Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Free Worldwide Energy - Nichola Tesla

  1. Jan 11, 2004 #1
    Nikola Tesla was an unrecognized genius before his time. He believed that the earth itself could conduct energy around the world and be tapped for free anywhere. Doesn't it seem ironic that such a device existed back in the early 1900's. Tesla had the right idea but the Government could not find a way to place a meter on free energy. It seems such a shame that we cannot work for mans benefit instead of a monetary benefit of a few people and governments.

    "Tesla believed this to be a simple procedure, and later confirmed through experimentation, that the Earth conducts electricity naturally, much like a metal ball. Tesla hypothesized that Earth could be charged from a single location and energy could be safely extracted from any other point on the globe's surface.

    The Earth could be pumped with electricity and anyone on its surface could remove it by simply placing a wire into the ground. This energy could be withdrawn in unlimited amounts for unlimited uses, free for all the world's people!"


    http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9654/tesla/projecttesla.html

     

    Attached Files:

  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 11, 2004 #2

    enigma

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    And whan, pray tell, would be used as ground if the ground was charged?

    TANSTAAFL
     
  4. Jan 11, 2004 #3

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Tesla was a genius, but today is unfortunately remembered in more in mythology than in history.
     
  5. Jan 11, 2004 #4
    Re: Re: Free Worldwide Energy - Nichola Tesla

    Originally posted by enigma

    And whan, pray tell, would be used as ground if the ground was charged?

    I am in no way an expert on Nikola Tesla and his theories but apparently the earth below our feet would be charged while he states that we are surrounded by a thin layer of insulating air which would prevent humans from receiving the electrical contact.

    According to Tesla, you would have to put a conducting wire "down" into the ground in order to utilize the preserved and non-diminishing electrical charge.

    But you will have to do a great deal of reading to understand exactly what Tesla was talking about as only now are people beginning to understand his genius concepts. It is true that the petrochemical industry and oil producing countries have a great deal to loose from 'free energy to the world.'
     
  6. Jan 11, 2004 #5
    Apparently some studies indicate that there is a highly conductive D" layer in the earth deep outer mantle.

    http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/nature/journal/v366/n6454/abs/366453a0.html

     
  7. Jan 11, 2004 #6
    Another article from NATURE indicates electrical conductivity at lowr mantle conditions.

     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 11, 2004
  8. Jan 11, 2004 #7

    enigma

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Re: Re: Free Worldwide Energy - Nichola Tesla

    Power is generated by using the potential difference between what is supplied (generated) and ground. If you charge up the Earth itself, you still need some neutral (or at least different) level of charge to draw any current from it.
     
  9. Jan 11, 2004 #8
    Re: Re: Re: Re: Free Worldwide Energy - Nichola Tesla

    Originally posted by enigma

    Power is generated by using the potential difference between what is supplied (generated) and ground. If you charge up the Earth itself, you still need some neutral (or at least different) level of charge to draw any current from it.

    This discipline is not my area of expertise.
    It seems that presently available electrical conductors and materials used to draw the stored charge for use above the ground should be readily available if Tesla's premise proved correct.
    It seems that there has been some recent studies of lower mantle conductivity as previously described.

    "We find that the geophysical estimate of lower-mantle electrical conductivity can be well explained by the conductivity of the perovskite component of a low-oxygen-fugacity mantle composed of pyrolite (the assemblage of mineral phases thought to broadly represent that of the Earth's mantle), assuming a standard geotherm."

    http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/conins.html#c1
     
  10. Jan 12, 2004 #9

    Integral

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Do these schemes include the actual GENERATION of the power or only the distribution. It is pretty easy to transmit power, every radio station does it. We could conceivably transmit power to every household in the world. Unfortunately this type of distribution is very inefficient and even worse there is no way to BILL for use. It is great for the consumer but it would sux to be the supplier. Who do you know that is willing to provide a very expensive service for free?
     
  11. Jan 12, 2004 #10
    I would do it if i could afford it!

    Tesla has to be my favourite physicist/mad scientist.
     
  12. Jan 12, 2004 #11
    TESLA TODAY

    Nikolas Tesla the man who makes most everything we do today functional is forgotten.

    http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9654/tesla/hacker.html

    Edison, who wasn't near the inventor Tesla was, but who was a better businessman, is well remembered as is his General Electric. Still, let me list a few of Tesla's works just so you'll understand how bright he was. He invented the AC motor and transformer. (Think of every motor in your house.) He invented 3-phase electricity and popularized alternating current, the electrical distribution system used all over the world. He invented the Tesla Coil, which makes the high voltage that drives the picture tube in your computer's CRT. He is now credited with inventing modern radio as well; the Supreme Court overturned Marconi's patent in 1943 in favor of Tesla.
    Tesla, in short, invented much of the equipment that gets power to your home every day from miles away, and many that use that power inside your home. His inventions made George Westinghouse (Westinghouse Corp.) a wealthy man. Finally, the unit of magnetic flux in the metric system is the "Tesla".

    Tesla got to thinking about resonance on a large scale. He'd already pioneered the electrical distribution system we use today, and that's not small thinking; when you think of Tesla, think big. He thought, let's say I send an electrical charge into the ground. What happens to it? Well, the ground is an excellent conductor of electricity.

    For a few moments, there in Colorado Springs, he achieved something never before done. He had used the entire planet as a conductor, and sent a pulse through it. In that one moment in the summer of 1899, he made electrical history. That's right, in 1899 - darn near a hundred years ago. Well, you may say to yourself, that's a nice story, and I'm sure George Lucas could make a hell of a move about it, special effects and all. But it's not relevant today. Or isn't it? Hang on to your hat.

    The SDI and the Tesla Coil

    Last month we talked about an amazing hack that Nikola Tesla did - bouncing an electrical wave through the planet, in 1899, and setting the world's record for manmade lightning.

    We've always assumed the ground is an electrical sinkhole. So, with our three-pin plugs we ground everything - the two flat pins in your wall go to electricity (hot and neutral); the third, round pin, goes straight to ground. That third pin is usually hooked with a thick wire to a cold water pipe, which grounds it effectively.

    Tesla proved that you can give that ground a terrific charge, millions of volts of high frequency electricity. (Tesla ran his large coil at 33 Khz). Remember, the lightning surging off his Coil was coming from the wave bouncing back and forth in the planet below. In short, he was modifying the ground's electrical potential, changing it from an electrical sinkhole to an electrical source.


    How much do we owe this genius today? Mad man, I don't think so....
     
  13. Jan 12, 2004 #12
    I agree with Integral. This scheme involves no more than a power distribution network, and a very poor one at that.
    To "charge" the earth with any measurably useful non-local extracting force would require a placement of an earth-charging generation device likely to boggle the imagination, and likely far surpassing any ability we have.
    Furthermore, what would be the point?
    A considerable amount of energy would be required to charge the earth, for one, and the earths exceptionally poor conductivity would create current losses far exceeding the rationality of efficient distribution.
    In my opinion, the idea is dead from the start.
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2004
  14. Jan 13, 2004 #13
    Originally posted by pallidin

    I agree with Integral. This scheme involves no more than a power distribution network, and a very poor one at that.
    To "charge" the earth with any measurably useful non-local extracting force would require a placement of an earth-charging generation device likely to boggle the imagination, and likely far surpassing any ability we have.

    A considerable amount of energy would be required to charge the earth, for one, and the earths exceptionally poor conductivity would create current losses far exceeding the rationality of efficient distribution.


    Actually the earth's mantle is constantly being electrically charged by many external forces such as the grounding by earth's electric users, and many natural forces that have been going on since the formation of this planet such as solar flares. Electricity is constantly being released from the earth by the action of thousands of hourly lightning events around the world sending the earth's charge into the atmosphere.

    Furthermore, what would be the point?

    The point? If some construct could be devised to draw the earth's electric charge from the mantle, how would governments and corporations charge for everyone's access to free unlimited energy sources. The nature of lightning seems to be doing a very efficient job many times a minute around the globe.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...eve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9603726&dopt=Abstract

    In my opinion, the idea is dead from the start.

    Interestingly that is exactly what many physicists said when Boehr came up with a concept known as QM.
     
  15. Jan 13, 2004 #14

    enigma

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    But that sort of charging is disorganized. You can't draw power from the ground after a lightning strike.

    Have you been listening?

    There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

    TANSTAAFL

    Charging the Earth may provide free power for the end users, but it A) Will most certainly NOT be free for the people who do the charging, and B) Would be horribly inefficient due to the resistivity of earth.

    Why would a company spend their money to charge the Earth so other people can feed off of it for free? Why would they use the Earth when power lines provide orders of magnitude lower resistance and power losses are proportional to resistance?

    That doesn't mean that every idea which is dead from the start is revolutionary. The vast majority are merely dead from the start.
     
  16. Jan 13, 2004 #15

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Lightning produces a relatively insignificant amount of electricity. Even if it could be reliably harnessed, it wouldn't do much to help the world energy situation.
     
  17. Jan 13, 2004 #16
    Originally posted by enigma

    But that sort of charging is disorganized. You can't draw power from the ground after a lightning strike. Have you been listening? There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

    After a lightning strike? How do you come to the conclusion that any electrical current charge is disorganized or organized with the earth being a capacitor? The earth having about two orders of magnitude through the transition zone in the depth range 410 to 660 kilome which is propelling a current of quantized electrical charges, electrons, through a load. The heavier this load, i.e. the lower the electrical resistance the more current would be drawn from any point on the earth. Actually there is such a thing as a free lunch when it comes to the irreducible complexity you get for free in your own cellular existence as an organism.

    Charging the Earth may provide free power for the end users, but it A) Will most certainly NOT be free for the people who do the charging, and B) Would be horribly inefficient due to the resistivity of earth.

    Maybe someday, the world's ever increasing need for electricity in all nations (rich and poor) will result in an altruistic consortium of nations using natures own (Energy Towers) physics to supply an endless supply to the betterment of mankind. Albeit the world has never demonstrated any altruistic proclivity toward their fellowman in history.

    Apparently Nikola Tesla had no trouble passing a significant electrical potential through the earth's resistance in the early 1900s. With enough money and the advancement of technology, even the earth's resistivity should eventually be overcome.

    Why would a company spend their money to charge the Earth so other people can feed off of it for free? Why would they use the Earth when power lines provide orders of magnitude lower resistance and power losses are proportional to resistance?

    When in the course of advanced technology, power lines provide a lower order of electrical potential than an earth mantle with significantly reduced resistance, then mankind might see its way to feeding and supplying power to the entire earth.

    But not in our days......

    That doesn't mean that every idea which is dead from the start is revolutionary. The vast majority are merely dead from the start.

    I have learned to NEVER say the words; always, forever or never when it comes to the potentials in the mind of man.
     
  18. Jan 13, 2004 #17
    Originally posted by russ_watters

    Lightning produces a relatively insignificant amount of electricity. Even if it could be reliably harnessed, it wouldn't do much to help the world energy situation.

    Lightning creates a potential difference of 2x107 to 108 volts between the ground and the bottom of the cloud, the ground being at a higher potential. The resultant electric field is in the upward direction and has a value of 104 volts/meter to 3x104 volts/meter. The average charge released per flash is about 20 coulomb. Hence, about 1000 to 2000 storms are required to occur (and they do occur) per day to maintain the energy balance in the atmosphere.

    So this amount of electricity is insignificant?

    I never implied that lightning be bound into something like a superconductor, simply the prelightning state of the earth's potential be harnessed long before it dissipates in lightning bolts.
     
  19. Jan 13, 2004 #18

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    HERE is an interesting site - coincidentally about tesla and harnessing lightning power. A key quote:
    I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume the raw data is accurate. But there is a problem with his conclusion: he doesn't know the difference between power and energy (kW vs kWh). 3 billion kW is indeed a lot of power: a typical nuclear reactor produces about 2 billion kW. But a lightning strike only lasts about a milisecond. So 4,000 in one day will only give you 138,900 kWh or a continuous output of 5,780 kW (please check my math).

    So even if you could harness EVERY lightning strike in the US, you'd only get a total of 1/300,0000 th of the power of a single reactor (in the US we have about 300 of them). Trivial.
     
  20. Jan 13, 2004 #19
    Originally posted by russ_watters

    HERE is an interesting site -

    coincidentally about tesla and harnessing lightning power. A key quote: I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume the raw data is accurate. But there is a problem with his conclusion: he doesn't know the difference between power and energy (kW vs kWh). 3 billion kW is indeed a lot of power: a typical nuclear reactor produces about 2 billion kW. But a lightning strike only lasts about a milisecond. So 4,000 in one day will only give you 138,900 kWh or a continuous output of 5,780 kW (please check my math). So even if you could harness EVERY lightning strike in the US, you'd only get a total of 1/300,0000 th of the power of a single reactor (in the US we have about 300 of them). Trivial.


    Please understand that harnessing lightning is not what I am asserting.

    According to current stats, over 10 million bolts of lightning occur each day in the world. That’s 100 zaps per second or every 40 seconds 3 billion kW X 4000 which you say is very trivial when you are looking at a millisecond output per strike.

    But if you were somehow able to harness earth's electrical power source prior to those 10 million lightning strikes/day on a continuous basis, how would those 300 +/- reactor's power rank?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 13, 2004
  21. Jan 13, 2004 #20

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Well, the multiplication is pretty simple - assuming we can harness every single one of those lightning strikes or the energy before the strike (and assuming your 10 million is accurate - it sounds high, but I'll let it go). (10,000,000/4,000)* (1/300,0000) = 1/120th of one reactor.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Free Worldwide Energy - Nichola Tesla
  1. About free energy (Replies: 4)

  2. Tesla turbie question! (Replies: 11)

Loading...