Slashdot Mirror


Tesla's New York Laboratory Up For Sale

Ziest points us to NY Times piece on the battle over the site of Nicola Tesla's last failed experiment. Tesla's laboratory, called Wardenclyffe, located on Long Island, has been put up for sale by its current owner, Agfa Corp. Local residents and Tesla followers were alarmed by a real estate agent's promise that the land, listed at $1.6 million, could "be delivered fully cleared and level." Preservationists want to create a Tesla museum and education center at Wardenclyffe, anchored by the laboratory designed by Tesla's friend, Stanford White, a celebrated architect. "In 1901, Nikola Tesla began work on a global system of giant towers meant to relay through the air not only news, stock reports and even pictures but also, unbeknown to investors such as J. Pierpont Morgan, free electricity for one and all. It was the inventor's biggest project, and his most audacious. The first tower rose on rural Long Island and, by 1903, stood more than 18 stories tall. ... But the system failed for want of money, and at least partly for scientific viability. Tesla never finished his prototype tower and was forced to abandon its adjoining laboratory."

43 of 183 comments (clear)

  1. If past performance is a current indicator... by zifr · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We'll level the place. We still can't figure out how some of his projects worked and much of his work was seized after his death, according to the History channel. Might as well level it and trash any chance at learning his knowledge while we're at it. Brilliant man.

    1. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Also, a loon.

      Nothing there anymore except the poisoned ground.
      There really isn't anything to learn there anymore.
      It's not like there going to level the building and store rooms full of stuff.
      OTOH, a pool of people that wanted to turn it into a museum could probably be brought together for some fund Raisers.

      Hell, you do it. Contact the real estate agent and find out what kind of time you have. Get some on line organization going and hit all the Tesla Forums.

      You would be the first person to do this type of thing successfully. If you really want to save it, there is no reason you can't give it a good effort. None.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Informative

      Umm. He was a loon and we do know how his projects worked and didn't.
      They where all interesting but as with many brilliant but crazy people most where not practical and none of them are past our understanding today.
      His lab is still there as are the foundations of the tower. Simple answer declare it a historical site and it becomes just about impossible to destroy no matter who owns it.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    3. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by mazarin5 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My take on it was:

      REALTOR: We'll sell this historic land for $1.6 million dollars
      CONDO BUILDER: I'll buy that
      REALTOR: Do you want us to demolish this historic site also?
      MUSEUM BUILDER: Oh hell no! $2 million!

      --
      Fnord.
    4. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by fishbowl · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, if the damage hasn't already been done, there's a price tag on preservation: $1.6 million. Not much more than an equivalently sized residential property in the area.

      What's the issue again?

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    5. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Informative

      I suggest you read more about his latter life. He was a loon. Actually I know a lot about his projects. My favorite is the Telsla turbine. It is a terrible turbine for air. It makes a great pump for solid-fluid mixtures but as a turbine it is no where near what more traditional turbines can do.
      His power transmission also just doesn't work. His work on AC power transmission and his AC electric motor. Brilliant.
      Time travel, death beams, free power... Loonie.
      It is a shame that so many of his fans do him a disservice by pushing his fantasy achievements.
      They are as loonie as was in his later life. His decline into mental illness should be forgotten and his real achivments should be remembered.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    6. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Both should be remembered. It's important to remember that no matter how brilliant some humans are, they're still human. Genius in a specific pursuit does not imply genius in all pursuits.

    7. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 3, Funny

      REALTOR: We'll sell this historic land for $1.6 million dollars
      CONDO BUILDER: I'll buy that
      REALTOR: Do you want us to demolish this historic site also?
      MUSEUM BUILDER: Oh hell no! $2 million!

      Well, shit! Dr. Evil doesn't even get a say in this kind of real estate market!

    8. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by RevWaldo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A loon who understood how alternating current works.

      Unlike some other loon inventors back then.

      Lookin' at you, Thomas Alva.

      (Topsy the Elephant, RIP)

    9. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by MeatBag+PussRocket · · Score: 5, Insightful

      you do realize that many of the technologies mentioned in the article do exist today (like wireless video transmission, stock quotes etc.) but in 1903 few people if any could explain how to make that work. and the other ideas, about providing wireless electricity? those arent so far fetched either

      2008: Intel reproduces Nikola Tesla's 1894 implementation and Prof. John Boys group's 1988's experiments by wirelessly powering a light bulb with 75% efficiency. wikipedia.org (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_power_transmission)

      just because you and 99% of people dont understand something dosent make it a hoax. i mean hell look at how many people dont realise the internet isint some kind of truck.

      --
      i wage a holy war against the apostrophe.
    10. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I suggest you read more about his latter life. He was a loon.

      Like many innovators. Clinically speaking, he was obsessive-compulsive, and this had some very specific effects on his activities but did not prevent him from inventing a dozen things in the room I'm in right now (including radio and flourescent lighting, of course). Edison, by contrast, was a mild meglomaniac and paranoid.

      Actually I know a lot about his projects.

      Well, let's see about that....

      My favorite is the Telsla turbine. It is a terrible turbine for air.

      The one I built works rather well as a air-powered motor. Oddly enough, it works like Tesla said it does (not like the modern Tesla worshippers claim, though - it won't power a spaceship to mars).

      It makes a great pump for solid-fluid mixtures but as a turbine it is no where near what more traditional turbines can do.

      I'm not sure you know what you're talking about here. You can pump mud with a "Tesla turbine" type pump, but Tesla had some other pump designs that worked better. Also, what do you consider a "traditional turbine"? There is no single accepted turbine design, nor was there in Tesla's time. (I'm partial to the Loeffel Francis myself, but it's not all that popular outside the hydropower field.)

      His power transmission also just doesn't work.

      "Just doesn't work?" Since he was not able to complete his work, yet was able to light up lamps from a quarter mile away and throw mile-long lightning bolts, I think "just doesn't work" is a bit of a facile dismissal from an Internet naysayer.

      His work on AC power transmission and his AC electric motor. Brilliant.

      AC power is a doddle, but yes, the universal brushless motor is indeed brilliant.

      Time travel, death beams, free power... Loonie.

      Time travel? Never heard that one. And of course, being killed by a beam of coherent energy will never happen (oh, wait, it did? Never mind).

      Here's all you need to know about Tesla's insight: In 1915 he tried to convince everyone that burning petroleum was wasteful and foolish, and that we should develop sources of energy that relied on the great movements of the cosmos - spinning planets, cycling winds, geothermal, solar radiation, etc... and people said "what a loonie!"

      It is a shame that so many of his fans do him a disservice by pushing his fantasy achievements.
      They are as loonie as was in his later life. His decline into mental illness should be forgotten and his real achivments should be remembered.

      We got no disagreements there, bud. But he was never any more subject to mental illness than the inventor of Bittorrent - his madness did not significantly affect his work, and may have helped him to focus on the insights that others blithely dismiss as insanity.

    11. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by carlzum · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm familiar with the area from my childhood, but couldn't recall anything on the site other than dead grass and a dilapidated parking lot. I read through the article and searched the web looking for remnants of the tower or something and found one article on what may be of value there. According to the 2002 article the 94x94 ft. lab is still in good condition. I would like to see Agfa sublet the property and at least donate that building. After all, they did poison the groundwater (well, the company they acquired did), it seems like a reasonable goodwill gesture to the community.

    12. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by mangu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Intel reproduces Nikola Tesla's 1894 implementation and Prof. John Boys group's 1988's experiments by wirelessly powering a light bulb with 75% efficiency

      The problem is 75% of which power?

      Unfortunately, it was 75% of received power, not transmitted power.

      About 99.99% of the transmitted power went to other directions, it heated neighboring rocks and nothing else.

      Unless you have a directional antenna, any sort of wireless power transmission will waste a lot of power. And, to have a directional antenna, you need to know in which direction your receiver will be. Then it starts to look pretty much like a wired power transmission setup...

    13. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by meepzorb · · Score: 4, Funny
      You would be the first person to do this type of thing successfully. If you really want to save it, there is no reason you can't give it a good effort. None.

      Ah, I love the smell of hipster nihilism in the morning. It smells like... defeat!

    14. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by ae1294 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What the heck is your point?
      The guy came up with the idea way back in 1894 so who really cares about its efficacy..

      Everything we plug in today has Nikola Tesla's I.P. in it. AC transmission won the current war over the DC method.

      Anyone who try's to belittle Tesla's work really has no idea what they are talking about. But yeah he had lots of crazy ideas but it was 1894 for god sake! Everyone who has ever invented something useful also probably had at least 100 bad ideas as well..

      ae

    15. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's like microwaving everyone in NY just so you can send a decent power output to Texas from Long Island?

      You say that like it's a bad thing.

      --
      Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
    16. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by SlashWombat · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, but we owe AC power, its generation, etc to Tesla. He also kicked Edison's arse (A good thing IMHO). It should be remembered that Edison was a well known patent troll of the late 19th century, who patented many of his employee's inventions under his own name.

    17. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by c6gunner · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The guy came up with the idea way back in 1894 so who really cares about its efficacy.

      What the heck is YOUR point? It wouldn't matter if he came up with it in 1498 - a crappy idea is a crappy idea, regardless of when it's thought up. If your "invention" requires 50,000 killowatts to power a friggin lightbulb, there's a bit of a problem there, especially when you're making use of a well known effect rather that inventing something new. Induction was discovered in 1831, so it's not like Tesla was discovering a new aspect of the physical world - he simply made use (in an extremely inefficient way) of a principle discovered by Faraday.

      Everything we plug in today has Nikola Tesla's I.P. in it. AC transmission won the current war over the DC method.

      Which is not necessarily a good thing. The only advantage of AC current is that it can be easily modified by transformers. Long-distance power transmission (between grids) is DC because it doesn't require phase synchronization and it's less wasteful, and the difference adds up nicely over longer distances. AC didn't replace DC - the two systems are complimentary.

      Also, while Tesla did invent a three phase AC generator, he didn't exactly come up with the idea of AC current, nor was he the only one working on it.

      Anyone who try's to belittle Tesla's work really has no idea what they are talking about.

      Anyone who tries to deify a mad scientist isn't firing on all cylinders.

      Everyone who has ever invented something useful also probably had at least 100 bad ideas as well.

      Exactly - the problem here is that the Tesla Cult like to pretend that his 100 bad ideas were actually 100 GREAT ideas which we "can't understand yet". Which is, to be blunt, bullshit. You can idolize the man for the great things he did, if you want, as long as you're not trying to prop up his shitty ideas at the same time.

    18. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 5, Informative

      Tesla must have been on some shit. Like mushrooms or some other psychotic food additives. It would help creativity, but gets one a bit loony too. Like, he did not only dream of powering light bulbs from a few meters, but providing free electricity to all the farmers in the whole world from his towers on Long Island. That's kinda loony, don't you agree? It's like microwaving everyone in NY just so you can send a decent power output to Texas from Long Island?

      If you had ever read anything about what he was trying to do, you'd realize that he was trying to create electromagnetic waves that would travel across the entire globe, and feed the amplitude of that wave by precise timing of the bursts. The technology he was experimenting with was seized by the US government, and is currently being explored in the HAARP project.

      The wealth of most of the northeastern United States can be traced to the Niagara Falls dam, and the vast amounts of energy it provides without the need for human effort. Which means it can be traced directly to Tesla. He's one of the greatest benefactors of the human race in recorded history. You might want to remember that when you're pissing on his name, and maybe question the way you calculate the measure of a man.

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    19. Re:If past performance is a current indicator... by Civil_Disobedient · · Score: 4, Funny

      The reason it can't be done is found in Maxwell's equations.

      That's not the reason it can't be done.

      The reason it can't be done is because even if it were possible, it would be impossible to meter.

  2. Article text by amicusNYCL · · Score: 5, Informative

    Subscription-free, minus the pictures and maps.

    A Battle to Preserve a Visionary's Bold Failure

    By WILLIAM J. BROAD
    Published: May 4, 2009

    In 1901, Nikola Tesla began work on a global system of giant towers meant to relay through the air not only news, stock reports and even pictures but also, unbeknown to investors such as J. Pierpont Morgan, free electricity for one and all.

    It was the inventor's biggest project, and his most audacious.

    The first tower rose on rural Long Island and, by 1903, stood more than 18 stories tall. One midsummer night, it emitted a dull rumble and proceeded to hurl bolts of electricity into the sky. The blinding flashes, The New York Sun reported, "seemed to shoot off into the darkness on some mysterious errand."

    But the system failed for want of money, and at least partly for scientific viability. Tesla never finished his prototype tower and was forced to abandon its adjoining laboratory.

    Today, a fight is looming over the ghostly remains of that site, called Wardenclyffe - what Tesla authorities call the only surviving workplace of the eccentric genius who dreamed countless big dreams while pioneering wireless communication and alternating current. The disagreement began recently after the property went up for sale in Shoreham, N.Y.

    A science group on Long Island wants to turn the 16-acre site into a Tesla museum and education center, and hopes to get the land donated to that end. But the owner, the Agfa Corporation, says it must sell the property to raise money in hard economic times. The company's real estate broker says the land, listed at $1.6 million, can "be delivered fully cleared and level," a statement that has thrown the preservationists into action.

    The ruins of Wardenclyffe include the tower's foundation and the large brick laboratory, designed by Tesla's friend Stanford White, the celebrated architect.

    "It's hugely important to protect this site," said Marc J. Seifer, author of "Wizard," a Tesla biography. "He's an icon. He stands for what humans are supposed to do - honor nature while using high technology to harness its powers."

    Recently, New York State echoed that judgment. The commissioner of historic preservation wrote Dr. Seifer on behalf of Gov. David A. Paterson to back Wardenclyffe's preservation and listing in the National Register of Historic Places.

    On Long Island, Tesla enthusiasts vow to obtain the land one way or another, saying that saving a symbol of Tesla's accomplishments would help restore the visionary to his rightful place as an architect of the modern age.

    "A lot of his work was way ahead of his time," said Jane Alcorn, president of the Tesla Science Center, a private group in Shoreham that is seeking to acquire Wardenclyffe.

    Dr. Ljubo Vujovic, president of the Tesla Memorial Society of New York, said destroying the old lab "would be a terrible thing for the United States and the world. It's a piece of history."

    Tesla, who lived from 1856 to 1943, made bitter enemies who dismissed some of his claims as exaggerated, helping tarnish his reputation in his lifetime. He was part recluse, part showman. He issued publicity photos (actually double exposures) showing him reading quietly in his laboratory amid deadly flashes.

    Today, his work tends to be poorly known among scientists, though some call him an intuitive genius far ahead of his peers. Socially, his popularity has soared, elevating him to cult status.

    Books and Web sites abound. Wikipedia says the inventor obtained at least 700 patents. YouTube has several Tesla videos, including one of a break-in at Wardenclyffe. A rock band calls itself Tesla. An electric car company backed by Google's founders calls itself Tesla Motors.

    Larry Page, Google's co-founder, sees the creator's life as a cautionary tale. "It's a sad, sad story," Mr. Page told Fortune magazine last year. The inventor "couldn't commercialize anything. He could barely fund his own research."

    Wardenclyffe epitomized that kind o

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  3. Re:Can you cut down on the long words, please? by uberjack · · Score: 5, Funny

    Then someone will assume it's a Labrador Retriever, and PETA will get involved.

  4. Re:Someone with electrical knowledge explain this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Imagine the upper layer of the atmosphere as a copper shell. Any high voltage alternated current deposited there could be harnessed by a sufficiently high tower that could "touch" the copper shell.

    Square law doesn't apply because its a conductor that captures the wave and prevents it from spreading in 3 dimensions just like it doesn't apply in wires.

    All the viability is in how closely ionized upper atmosphere resembles a copper shell and also in how hard it is to effectively "touch" this layer with lots of air in between you and it.

  5. Re:Someone with electrical knowledge explain this by NicknamesAreStupid · · Score: 4, Informative

    See http://blogs.intel.com/research/2008/10/rattner_the_promise_of_wireles.php . Tesla was, obviouly, much omre ambitious.

  6. Paging Dean Kamen by Loadmaster · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Seems like this would be right up his alley. He always said he wants scientists to be appreciated like sports stars. Here's his chance to enshrine one of the most famous and far thinking of them all.

  7. Is this it? by slummy · · Score: 3, Informative

    It appears there's a circular spot that had something there...

    Tesla's Laboratory?

  8. Re:Someone with electrical knowledge explain this by geekoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Magic.

    He did a lot of incredibly smart things, but some of his stuff was just loony.
    That might not be fair, perhaps experimentally ignorant. But with that time period and electricity, everyone was.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  9. Re:Can you cut down on the long words, please? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    You really want a site that often covers technical issues to avoid polysyllabic words? Okay, I'll try:

    Your post makes me sad.

  10. i will buy it by ifeelswine · · Score: 3, Funny

    and use it to figure out how to manufacture a pork samich without a bone in it. i will be rich.

  11. Get congress to Earmark it. by tjstork · · Score: 4, Funny

    Seriously... Blowing a couple of million bucks on the site, along with perhaps a reconstructed museum and tower, is honestly a good way to waste Federal money. There's a big war bill coming out of the House, and get the New York delegation to stuff some money in there for a national museum, and while we're at it, have the President declare it as a national heritage site.

    There will be some dopes at the National Review that will bitch about it, but even hard righties like me love national parks and the story of American industrialization and research. It's a lot better than Woodstock. I'd plug it on my right wing site, for sure.

    Come on libs, spend some money and save this place!

    --
    This is my sig.
  12. If wishes were horses... by earlymon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'd ride mine down to cash in my winning lottery ticket, buy the land, and endow part of the fund needed to launch a world-class museum. You can visit Edison's lab in Greenfield Villiage (Henry Ford Musuem, etc) in Dearborn, Michigan - which, if you ever get the chance, do it - you won't be disappointed, I guarantee.

    It would be shame if Tesla doesn't become similarly remembered.

    --
    Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
  13. I think the idea was to couple to the ionosphere.. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How would these towers effectively transmit electricity? I'm having trouble seeing how this would work effectively given the inverse square law.

    I'm not Tesla but I can take a guess.

    I think the idea was to couple to the ionosphere - treating the conductive ground and one of the layers of the conductive ionosphere as the two walls of a resonant cavity and pumping one of its resonances. The energy would not propagate away into space but would stay in the cavity until removed by a load or resistive losses due to the imperfect conduction of the cavity walls and its contents (dirt, buildings, birds, people, ...). It would be an extremely high impedance - enormous voltage (because of a nontrivial voltage gradient - in the ballpark of the atmospheric DC bias - multiplied by an enormous height) combined with minuscule currents through the tiny (though physically large) apacitances.

    At the relatively low (compared to radio) frequencies involved you wouldn't have appreciable currents in anything that wasn't also a resonator and strongly coupled to the cavity (by being tall and broad at the top), i.e. a "raised capacitance" (Tesla's term for that big sphere-ish conductive shape on the top of the structure) and a big coil between it and ground, forming a tank circuit tuned to the carrier frequency and cavity resonance.

    Buildings and metal towers might have nontrivial unintentional currents. But they'd be reactive currents because of the low resistance of the buildings' structural members. So they wouldn't suck out much power - just shift the phase of the power carrier signal in the area near them.

    But a resonant circuit between a big raised conductor and ground would be able to efficiently power out of the cavity and couple it to a secondary coil around the main coil - shifting the voltage/current ratio from the extraordinarily high impedance of the transmission system to a lower impedance more convenient for use (though still at the carrier frequency so probably in need of rectification or other frequency conversion).

    At least I think that may be what he intended. Whether it would work or not is still "up in the air", pun intended.

    One nice thing: At the frequency involved you shouldn't be interfering with any existing information services. If the losses are low enough for it to be practical for power transmission it would be constantly "ringing" from lighting excitation. (Or maybe that's the ELF band where the US is talking to submerged submarines...)

    (Heh. Thinking about this I just recognized the details of the broadcast power that was a throwaway background item in Eric Frank Russel's novel _Wasp_. Cars were "dinos" with the car body for "raised capacitance" and a dynamotor for frequency conversion. Disconnecting the "intake lead" and striking it against an "earth terminal" would produce a thin thread of arc if the distant power transmitter was on. And the energy density necessary to operate an automobile on this was completely ignored, of course. B-) )

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  14. Cats, hats, and wolverines... by denzacar · · Score: 4, Funny

    The building's dark interior was littered with beer cans and broken bottles. Flashlights revealed no trace of the original equipment, except for a surprise on the second floor. There in the darkness loomed four enormous tanks, each the size of a small car. Their sides were made of thick metal and their seams heavily riveted, like those of an old destroyer or battleship. The Agfa consultant leading the tour called them giant batteries.

    "Look up there," said the consultant, Ralph Passantino, signaling with his flashlight. "There's a hatch up there. It was used to get into the tanks to service them."

    Tesla authorities appear to know little of the big tanks, making them potential clues to the inventor's original plans.

    Boy are they going to be surprised when they open them and find hundreds of hats, dead cats and human corpses with huge bone claws on their hands crammed in there.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  15. Re:Radio principle by geekoid · · Score: 4, Informative

    What? yes, every person that listens takes power. It's a minute amount of power but it does. In this case it weakens the range of the broadcast.

    Do you even think about what you are saying? If that where true we would all be powering our devices from radio signal. You are saying 50K watts of power can power infinite devices, ir be broad cast to an infinite amount of radios with degrading the signal.

    THINK!

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  16. Re:Someone with electrical knowledge explain this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    while point-to-point transmissions of a couple hundred watts, with lousy efficiency, tuned directional antennas, and an EE to man the thing, are still in the realm of laboratory/trade show curiosity.

    Did and done back in 1975.

    34 kilowatts, 1.5 kilometers with an efficency of over 82%. That's hardy "a couple hundred watts, with lousy efficiency".

  17. amazing how this news keeps changeing by lunatick · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I work across the street from his old lab (on Tesla st no less) The place is in serious disrepair, but it would be nice to see it preserved. His transmission towers are in wreckage all over the DEC property on the south side of 25a in rocky point.

    Last I heard 1 week ago the museum was a go, guess things change.

    --
    The Lunatick, Carpe Corpus!
  18. Re:Someone with electrical knowledge explain this by JWSmythe · · Score: 4, Informative

        I think the better example is how ham radio, or UHF stations can bounce in the atmosphere to reach long distances.

        For example when I was a kid in West central Florida, if the weather was right, we could watch TV from Texas with a regular mast mounted antenna (50' tall). We required the same antenna to pick up UHF and VHF stations in the next major city, approximately 100 miles away.

        I'm familiar with Tesla's work. It's all really interesting stuff.

        There really isn't anything left at the site, which is a terrible shame. It could be recreated, but would cost a fortune, and without Tesla there to make it work (or work out the bugs), it's seriously doubtful the casual hobbyist could make a working replica.

        His wireless power on a global scale idea would require much more than just the Wardenclyffe site. The plans indicated many transmitters globally. This would never happen, as it takes the control away from too many huge money making industries. No government would allow it either. During a military operation, one of the first strategic moves is to disable the infrastructure (power, communications, water, and transportation). Once an enemy is blinded, the aggressive forces have a significant advantage.

        I was always curious about long term effects. Non-ionizing radiation is proven to cause various illnesses. For example, some schools were built on cheap property in close proximity to large power transmission lines. That caused an unusually high rate of leukemia in the students. Prolonged exposure (living or going to school) at 200 meters raised the chance of getting leukemia by 70%. 200 meters to 500 meters raised it by 20%. Obviously, no research was done with Tesla's unfinished work. And for those asking for citations, search Google for "power lines leukemia" .

        Some of Tesla's earlier work in Colorado Springs caused sparks to jump out of water faucets and from peoples feet as they were walking. It would have been interesting to see, but I'm sure quite unnerving after a while. I don't know the Wardenclyffe facility would have caused the same effect, or if he corrected it by possibly changing the frequency that he worked at.

        The only people with enough documentation to know are the US Government, who seized all of his work materials when he died.

    --
    Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
  19. Re:Someone with electrical knowledge explain this by darkstar949 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I am not an electrical engineer (IANAEE) but I have a read a couple of books on Tesla and struggled through some of the papers he wrote and one thing that seems to be constant is that he was way ahead of his time. However, reading through some of the annotated papers something that stands out is that he was actually working with some stuff that we didn't even have the correct terminology for and that Tesla seems to be a lot more of an intuitive experimentalist than someone that worked with electrical theory. Thus, this tends to mean two things, to me at least, in regards to Wardenclyffe, namely that the only person that would likely know what Tesla was planning on doing is Tesla and there is a pretty good chance that people might also be assuming that Wardenclyffe was intended to do more than it was meant for.

    I would have to get the books out, but I seem to recall that Wardenclyffe was partly a proof-of-concept demonstration based upon his Colorado Springs, CO experiments so I find it hard to believe that it wouldn't work like he intended. Also, one of his papers on the wireless transmission of electricity explained that a series of towers similar to Wardenclyffe would be needed throughout the world in order to achieve his goals.

    However, I am willing to concede that the plans might not have worked out as Tesla had hoped for even if he did not encounter the financial issues due to a lack of full understanding of electrical theory. All told though, it would be a shame to have museums dedicated to Edison here in the US, but you have to the Tesla Museum in Serbia if you want to learn about him outside of books.

  20. C'mon, folks! by Anachragnome · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This perhaps the single greatest opportunity ever to cross paths with Slashdot!

    If we each pitch in a buck a piece...

    Can you imagine the fun a few million /.ers can have with this stuff?

    Projects/experiments can be decided democratically (!) via the moderating system and we can further fund the entire project from the click-throughs generated by poster signatures.

  21. Re:Someone with electrical knowledge explain this by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Google for "power lines leukemia"

    There's a big difference between searching google

    ...and searching google scholar. Have a look ;)

  22. Re:Someone with electrical knowledge explain this by iron-kurton · · Score: 4, Funny

    The plans indicated many transmitters globally. This would never happen, as it takes the control away from too many huge money making industries. No government would allow it either.

    He tried to get it funded by JP Morgan. One day, he got a telegraph:

    "No interest in wireless power. Nowhere to put the meter."

    --
    Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine -- Robert C. Gallagher
  23. Re:Someone with electrical knowledge explain this by iron-kurton · · Score: 3, Interesting

    even if he did not encounter the financial issues due to a lack of full understanding of electrical theory

    His financial troubles were caused by a much more wealthy and sinister Edison whose inferior design did not match up to Tesla's. Edison constantly and consistently tried to undermine Tesla evidenced with the famous plug-a-cat-into-ac-adapter demonstration. There is also speculation that Edison has something to do with Tesla's lab mysteriously bursting into flames.

    In the early days when Tesla first moved to the US, He partnered with Edison only to have his plans stolen and the promised research money never delivered.

    Where Tesla was an inventor, Edison was a businessman. To me, Edison having a museum is like Warren Buffet or Donald Trump having one, a waste of good museum real estate.

    --
    Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine -- Robert C. Gallagher
  24. Re:Someone with electrical knowledge explain this by julesh · · Score: 4, Informative

    Prolonged exposure (living or going to school) at 200 meters raised the chance of getting leukemia by 70%. 200 meters to 500 meters raised it by 20%. [...] And for those asking for citations, search Google for "power lines leukemia" .

    I did. Half of the results I got were of the "study finds no link between power lines, leukemia" type. The rest seemed to be written by internet nuts with no clue what they were talking about. Assuming then you meant to search without the quotes, I repeated the search. This time I found more that substantiate what you said, but realising that half of them didn't know what they were talking about I repeated it on google scholar (as should anyone interested in what actual scientific research on a subject says).

    Results: "no relationship was found between leukemia and electric power line configurations", "Residence near high-voltage lines did not increase risk", [test subjects who lived] within 300 metres [of a power line showed a] relative risk [with] 95% confidence interval [of one kind of leukemia of] 0.8-3.5 [, or for another] 0.7-3.8 [, or if exposure was prolonged] 1.0-4.6 [or] 0.9-4.7" (i.e., for those who don't understand how to interpret that last one, no statistically significant effects -- note that this is the study that's usually cited _in favour_ of arguments about power lines causing leukemia). "the risk was not significantly associated with either residential magnetic-field levels ", "The study provides [...] no support for an association between leukemia and [magnetic field exposure]", "the results suggest that typical magnetic fields of high-voltage power lines are not an important cause of leukemia in adults", "These results provide little support for a relation between power-frequency EMF exposure and risk of childhood leukemia", "For residential exposure >= 0.2 uT, the relative risk for leukemia was estimated at .. 95% confidence interval 0.8-2.2" (i.e. not statistically significant). That's the first page of results finished with; I don't see any evidence fdor your assertion of a 70% increase in risk, and I would be cautious at claiming even that there's a link. Google scholar selects widely cited papers first, and papers with the most provocative results are likely to be the most widely cited. Given the number of studies that have been conducted on this subject, we'd expect at least some to come up with postive results based on random variation. That none of the ones I've looked at have even had statistically significant results suggests there's nothing to this, and it really is just random variation we're seeing.