Milan,
Pleas note I never claimed Tesla didn't know what he was doing, just that it is a possibility. Every scientist in the frontline is necessarily dealing with the unknown to some extent. I am sure Marie Curie also knew what she was doing, to the extent it was reasonably possible for her to know. Even several decades after her groundbreaking research many physicist still didn't realize how dangerous it was and sometims made practical jokes by giving each other "sunburns" using radioactive material. Similar for X-ray. It is said that almost all the nurses who worked on the X-ray deprtatment at one hospital in Stockholm in the 1940's developed stomach cancer later in life. Of course nobody would have exposed them to such danger if anybody had realize it back then.
Similarly, how many thousands patients have died over the years because physicians have had to experiment with treatments for things they still had no knowledge of how to treat. It was unavoidable for the advance of medicine that they made dangerous experiments and that some patients got cured and others died.
I never in any way intended to diminish the excellent scientist Tesla or suggest that he was stupid of foolish.
Pleas note I never claimed Tesla didn't know what he was doing, just that it is a possibility. Every scientist in the frontline is necessarily dealing with the unknown to some extent. I am sure Marie Curie also knew what she was doing, to the extent it was reasonably possible for her to know. Even several decades after her groundbreaking research many physicist still didn't realize how dangerous it was and sometims made practical jokes by giving each other "sunburns" using radioactive material. Similar for X-ray. It is said that almost all the nurses who worked on the X-ray deprtatment at one hospital in Stockholm in the 1940's developed stomach cancer later in life. Of course nobody would have exposed them to such danger if anybody had realize it back then.
Similarly, how many thousands patients have died over the years because physicians have had to experiment with treatments for things they still had no knowledge of how to treat. It was unavoidable for the advance of medicine that they made dangerous experiments and that some patients got cured and others died.
I never in any way intended to diminish the excellent scientist Tesla or suggest that he was stupid of foolish.
But like many great scientists, he often crossed the border into crackpottery. Like Pauling or Josephson or Crookes. No bad reflection on him, his contributions are legend (and he gets a unit named after him!), it's just that there's something of a Tesla cult out there based on his, ummmm, not-so-great ideas.
SY said:
Switching to another famous person. Since you are a physicist (I think), do you know if there is any truth to the story that the otherwise very bright Heisenberg tried to start a nuclear reaction in a cave somewhere in Germany during the war, not realizing how dangerous the experiment was? Or is that just a false rumour? BTW, I am not capable to judge if it would even be possible to get a nuclear reaction started under such circumstances. It is also said that he later told Bohr about this experiment, making Bohr absolutely furious about Heisenbergs stupidity.
SY said:
Well, I meant you were trained as a physicist. I know you design wine corks nowadays.
Yes, I also thought the story sounded unlikely, but I don't have enough knowledge of nuclear physics to judge if it would even be possible. BTW, this story seems to appear in a play about Heisinberg meeting Bohr in Copenhagen some time in 1941/42. AFAIK this meeting actually took place in reality, but how much else of it is based on reality, I have no idea of.
SY said:
OK, but wasn't it least an improvement over the Rutherford model at the time it was introduced. I guess Bohr couldn't possibly foresee that QM would make his model somewhat obsolete a few years later. But I am on thin ice here. I don't even quite remember exactly what those two models look like and how they differ.
I'm interested in anything Tesla did that was considered crackpot. New stuff is in the dark coners, not the places you've already looked. You know that, Sy. On the other hand, I've no idea what it is (or I might, duunno) that you guys speak of.
And what was that particular thing or avenue? I'm all curious-aquiver now.
Spill da beans.
And what was that particular thing or avenue? I'm all curious-aquiver now.
Spill da beans.
SY said:I don't debate creationism or Tesla cults.
I can agree with your stance on debating just about any religion over the net. As far as "Tesla Cults", or even worse, the "Edison Cults" I've had the misfortune to run in to....Yikes!
I'd also agree that along with the normal "Students" and people just wanting to know/understand the "Who/What/Why" of things......There sure are some Wacky people in this world!.....
Me, I'm just crazy!
Tall Shadow
so I guess I have to google tesla cults?
I'd imagine that Edison Cults would be rather boring. Awful meetings, I'd wager. Reminiscent of Vogon Poetry readings.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Don't you believe in an ineffiable truth?"
"You mean Google?"
I'd imagine that Edison Cults would be rather boring. Awful meetings, I'd wager. Reminiscent of Vogon Poetry readings.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Don't you believe in an ineffiable truth?"
"You mean Google?"
KBK said:so I guess I have to google tesla cults?
I don't know what would come up, but imagine every "Free Energy" & "Perpetual Motion" crazy'ness that you have ever seen, heard about or read x10!KBK said:
You almost cost me a new monitor with that last line...
Actually, a good many (if not most) of the present day schools teach about "The Wizard of Menlow Park" as he is/was called. They tell of all of the great "Inventions" that he "Thought up", when he was only (IMHO) actually a mildly inventive man, more prone to stealing his "Great discoveries", or standing on the shoulders of giants to reach them...and then only by using "brute-force inventing"...then when finished, disavowing any of their contributions.
As i found quoted one day looking through Lindsay Books
(Loosely transcribed here)
"Don't beat your head against it till it works like Edison would, do some calculations first, like Tesla."
KBK said:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Don't you believe in an ineffiable truth?"
"You mean Google?"
Like I said, while I can agree that none of the current "Religions" have "it" correct.
I (A.) Can't believe that there in the VASTNESS of space that there isn't something "Better/Higher/More God-Like" than us.
And (B.) We have any where near an Idea of what is really going on in the Universe.
And Finally...
NEVER try to argue religion over the net......I can't think of a bigger waste of time that that.........except maybe....SOCCER!
Just Kidding! Europe!!!!Tall Shadow
back on topic ...
When I was designing electric fence energisers we used a current / time curve called the 'C2 Line'. Under was 'safe', over was not.
Basically it related pulse duration to peak current. IIRC the maximum duration was limited to 10ms at some mA, the maximum current was 15.5A for 100us. The line represented the current/time combination that had a 1 in 170,000 chance of causing fibrillation. This was based on a human body resistance of 500R - though in practise it was more like 800R.
The biggest energiser I designed would deliver a 10kV, 100uS pulse, with 36J backing it up. Right up at the C2 limit ...
When I was designing electric fence energisers we used a current / time curve called the 'C2 Line'. Under was 'safe', over was not.
Basically it related pulse duration to peak current. IIRC the maximum duration was limited to 10ms at some mA, the maximum current was 15.5A for 100us. The line represented the current/time combination that had a 1 in 170,000 chance of causing fibrillation. This was based on a human body resistance of 500R - though in practise it was more like 800R.
The biggest energiser I designed would deliver a 10kV, 100uS pulse, with 36J backing it up. Right up at the C2 limit ...
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.