Register to reply

Wireless Power? (The work of Nikola Tesla)

by Desmond108
Tags: nikola, power, tesla, wireless, work
Share this thread:
jim hardy
#19
Feb16-12, 07:36 PM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
jim hardy's Avatar
P: 3,522
"""Did you mean to ask whether the secondaries of the pancake coils were connected? ""

yep, that was the question..errr, should have been the question..
just trying to get a handle on your setup.

Thanks !
billbaty
#20
Feb18-12, 03:23 PM
P: 4
Most people think that Tesla was transmitting power through the air, probably because they see the towers he built, hear that he was transmitting power and associate his operation with modern-day radio transmitting towers.

What was actually happening is he was collecting electricity at the top of the tower and transmitting it into the ground. The ground was his wire. Look at his patent for the wireless transmission of power and the tower is labeled as a "generating" device.

Look up "Art Bell's Antenna" and he accidentally stumbled upon Tesla's electrical generating capabilities. I don't have all the stats before me but Art got a continuous 350 volts from a radio tower that was about 80 ft tall and had a loop of about 1/4 mile of #2 wire.

ll the best,

billbaty
sophiecentaur
#21
Feb18-12, 03:42 PM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
sophiecentaur's Avatar
P: 11,958
Where did the energy, reputedly, come from?
Meizirkki
#22
Feb18-12, 05:27 PM
P: 49
It has been rumored, but afaik not verified, that Tesla collected energy from naturally occurring electric fields. Wilhelm Reich was also known to "accumulate" electric fields in his accumulators (though he always called it something cool like "force of life and sexuality").

What we do know about Tesla coils is that in a well designed coil the oscillating field becomes very large and dies off rather slow. The Q factor is incredibly high, especially when operated at the "capacitive resonance" frequency, far higher than the usual resonant frequency. At this high frequency, the electricity no longer moves along the wire but along the capacitance between each turn of the coil. There is practically no current in an ideal Tesla coil secondary, which means there are no resistive losses and no magnetic-related losses whatsoever.

In his patents, Tesla is boasting how the upper terminal of his coil can reach "many hundreds of thousands of horsepower". This is not a lie for the coil maintains it's oscillation and even with a relatively small input power, the oscillating field can reach tremendous power over time. Tesla surely didn't have a continuous input power of many hundreds of thousands of horsepower. There is much confusion about this perceived "excess energy", but I hope the above has it in a nutshell.

But if Tesla indeed managed to collect large amounts of electrical energy somehow I'm all in to replicating such work. I didn't look up the Art Bell's antenna yet, but it sounds reasonable. We are surrounded by many naturally occurring and man-made fields. Art Bell's antenna could be receiving anything from Earth's ELF signals to AM radio of >250KHz.

There's also this guy who designed and built a Tesla coil alike high Q AM antenna and tuned it to resonate at the frequency of certain radio broadcast. As expected, his antenna begun oscillating and up to 30 watts of power could be received from the distant radio station.
sophiecentaur
#23
Feb18-12, 05:50 PM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
sophiecentaur's Avatar
P: 11,958
The above terminology is a bit far fetched. Power ( "Horsepower" ) is a transfer of energy and not 'stored energy'. It is true that a resonant circuit (or a standing wave) will store energy but this has nothing to do with power. It's all about having a fairly high Q circuit. But a good receiving antenna will couple well to free space so it will not have a high Q.

This stuff about 'collecting' energy from 'naturally occurring and man-made fields' violates thermodynamics and basic conservation principles that even Nicola cannot waffle his way around. I could suggest that he was probably well enough informed to be aware of this and that it's his disciples who have over egged his claims.

Many antennae have a larger effective cross section for intercepting a passing wave than their geometrical shape would suggest (a thing wire dipole, for instance) but the power has to come from somewhere and, once beyond the local field of influene, the energy flux over the sphere will not be affected. Where this "30 Watts" is supposed to have come from is anyone's guess. What was the original transmitter power and what was the separation?

Since Tesla died, technology has progressed an awful long way. People seem to be suggesting that his ideas were, somehow, so magical that they have never been understood by anyone since. This is despite GR, Quantum Physics, String Theory, even classical EM theory and the rest. There has, somehow, to be a subset of knowledge that Tesla had - some sort of magic- that has escaped all the brilliant minds that have existed since his time. Get real chaps. If they were real and worth money then we'd have them in our homes, transport systems and weaponry.

Instead, what have we got? Fizzy sparks for school kids.
billbaty
#24
Feb18-12, 05:58 PM
P: 4
The energy is the Earth's magnet that has been concentrated. Electricity is concentrated magnetic flux. When you put a coil of wires in front of a magnet the flux is concentrated in the individual strands of wire. Tesla's tower, or Art Bell's, essentially concentrates the Earth's magnetic flux into a measurable amount of electricity when it is released or grounded, that is to say released to the ground.

We all have assumed that Benjamin Franklin flew a kite in a thunderstorm and got shocked. But what really happened is that he flew a kite in broad daylight using a copper wire for a string and when a certain altitude was reached and he touched the attached key, he ground out the concentrated magnetic flux and shocked himself.

billbaty
sophiecentaur
#25
Feb18-12, 06:15 PM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
sophiecentaur's Avatar
P: 11,958
Quote Quote by billbaty View Post
The energy is the Earth's magnet that has been concentrated. Electricity is concentrated magnetic flux. When you put a coil of wires in front of a magnet the flux is concentrated in the individual strands of wire. Tesla's tower, or Art Bell's, essentially concentrates the Earth's magnetic flux into a measurable amount of electricity when it is released or grounded, that is to say released to the ground.

We all have assumed that Benjamin Franklin flew a kite in a thunderstorm and got shocked. But what really happened is that he flew a kite in broad daylight using a copper wire for a string and when a certain altitude was reached and he touched the attached key, he ground out the concentrated magnetic flux and shocked himself.

billbaty
"Electricity is concentrated magnetic flux" is it? "Electricity" is, in fact, a non-specific term (in Science) which is used as a general description 'to do with' Electromagnetism and the study of it. There is Electric Field, Electric Potential and many well defined quantities - but not 'Electricity'. If you want to 'get energy' from something then you have to put energy in or there needs to be a change of some sort. This is basic stuff that has proved itself to be reliable and consistent enough to 'put a man on the Moon' and 'give us the Internet'. The standard theory could be said to have pretty much justified itself in most practical applications. If you want to propose a better theory then you had better start on a massive body of work and not just give assurances about things that happened in the dim past.
It's interesting that you quote Benjamin Franklin and not an experimenter of more recent times. Were you there to see "what really happened" and could you quote some figures to indicate just how much energy is available in this way? If it really were as you say it is, why don't we all have towers over all our houses to supply our energy needs? It's so wasteful to be burning all that gas and oil when towers could do the job. Set up a company and see if it makes you any money - based on results.

Actually, what you are proposing is outside the terms of Physics Forums in that it does not involve any peer- reviewed ideas.
Meizirkki
#26
Feb19-12, 06:43 AM
P: 49
Quote Quote by sophiecentaur View Post
This stuff about 'collecting' energy from 'naturally occurring and man-made fields' violates thermodynamics and basic conservation principles that even Nicola cannot waffle his way around. I could suggest that he was probably well enough informed to be aware of this and that it's his disciples who have over egged his claims.
Why and how exactly does anything I suggested violate the laws of thermodynamics and basic conservation principles? My point was that whatever these "collectors" may be, they don't create energy but receive it from an existing source. And there are lots of sources around us.

Quote Quote by sophiecentaur View Post
Many antennae have a larger effective cross section for intercepting a passing wave than their geometrical shape would suggest (a thing wire dipole, for instance) but the power has to come from somewhere and, once beyond the local field of influene, the energy flux over the sphere will not be affected. Where this "30 Watts" is supposed to have come from is anyone's guess. What was the original transmitter power and what was the separation?
Here's the article. Just like a receiving Tesla coil, the antenna becomes a capacitor in series with the capacitance of the transmitter.
EDIT: He also used the regenerative circuit to increase the effective area of the antenna, sorry I didn't remember that one.
EDIT2: Nevermind, the regenerative circuit was only used in first of his tests, not the 30W one you were interested in.

Quote Quote by sophiecentaur View Post
Since Tesla died, technology has progressed an awful long way. People seem to be suggesting that his ideas were, somehow, so magical that they have never been understood by anyone since. This is despite GR, Quantum Physics, String Theory, even classical EM theory and the rest. There has, somehow, to be a subset of knowledge that Tesla had - some sort of magic- that has escaped all the brilliant minds that have existed since his time. Get real chaps. If they were real and worth money then we'd have them in our homes, transport systems and weaponry.

Instead, what have we got? Fizzy sparks for school kids.
I don't want to upset you, but I think Nikola Tesla is the only man to ever use the planet Earth's features as crucial parts of his circuits for wireless energy transmission. That is where everyone else have gone wrong. Tesla's wireless transmission system is very real and there's no magic: just think of the Earth and the atmosphere as capacitors and it will make sense. The energy is not radiated, it is conserved.

Peace.
sophiecentaur
#27
Feb19-12, 08:58 AM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
sophiecentaur's Avatar
P: 11,958
Your posts and the link you have exhibit the same glaring flaw. That is there are no quoted figures and no serious experimental details.
All Science and Engineering involves details and numbers. That's why it tends to work when done 'properly'.
The fact is that there is no EVIDENCE to support this nonsense.
You either have to believe that there were successful results from the original work and they have been deliberately suppressed (conspiracy) or that no Scientist has had sufficient ability to take it to a successful commercial conclusion (cockup).
Else you could just admit to yourself that it's all moonshine.

That link is no more than a rather garbled version of a straightforward EM text book. But with one thing missing - solid theory.
Meizirkki
#28
Feb19-12, 09:50 AM
P: 49
I've provided details of my last experiment and given a reasonable explanation of how the transmission works, which obeys all laws of the prevalent physics. And once again I'm told that the tesla transmission is nonsense.

You have all the right to not believe what you haven't seen with you own eyes, but please keep it to yourself. It isn't very good science to come over and tell an experimenter he's wrong just because what he does isn't in the book.

And by the way, please don't take the link against me here. Whatever the author has written is his opinion, not mine. I agree with the idea of a resonant receiver becoming part of the transmitter circuit, but I don't have enough knownledge to comment on anything else he might have said.
jim hardy
#29
Feb19-12, 11:02 AM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
jim hardy's Avatar
P: 3,522
i repeat, at first glance resonance looks a lot like energy creation but in reality it's energy storage.

Q being ratio of energy stored to energy dissipated per cycle,

a substantial amount of energy is expected in a high Q system that's gently excited at its resonsnt frequency.
But the energy came from the excitation source , in tiny little bits one cycle at a time..
That's why soldiers marching across a bridge break step.

If you ever lived with a Piano, you've heard individual strings come and go in sympathetic vibration with sounds in the room. Room sounds are the excitation source and each individual string is a high Q resonator.

I'm still waiting for a "Free Energy" experimenter to identify the source of excitation more specifically than "Earth's magnetic field" .. and not holding my breath on that one.

But i find your 14mhz transmission experiment producing 380 mv across ten ohms interesting.
That sure is one heck of a directional antenna pair!


old jim
sophiecentaur
#30
Feb19-12, 11:19 AM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
sophiecentaur's Avatar
P: 11,958
Quote Quote by Meizirkki View Post
I've provided details of my last experiment and given a reasonable explanation of how the transmission works, which obeys all laws of the prevalent physics. And once again I'm told that the tesla transmission is nonsense.

You have all the right to not believe what you haven't seen with you own eyes, but please keep it to yourself. It isn't very good science to come over and tell an experimenter he's wrong just because what he does isn't in the book.

And by the way, please don't take the link against me here. Whatever the author has written is his opinion, not mine. I agree with the idea of a resonant receiver becoming part of the transmitter circuit, but I don't have enough knownledge to comment on anything else he might have said.
I am "taking the link against" you because you brought it into the argument. You have used it as evidence and I am debunking that particular piece of evidence.

Your experimental results show that it is possible to get coupling between two circuits (a pretty common thing). In fact you have not given a 'reasonable explanation' for the results because they need to be analysed properly. And the results, in fact, tell you very little.

I question that your claim of 95% efficiency. To prove that, you need to be looking at Power and not just a voltage across a resistor. You can only use Current or Volts as a measure of efficiency if the impedances are the same. (A transformer can appear to be a fantastic amplifier if you don't obey the rules). Are you aware of what Jim is telling you about resonance?
What is the output power of your signal generator and the actual power delivered to your LEDs? It may be quite hard to determine this, actually.

You mention a School. I sincerely hope you are giving any students a balanced view of their Science and not taking them down strange, alternative paths. Young people are easily lead and the Tesla legend could be dangerously attractive.
Meizirkki
#31
Feb19-12, 02:04 PM
P: 49
jim, in one of my posts I explained why Tesla coils have such high Q and that it's exactly what "excess energy" seeking people get so exited about. I hope it didn't give you the wrong impression that I would think there is excess energy. I see what you say and I completely agree. Also, thanks for the compliment :) but I must note that Tesla coils are not directional antennas in the traditional sense. They are more like plates of a capacitor, the entire space between them being the dielectric. A properly operated Tesla coil doesn't create large magnetic fields.

and sophiecentaur, sorry for not being clear enough in my previous posts. The resistor were of same type, 10 ohm (very close, measured with a multimeter) and the coils as identical as possible. The impedances were same and that's why I didn't bother mentioning current or power. Voltages are true RMS measured with an oscilloscope.

I don't think I'm leading any of my fellow students down a wrong path.. I'm an experimenter, not a theorist. I'm not one to tell people how things are, instead I show off Even our teacher was surprised when we lit up fluorescent lamps by holding them in our hands ;) (a joule thief buzzing in the background.)
jim hardy
#32
Feb19-12, 02:53 PM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
jim hardy's Avatar
P: 3,522
"They are more like plates of a capacitor, the entire space between them being the dielectric. "

I did not do well in fields or vector calculus courses so can't offer any worthy commentary.
"... A properly operated Tesla coil doesn't create large magnetic fields.""
Yet i have read that E and B fields are inseparable..
So i just make mental note of experiments like yours , and if Fate ever wants me to understand fields better one of them will be an epiphany.
"When the student is ready a teacher will appear".
Meantime i just watch while folks like Sophie and Yungman and Bassalisk et al enjoy the advanced math.


Maybe we'll get back to an Aether and maybe it'll be anisotropic.... some of my friends over at Neutron Repulsion toss about such ideas. I feel like Charley working in that bakery...(Flowers for Algernon)
Thanks for the clarification and thanks to all for letting me share your playground..
sophiecentaur
#33
Feb19-12, 03:33 PM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
sophiecentaur's Avatar
P: 11,958
Quote Quote by Meizirkki View Post
jim, in one of my posts I explained why Tesla coils have such high Q and that it's exactly what "excess energy" seeking people get so exited about. I hope it didn't give you the wrong impression that I would think there is excess energy. I see what you say and I completely agree. Also, thanks for the compliment :) but I must note that Tesla coils are not directional antennas in the traditional sense. They are more like plates of a capacitor, the entire space between them being the dielectric. A properly operated Tesla coil doesn't create large magnetic fields.

and sophiecentaur, sorry for not being clear enough in my previous posts. The resistor were of same type, 10 ohm (very close, measured with a multimeter) and the coils as identical as possible. The impedances were same and that's why I didn't bother mentioning current or power. Voltages are true RMS measured with an oscilloscope.

I don't think I'm leading any of my fellow students down a wrong path.. I'm an experimenter, not a theorist. I'm not one to tell people how things are, instead I show off Even our teacher was surprised when we lit up fluorescent lamps by holding them in our hands ;) (a joule thief buzzing in the background.)
But the 10Ω is not the Load, is it? It is surely just a current sensing resistor, not a power meter. Certainly you wouldn't light LEDs with 400mV. So how did you actually measure the POWER transfer involved? What was your load impedance and what was your source impedance, for a start?
I get the impression that your attitude to this business is tailor made for the Tesla religion. Just approximate enough to feel you understand the arm waving but not rigorous enough to use the Equations to tell you what exactly is going on and to keep you on the rails.

You are a student, I realise. It is great that you have enthusiasm. If you really want to follow this fondness for Science to take you into a career, you will need to go through the pain of formal treatment of all these things. You will then be able to see what you have read in its context. Take it from me, conventional EM is NOT WRONG. The terms you are bandying about have much more exact meanings than you seem to realise. When you have got some substantial knowledge of the topic then you can usefully take the subject into 'paid employment'.

If you want to beat 'em then you will have to join 'em first - like all the successful and celebrated workers have done. You seem to have a good, healthy disregard for 'excess energy', in principle - and that reassures me.But I think you need to see the overall picture and that a lot of what you are describing is, in fact, just that. These Energy Sources are not actually Sources - they are just (Low-grade) Energy Levels. There is loads of thermal energy in the Arctic Ocean - it's just not a lot of use because the temperature is so low. Likewise with your 'unspecified' energies that exist in the World. The Energy sources you hint at don't actually represent energy that can be utilised. Like I said, the Conservation Laws and thermodynamics can't be ignored. The Numbers count: use 'em.
Meizirkki
#34
Feb19-12, 05:17 PM
P: 49
Okay, now I see that I wasn't clear enough. Sorry.

The LED test and the efficiency test were two separate tests. In the efficiency test, the 10 ohm resistor was the load impedance. The only component connected across the terminals of the primary coil, which means all the current in the primary goes though it. At the transmitter end, a 10 ohm resistor was connected in series with the primary and function generator, again all the current from the function generator goes though the 10 ohm resistor. My teacher was following the experiment and I can assure you I did everything with great care.

I hope I didn't upset you. I don't have a fraction of the knowledge and experience you have. I'll take your advice and learn more :)

I hope to take pictures and more accurate measurements of my new setup when it's finished.
sophiecentaur
#35
Feb20-12, 05:33 AM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
sophiecentaur's Avatar
P: 11,958
Never upset - don't worry.
My point is that your 10Ohm resistor measurement will not tell you the power unless you know source and load impedances. If you have resonant systems it is even less easy. So, apart from the fact that you lit your diodes, you cannot know the efficiency.

But there are two entirely separate issues here. You have shown that it is possible to get good coupling between a source and load, using a transformer but that has nothing to do with the notion of getting energy from other, unspecified, sources of RF energy. You did not take my point about Conservation Laws, but they apply here the same as anywhere else and they are the basic objection to 'excess energy' and also to this. Going back a bit, you are actually suggesting the equivalent to a 'Maxwell Demon', which has been put to bed long ago.
Meizirkki
#36
Feb20-12, 01:03 PM
P: 49
Quote Quote by sophiecentaur View Post
Never upset - don't worry.
My point is that your 10Ohm resistor measurement will not tell you the power unless you know source and load impedances. If you have resonant systems it is even less easy. So, apart from the fact that you lit your diodes, you cannot know the efficiency.

But there are two entirely separate issues here. You have shown that it is possible to get good coupling between a source and load, using a transformer but that has nothing to do with the notion of getting energy from other, unspecified, sources of RF energy. You did not take my point about Conservation Laws, but they apply here the same as anywhere else and they are the basic objection to 'excess energy' and also to this. Going back a bit, you are actually suggesting the equivalent to a 'Maxwell Demon', which has been put to bed long ago.
In my last two posts I have apologized for causing all these misunderstadings by not making my posts clear enough. No, it's not that. I read several previous posts of mine and I don't understand which part of them makes you think that:

- I am not familiar with the laws of thermodynamics and the conservation of energy.
- I have claimed that my coils would "collect energy"

I never claimed that Tesla coils had something to do with "collecting energy" nor did I make the slightest implication that my coils were in any way associated with the whole subject.

I didn't comment on your point about energy conservation laws and thermodynamics because I wasn't ignorant to them in the first place. You say that I was "suggesting the equivalent to a 'Maxwell Demon'".. I do not recall making such a suggestion.

Also, I must say I am slightly offended by your refusal to believe that I and the teachers of my school know how to measure efficiency.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Nikola Tesla's Death ray General Physics 9
Nikola Tesla General Physics 18
Nikola Tesla Introductory Physics Homework 8
Nikola Tesla General Discussion 4