it., but this whole Tesla Fad, I feel, is going just a bit too far. (like claiming that Einstein was wrong about everything, and Tesla was right about everything) It jsut sorta discredited the works of other brilliant scientists and Engineers.

 

[nordicwarrior]

Fair enough... let's agree to disagree.

Please allow me to clarify a few points though. I'm not really anti-Edison. My beef with the scientific community concerning Tesla is how Einstein has received almost heroic historical press at the expense of Tesla (who I think was more far more intelligent). The common man doesn't realize the impact that Tesla has had on his everyday life, while he probably looks to Einstein as the most brilliant thinker mankind has ever produced. I think Einstein simply had a better P.R. firm.

And I think Tesla's work in controlled resonance and harmonics is potentially more powerful/mind-bending than even his rumored death ray. If my (grantedly odd) take on the Philadelphia Experiment is accurate, Tesla's methods of modulating basic inherent vibrational energy trump all other known scientific gains during the last 200 years. Of course I think his "earth-quake machine" is viable technology so as you can see I'm a tad wacky.

With Bill Gates... I'm not so sure he would provide the planet with free or greatly reduced energy (J.P. Morgan wasn't crazy about doing so). I think the ultra elites sometimes play by a different playbook than you or I might. Again, I've been known to study a few conspiracy theories here and there-- so take my rantings worth a grain of salt.

P.S. I took calculus in high school too-- and failed! (slept through almost every lesson.) I scored higher than most of my classmates on the math portion of the SAT's though so something must have soaked in, thankfully.

 

[LeBrok]

Just wait a minute. There is a lot of free energy coming to Earth every day and every second. It is billions and trillions times more powerful than any other energy like cosmic rays or earth's magnetic field. Just go outside and face the sun, go outside and catch the sunlight, or even catch the wind (byproduct of sunlight). It is so easy, and it is freeeeeeeeeeeee.

Well, with all energy sources, even if it comes free from sun or supposed other free sources (eluded by NW), there need to be infrastructure and conduits supplying it where we need it, either to our homes or our cars. And this never is free, because it costs billions to build. Trillions in global scale.
Actually we are lucky that private companies can make profit on it therefore willing to invest and build it for us. If it was unprofitable the government would need to organize it for us. Knowing how government operates, or any other monopoly, the electricity would be very expensive with rampant shortages.

Some time ago I lived in socialistic country of Soviet block. The coal and oil didn't cost anything to the government or even to society (you wouldn't charge yourself for your own resources, would you?). The powerplants and all infrastructure was own by government too. And yet, electricity was very expensive and in short supply. Heck, everything was very expensive, if you were lucky to get it, lol.

Free energy? Be careful what you wish for...

 

[nordicwarrior]

"Be careful what you wish for..." that's what I've been wrestling with concerning the concept of free energy.

I don't know that as a species mankind is ready to handle free energy (or almost free energy anyway). If Tesla was correct and we at some point are able to capture these bountiful sources of circulating energy... I think violence and destruction would be the first thing some groups would reach for. Maybe J.P. Morgan realized this earlier...

Your experience with centralized Socialism illustrates why that system doesn't work. Sadly, the crony capitalism that we now have in the U.S. is showing it's faults also. We now have a hybrid of big business in bed with big government and historically this form of societal construct usually doesn't bode well for most citizens (it's the text book definition of fascism to boot). That's why I keep coming back to the teachings of Ron Paul and limited Federal government and fiercely independent small business. But that's another thread!

 

[LeBrok]

That's why I keep coming back to the teachings of Ron Paul and limited Federal government and fiercely independent small business. But that's another thread!

Small business doesn't have financial resources, manpower, infrastructure or economy of scale to do big projects, and do them efficiently.

I'm confused, why you're avoiding the most ubiquitous, powerful and free sunlight energy? Instead you go with some mysterious source. To me your appetite for anything secretive and mystical is higher than anything real, proven by science, even as real as free sunlight. Come on, get real dude.

 

[agitated]

Free energy, yes we are ready for it. In fact LOTS of people are working on free energy right now. Unfortunately, I can't post any links, but free energy is being worked on in many different ways none of them involve cosmic rays. Solar panels have been used for a very long time, but for now, Solar panels can only absorb infrared radiation (very low-energy radiation), people are trying to find new compositions that can absorb the visible spectrum and the UV spectrum (mid-energy radiation). Solar energy will be free energy in the future, or energy that costs cents! remember, its Radiation that we get energy from, not solar rays with net charge (which is what Tesla thought he could use)
Solar energy is actually getting cheaper extremely quickly, being able to absorb more sections of the electromagnetic spectrum
Iceland sorta has it's own free energy. They use geothermal energy, and people sorta just pay for the maintenance of these systems (which is actually quite expensive since these are literal giants being drilled into volcanoes)

as for Earthquake machine, you don't just vibrate stuff without energy. Take your microwave for example, it follows a similar idea. The radiation is tuned to the "resonance" of water, and vibrates water molecules to and gives heat energy to your food. But your microwave needs some energy to generate these waves, likewise, an earthquake machine would also need energy to vibrate the earth. I would show how much energy is needed to actually vibrate 5 trillion billion tons (about a small town i'de say) of earth to just register a 4.0 on the rictor scale... let alone a 5.0 (remember, a 5 is 10x stronger than a 4) but lets just say, we'd need something like several Nukes to supply that power.

Although Tesla was able to vibrate a small section of the Earth, it is far cheaper to just nuke a town than to waste energy vibrating the Earth under it.

And, if such a thing were possible, you could cancel out earthquakes by destructive interference and prevent the deaths of Many people. Any philanthropist would want that! but unfortunately, such a thing of this magnetude does not exist, and I haven't even explained how much energy would be required to power such a machine.
So earthquake machine, possible, and a genious invention
feasible, not really, especially in Tesla's time.
Maybe 1000 years from now, Tesla enthusiasts can make his inventions possible, but for now, we need better and more efficient methods. Maybe we will use Tesla's earthquake machines to terraform planets. Or someone will discover a better way to do it. But for now, Tesla's ideas just won't work.

 

[nordicwarrior]

Small business doesn't have financial resources, manpower, infrastructure or economy of scale to do big projects, and do them efficiently.

I'm confused, why you're avoiding the most ubiquitous, powerful and free sunlight energy? Instead you go with some mysterious source. To me your appetite for anything secretive and mystical is higher than anything real, proven by science, even as real as free sunlight. Come on, get real dude.

Lighten up Francis. I'm not avoiding anything... this is a thread on Tesla-- where are the solar panels on Wardenclyffe? If solar was effective we would have replaced fossil fuel by now.

 

[LeBrok]

Lighten up Francis. I'm not avoiding anything... this is a thread on Tesla-- where are the solar panels on Wardenclyffe? If solar was effective we would have replaced fossil fuel by now.

At least it exists, unlike energy of your dreams and visions.

 

[agitated]

Please allow me to clarify a few points though. I'm not really anti-Edison. My beef with the scientific community concerning Tesla is how Einstein has received almost heroic historical press at the expense of Tesla (who I think was more far more intelligent). The common man doesn't realize the impact that Tesla has had on his everyday life, while he probably looks to Einstein as the most brilliant thinker mankind has ever produced. I think Einstein simply had a better P.R. firm.

Einstein was the genius of the physics realm, Tesla was the genius of the engineering realm (my realm ). The common man doesn't know Tesla, and I think its sorta our fault for not publicising him as much, but then again, look at any newspaper archive and search up Tesla, I guarantee you that you will find several articles about him throughout the century.

But in the wonderful world of physics and engineering, We don't have a unit called "Einsteins", and we hear "Tesla's" pretty much everyday. Although theres Einsteinium, who the heck ever even uses Einsteinium...

Einstein is more famous today because of relativity. Your internet, phone, computer, sattelites most modern electronics, came from Einstein's theory of relativity and the photoelectric effect. It was the basis of what every macroscopic technology uses today. Even Tesla's inventions had to follow the laws which Einstein discovered. His wireless transmission of electricity came from the photoelectric effect, discovered by Hertz and proven by Einstein.

Resonance and the possibilty of vibrating objects (such as making Earthquakes) was discovered by Hertz, hence we name frequencies in Hertz.

EDIT:
We can't measure who is smarter, Tesla was probably smarter, and he'd probably discover both Relativity, Quantum mechanics and the unfied field theory if he were a physicist, we'll never know. But he was more of an engineer with ideas rather than concepts, and we don't nearly get as much recognition as Scientists
No engineer really wins a nobel prize, but Scientists to.

 

[agitated]

Lighten up Francis. I'm not avoiding anything... this is a thread on Tesla-- where are the solar panels on Wardenclyffe? If solar was effective we would have replaced fossil fuel by now.

Solar is extremely effective. It is to replace fossil fuels in the near future. As I said earlier, its ineffective now because we are only able to absorb the infrared radiation (low-energy) and new compounds are being discovered that can absorb more and more sections of the electromagnetic spectrum, such as visible light and UV rays (mid-energy)

 

[ElHorsto]

Take your microwave for example, it follows a similar idea. The radiation is tuned to the "resonance" of water, and vibrates water molecules to and gives heat energy to your food. But your microwave needs some energy to generate these waves, likewise, an earthquake machine would also need energy to vibrate the earth. I would show how much energy is needed to actually vibrate 5 trillion billion tons (about a small town i'de say) of earth to just register a 4.0 on the rictor scale... let alone a 5.0 (remember, a 5 is 10x stronger than a 4) but lets just say, we'd need something like several Nukes to supply that power.

I'm rather ignorant in this topic, but I wonder: If the microwave needs an amount of time to accumulate the energy in form of heat in the water until boiling, wouldn't it be the same for an earthquake machine, where just a minor amount of energy is constantly applied to the earth, but it would accumulate over time due to resonance. Wouldn't it be just a matter of time until the critical energy has added-up in the earth? Thanks!

 

[agitated]

I'm rather ignorant in this topic, but I wonder: If the microwave needs an amount of time to accumulate the energy in form of heat in the water until boiling, wouldn't it be the same for an earthquake machine, where just a minor amount of energy is constantly applied to the earth, but it would accumulate over time due to resonance. Wouldn't it be just a matter of time until the critical energy has added-up in the earth? Thanks!

Well this is true, but think of the microwave again, even though it is being heated up, it still cools down while it is heating up and loses energy, so in a way, heating something slowly is much less efficient.
If you were to constantly add energy to the earth and vibrate it, it will constantly be vibrating, but at a lower efficiency since most if it will be lost over time. It will be like microwaving your food for 10 seconds, taking it out, putting ti back in for 10 seconds... repeat.

you can't store vibrations on Earth because of friction and other physical phenomenons that I can't explain in a single post. Your food in the microwave gets warmer because the gain in heat energy is higher than the loss of heat energy. In the case of Earthquakes, the loss of "vibrations" will be very high considering the size of the Earth.

And I'll make a wierd water bottle analogy ... mind experiment.
try to fill up your water bottle at a small tap, it will take a longer time to fill it.
Now fill it with a garden hose, or a shower, it will fill almost instantly.
Now when it comes to the water company, it doesn't matter if it took you 1 month to fill up the bottle or if it took 1 second to fill it, you still used the same amount of water.


EDIT:
Another reason, Earthquakes don't shake the entire Earth, it just shakes a small portion of the thin outer layer of the Earth. To store vibrations, we'd have to essentially vibrate the entire world. something that even all the nuclear weapons on earth combined can't do.

Sorry, its very hard to explain these concepts

 

[ebAmerican]

We need to build a Dyson sphere, and become a Type II Civilization (Kardashev Scale). I do agree with Agitated, if Tesla's inventions worked on an industrial scale it would have been done by now, or it would be vigorously perused. Einstein and Tesla were genius men of their times, but they are nothing more than steps on a ladder of futuristic greatness. Tesla and Einstein contributed pieces to the puzzle that future scientist will use to make Energy Machines, but we got a long ways to go. Free energy is not possible, because of the laws of thermodynamics. Once we create a machine to extract energy from the sun economically, then we will build machines that use the power proportionately, and eventually drain the sun like fossil fuels. we would then need to become a Type III Civilization in order to survive. It is a viscous circle of consumption.

 

[ElHorsto]

Well this is true, but think of the microwave again, even though it is being heated up, it still cools down while it is heating up and loses energy, so in a way, heating something slowly is much less efficient.
If you were to constantly add energy to the earth and vibrate it, it will constantly be vibrating, but at a lower efficiency since most if it will be lost over time. It will be like microwaving your food for 10 seconds, taking it out, putting ti back in for 10 seconds... repeat.

you can't store vibrations on Earth because of friction and other physical phenomenons that I can't explain in a single post. Your food in the microwave gets warmer because the gain in heat energy is higher than the loss of heat energy. In the case of Earthquakes, the loss of "vibrations" will be very high considering the size of the Earth.

I understand that the amount of "vibrations" alone probably would be devastating and apparent already long before the actual earthquake.
That the energy loss eventually might exceed the energy input is understandable too. I had a bridge in mind where an army of men is stomping over, resonating it until it breaks. Or a singer who crashes a glass just by singing one specific tone. I guess the problem is as you said that the earthis constantly changing its resonance frequency (among other properties) while resonation is increasing due to increasing involvement of other layers and areas of soil, making it impossible to exceed a certain limit.

And I'll make a wierd water bottle analogy ... mind experiment.
try to fill up your water bottle at a small tap, it will take a longer time to fill it.
Now fill it with a garden hose, or a shower, it will fill almost instantly.
Now when it comes to the water company, it doesn't matter if it took you 1 month to fill up the bottle or if it took 1 second to fill it, you still used the same amount of water.

Yes, of course. My point is that for an earthquake machine it is not important to get free energy from somewhere, but to store it in high enough capacity (e.g. mechanical resonance energy). That would mean that the bottle (e.g. earth piece) should be big enough such that it is able to collapse by overload.

EDIT:
Another reason, Earthquakes don't shake the entire Earth, it just shakes a small portion of the thin outer layer of the Earth. To store vibrations, we'd have to essentially vibrate the entire world. something that even all the nuclear weapons on earth combined can't do.

Sorry, its very hard to explain these concepts

I think I got it, thanks.