bascule Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Actually, I was talking about his "Tesla made an earthquake machine" claim. Tesla did build an electromechanical machine that you could attach to a structural column of a building and vibrate it at his resonance frequency. He did this to the building his laboratory was housed in, much to the chagrin of local police. However, this is obviously far from an "earthquake machine" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keano Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20051031/sc_space/usmilitarywantstoowntheweather thats yahoo news folks the thing would fit in your pocket--> Excerpt from the New York World Telegram, July 11, 1935 - Nikola Tesla revealed that an earthquake which drew police and ambulances to the region of his laboratory at 48 E. Houston St., New York, in 1898, was the result of a little machine he was experimenting with at the time which "you could put in your overcoat pocket." The bewildered newspapermen pounced upon this as at least one thing they could understand and "the father of modern electricity" told what had happened as follows: "I was experimenting with vibrations. I had one of my machines going and I wanted to see if I could get it in tune with the vibration of the building. I put it up notch after notch. There was a peculiar cracking sound. "I asked my assistants where did the sound come from. They did not know. I put the machine up a few more notches. There was a louder cracking sound. I knew I was approaching the vibration of the steel building. I pushed the machine a little higher. "Suddenly all the heavy machinery in the place was flying around. I grabbed a hammer and broke the machine. The building would have been about our ears in another few minutes. Outside in the street there was pandemonium. "The police and ambulances arrived. I told my assistants to say nothing. We told the police it must have been an earthquake. That's all they ever knew about it." Some shrewd reporter asked Dr. Tesla at this point what he would need to destroy the Empire State Building and the doctor replied: "Vibration will do anything. It would only be necessary to step up the vibrations of the machine to fit the natural vibration of the building and the building would come crashing down. That's why soldiers break step crossing a bridge." His early experiments in vibration, he explained, led to his invention of his "earth vibrating" machine. (For more detailed information on this device, please check out a fantastic book, by Dale Pond - "Tesla's Earthquake Machine." Pick one up from Amazon.com, below) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20051031/sc_space/usmilitarywantstoowntheweather thats yahoo news folks Yes, and the article you quote isn't at the URL you gave... THREE TIMES! Furthermore, Tesla claimed to have invented all sorts of things he never did, including a "Death Ray," a weather control machine, machines designed for the wireless transmission of electrical power, etc. Or rather, he thought he was "close" when he, in fact, was quite a ways off the mark. The British government tried to build his death ray. They couldn't get it to work. Tesla was just way too much excitement and way too little math... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keano Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 a bunch of spin Dr's in here smoke and mirrors to blind people from knowing or at least investigating for yourself the truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 smoke and mirrors to blind people from knowing or at least investigating for yourself the truth I'm a big fan of Tesla. I've read multiple biographies and investigated his life quite extensively. Maybe the fact that I already know the truth has rendered me immune to your bullshit... Tesla suffered from the fact that he had very lofty goals which weren't ever immediately practical, or possible, but that didn't stop him from dreaming... just don't confuse his dreams with reality, because for Tesla himself the border between the two was quite fuzzy. Tesla had many, many wholly impractical goals and spent other people's fortunes trying to make them a reality... but rarely succeeded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanJ Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 a bunch of spin Dr's in heresmoke and mirrors to blind people from knowing or at least investigating for yourself the truth What are you talking about? No-one is trying to spin any lies here! I agree with you bascule - we had to do a project on Tesla for physics and he did try (and thoughjt he has succeeded in making) some things that were then impossible and some of which are still out of reach today. @Keano: It seems it may be you that needs to do some research because I fully agree with bascule on this point Cheers, Ryan Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keano Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 ok ok ok heres something to chew on Cold fusion back from the dead Mullins, J. This paper appears in: Spectrum, IEEE Publication Date: Sept. 2004 Volume: 41, Issue: 9 On page(s): 22, 24, 26- ISSN: 0018-9235 INSPEC Accession Number: 8101948 Digital Object Identifier: 10.1109/MSPEC.2004.1330805 Posted online: 2004-09-03 10:46:54.0 Abstract The US Energy Department has renewed its efforts to investigate the prospects for cold fusion, the supposed generation of thermonuclear energy using tabletop apparatus. While critics say that the extravagant claims behind cold fusion need to be backed with exceptionally strong evidence, there has been a small group of dedicated researches who have continued to conduct investigations. Over the years, a number of groups around the world have reproduced the original Pons-Fleischmann excess heat effect, yielding sometimes as much as 250 percent of the energy put in. It appears that the results of all these research have convinced the DOE to give cold fusion another look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanJ Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 @Keano: I remember reading about that a while ago (Though it was an article not a book) unfortunatly coldfusion still seems to be an unattainable goal. If it were then why is it not in use everywhere already as a pollution free energy source? Cheers, Ryan Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keano Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 youll have to check the nearest "conspiracy theory" <-- note the spin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanJ Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 youll have to check the nearest "conspiracy theory" <-- note the spin I don't understand what you are talking about... Cheers, Ryan Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keano Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 "Over the years, a number of groups around the world have reproduced the original Pons-Fleischmann excess heat effect, yielding sometimes as much as 250 percent of the energy put in." "unfortunatly coldfusion still seems to be an unattainable goal" answer to what Im talking about, just read it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanJ Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 "Over the years' date=' a number of groups around the world have reproduced the original Pons-Fleischmann excess heat effect, yielding sometimes as much as 250 percent of the energy put in." "unfortunatly coldfusion still seems to be an unattainable goal" answer to what Im talking about, just read it[/quote'] Not according to what I've read. Though they did increase some increased results none of the results were exactly alike and they all started out with the same experiment. In contrast' date=' hundreds of researchers worldwide claim they have reproduced cold fusion, often at very high signal to noise ratios. Excess heat has been measured at sigma 50 to 100, and tritium between 60 and 1 million times background. Roughly 500 papers were published about polywater at the peak, but most were theory and only a handful claimed positive results, whereas over 3,000 papers on cold fusion have been published. Although requiring exotic or unknown physics does not rule out the existence of a process, it does drastically increase the level of evidence needed to establish a process, while at the same time making it much harder to perform experiments to verify that the process exists. Requiring exotic or unknown physics increases the suspicion that the underlying cause of the experimental results lies in errors of experimental design or misinterpretation of results, and causes the scientific community to be skeptical of marginal results and demand unambiguous demonstrations of a process. [/quote'] Hey! I'm not arguing! I hope that cold fusion does somday work. It would be great, cheep pollution free energy! Cheers, Ryan Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keano Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 IEEE is the manuscript the professional electrical engineer gets his info Wikipedia is basically for students or the non professional who you going to listen to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanJ Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 IEEE is the manuscript the professional electrical engineer gets his infoWikipedia is basically for students or the non professional who you going to listen to Right now I'll have to think about it because if it is really already in existance then why is it not already being used everywhere? Who would turn down a cheap and pollution free energy source if you see what I'm saying. Cheers, Ryan Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keano Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 1) Big Oil = Big $ = Big Pollitical Power = Control and supression 2) it would turn the world economy upside down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 who you going to listen to Certainly not the conspiracy theorist... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keano Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 ive presented facts that should make everyone reconsider you call me conspiracy theorist, I call you spin dr. and if i was a conspiracy theorist i could get you way better and more far out topics than cold-fusion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 ive presented facts You've presented bullshit you call me conspiracy theorist, I call you spin dr. Yes, sorry for "spinning" your "facts" as bullshit and if i was a conspiracy theorist i could get you way better and more far out topics than cold-fusion You're claiming that big oil is holding back cold fusion. Certainly sounds like the bullshit of a conspiracy theorist to me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keano Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 your spinning like a little toy top Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keano Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 who pulls your string? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanJ Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 @Keano: How about taying n topic? We don't need name calling and or accusing people of being a spin dr or a conspiricy theorist Maybe we can get back on topic and talk about other things people have done that could be considered god-like? How about atom smashing? Creating new particles form existing ones - thas pretty cool! Cheers, Ryan Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadaAotS Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 ... wikipedia is for students or non professionals I hate how people feel that wikipedia is not a trust-worthy source of information... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 How about atom smashing? Creating new particles form existing ones - thas pretty cool! I think just the fact we can send atoms to the speed they need in order to be smashed is amazing. I attended a few lectures on electromagnets... amazing stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 I hate how people feel that wikipedia is not a trust-worthy source of information... wrong thread?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanJ Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 I think just the fact we can send atoms to the speed they need in order to be smashed is amazing. I attended a few lectures on electromagnets... amazing stuff. Yea thats true... its very, very fast and thats about all I kno of it. Another use of magnets is in chemistry - mass specroscopy... the atoms, compounds, whatever you like, are stripped of an electron, passed through a set of positive plates to focus them and then they pass through a powerful magnet. Heavier ones get deflected less than lighter ones. For atoms this means you can work out the relative atomic mass though all the isotopes and their relative ammounts and from compounds you can determin its mass and its formula! I'll not bore you with the details of it - I just had to "endure" 2 hours of working with one of these things and seeing the results - it was quite cool. By working I mean watching the professionals don it but it was still interesting I'd say another thing thats god like about humaits is its knowledge. Think about how much we know compared to what we did say 200 years ago! Cheers, Ryan Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts