Tesla discovered free energy, plans resurface and presented here for all.

Someone asked how much electricity you can generate from the atmosphere.

Figures vary between sources, but 100V per metre above sea level is probably a reliable figure. The voltage increases by a factor of 2 or 3 in the winter.

Roughly speaking the current depends on what the area of your collector is. It's around a billionth of a milliampere per square metre.

Let's suppose you had a 100m high collector of 100m x 100m in area. The total power generation would then be 100 * 100 * 100 * 100 / 1000,000,000,000 W = 0.1 milliwatts. You'd need 1000 such collectors to light a standard 100W bulb.

To collect the energy you only need a rectifier and accumulator.

To increase the power you can do two things:

1) Increase the height of the collector

2) Increase the area of the collector

Number 2 is much easier -- no one said it had to be flat!

Of course you can't commercialise the idea because it is patented. See US patent 1,540,998.

Originally posted by kanetaker
One of my friends posted this series on facebook a couple of weeks ago.

I *LOVE* that series.. I hadn't seen the Tesla one .. he did a surprisingly decent job telling the story compared to some of the earlier ones I've seen lol

Originally posted by hawkiye
You said:

S&F. Lots of folks have tried to build this and got it to work somewhat but not with any sufficient amount of electricity generated.

A link would be nice to make it easier to copy. [/quote

My post:

I'm guessing Tesla supplied all his own electricity. I mean, it's not like he write con-ed a check each month.

I really, really want to know how much Tesla 'infrastructure' is needed to run a 'home'.

edit on 21-2-2011 by starless and bible black because: sorry I messed up the code

Originally posted by Agarta
reply to post by leaualorin

 

I don't know, I built a small one and put it in my back yard it runs my deep freezer. But I will keep an eye out for the symptoms you described. As for the Spirituality and Mental Evolution I agree, in fact I wrote a book about it. If you are interested its here www.ziddu.com...
The problem is people tend to care about the World immediately around them and bettering their lives before they go inside to know themselves, but I feel we as The Human race are getting better.
Thank you for your comment and a star for your honesty and concern.

to the op star and flag my good man

GOT PHOTOS OF THAT

Originally posted by fordrew
reply to post by FlyInTheOintment

 

don't get angry at me because im smarter than you LOL! You would be surprised at how many people here are dumb enough to sI will give an analysis of some sort later.

edit on 21-2-2011 by fordrew because: (no reason given)

I wouldn't mind shutting down my energy machine every 5 years to change the bearings. I think that the super smart people like you are the one's holding people back from tinkering. I believe that there is a super efficient means of producing energy. Whether it can be 100% efficient or not is not my main concerne.

I have a few ideas for a magnetic pulse motor that I am going to tinker with. I think that you focus too much on the free part, and just from my experience of being a welder, the ones that say that they are awesome welders, usually lack the skills. So keep gloating how smart you are. I believe you.

I S&F you for the hell of an effort on a thread. Good job and I am looking forward to the pics.

reply to post by Agarta
Great post! One of the more complete explanations of free energy and Tesla's methods and ideas for tapping into it that I've run across and fairly easy to understand. For me, this is the type of post that ATS is about.

Someone send this to mythbusters, maybe they can test it out, and im sure it won't be hard someone that would want to try it just to disprove it.

reply to post by Agarta

I give you an official Harumph!

Thank you for your post.

Tesla was truly an incredible inventor and scientist.

Tesla himself attributed his abilities to being able to visualise wave propogation and its effects.

At a time when science was rather reductionist (aka Edison's insistence on DC power generation & distribution), Tesla saw the wave as natures way of energy distribution and his ability to "see" the waves conceptually allowed for him to define the mathematics and engineering attendant to his understanding.

Tesla's true greatness was not in the things he made but in the process of his "understanding". The hardware was just evidence of his mind.

On these boards I often see posts where the topic is denigrated based upon bad science or on the basis of pure fiction. It irks me somewhat but sometimes I see the spark of a different paradigm formed.

Einstein never really built anything as evidence of his ideas but the ideas themselves were magnificent. It is these magnificent ideas, not wether they are right or wrong, that will transform and transport humanity into its future. So be lenient if someone seems to have it all wrong, they may actually have another truth.

don't get angry at me because im smarter than you LOL! You would be surprised at how many people here are dumb enough to actually believe they can have a mechanical machine that can function forever!

I will give an analysis of some sort later.

edit on 21-2-2011 by fordrew because: (no reason given)

Firstly - please, no analysis. It's entirely unnecessary, and I've already said you shouldn't waste your time explaining to me something that I already understand... If I require knowledge on any subject, I am a resourceful bloke and have access to plenty of places where the educators are better-informed than you.


Secondly - the response you gave (quoted) makes you sound more like a '16 year-old kid with a passing interest in engineering' than a skilled, time-served professional engineer.

HINT: Including a capitalised 'LOL' doesn't help your cause much.

Interestingly, you reacted like a child in more than one way - for example, misinterpreting the words I wrote down for you. Here's a reminder of the summary:

I would like to see you (resident 'real engineer') concentrate less on promising to tell us how stuff works (we can all research the net) and more on building some of these devices, publishing your results/ conclusions etc. You know what they say - "Those who can, engineer - those who can't....???"

Erm... What part of that comes across as 'anger' at your 'smarts'..? Because to me, it sounds more like a challenge to put your talent where your mouth is. I've already stated my interest in attempting to replicate some of the many devices trialled by other pioneers who followed in Tesla's footsteps. And as stated, I need no explanation on the law of conservation of energy (or on anything for that matter) from you.

Here's an interesting free document/ newsletter typed up by a very helpful chap who would like us all to think a little more about zero-point energy. He updates it frequently and I'll be emailing him soon to say thanks for being such a helpful chap.

Free PDF book (32MB size warning!!) Zero-Point Energy Inventions/ Inventors, including instructions on how to build

And below are some quotes from the author's website, neatly rubbishing your (under-educated) claim that zero-point energy is 'impossible'.

Oh and by the way, here's another HINT - It's only ''impossible'' if you aren't smart enough to know how to do it...

So, why don't electrons run out of energy and just slow down to a standstill? Quantum Mechanics has shown that the universe is a seething cauldron of energy with particles popping into existence and then dropping out again. If E = mC2, then we can see that a tremendous amount of energy is needed to create any form of matter. Scientists remark that if we could tap even a small part of that energy, then we would have free energy for our lifetime.

The Law of Conservation of Energy is undoubtedly correct when it shows that more energy cannot be taken out of any system than is put into that system. However, that does not mean that we cannot get more energy out of a system than we put into it. A crude example is a solar panel in sunlight. We get electrical power out of the panel but we do not put the sunlight into the panel - the sunlight arrives on its own. This example is simple as we can see the sunlight reaching the solar panel.

If, instead of the solar panel, we had a device which absorbs some of the energy which Quantum Mechanics observes and gives out, say, electrical power, would that be so different? Most people say "yes! - it is impossible!" but this reaction is based on the fact that we cannot see this sea of energy. Should we say that a TV set cannot possibly work because we cannot see a television transmission signal?

Continued...

Many people have produced devices and ideas for tapping this energy. The energy is often called "Zero-Point Energy" because it is the energy which remains when a system has its temperature lowered to absolute zero. This presentation is introductory information on what has already been achieved in this field: devices which output more power than they require to run. This looks as if they contradict the Law of Conservation of Energy, but they don't, and you can see this when you take the zero-point energy field into account.

The material on this web site describes many different devices, with diagrams, photographs, explanations, pointers to web sites, etc. As some of the devices need an understanding of electronic circuitry, a simple, step-by-step instruction course in electronics is also provided in Chapter 12. This can take someone with no previous knowledge of electronics, to the level where they can read, understand, design and build the type of circuits used with these devices.

And here's a gentle reminder of the non-omniscience of (any) current scientific paradigm:

This is a very interesting field and the topic is quite absorbing once you get past the "it has to be impossible" attitude. We were once told that it would be impossible to cycle at more than 15 mph as the wind pressure would prevent the cyclist from breathing. Do you want to stay with that type of 'scientific' expert? Have some fun - discover the facts.

Source = Free-Energy-Info-UK


So - again, I express my conclusions: Zero-point energy is realistically achievable, and the technology/infrastructure needed to tap into it will ultimately prove almost infinitely cheaper than our current systems. So quit your jibber-jabber; get reading and get building! Less talky more action!

reply to post by Agarta


First off, SandF!

Your collector sounds like a really huge xtal set.

If you would,

What are the specs for the unit you built?

Turns per inch? Length of Coil? I can find the resonance via a radio calculator. Have you actually put a voltmeter to this? What is the output? I'm guessing its AC?

Thanks for your time on this!

reply to post by XtraTL


Wow.

I think you put some decimal points in the wrong places somewhere.

Seriously - if that was the potential yield, nobody would bother experimenting. The type of info you just posted is usually splurged by mainstream media shills when they (or rather, their paymasters) are in the pocket of the big energy companies.

I'll go with Tesla's insights over your numbers any day of the week. You might also like to look into the pages I linked in my last post - they seem to suggest that many clever inventors/ electrical engineers disagree with you.

Just dropping in here. This is for Tesla's Radiant Energy Device. I have a background in this field and was wondering if anyone had links to schematics for this device (The pictures are not all that helpful and the text helps only a bit). Also, for anyone who has tinkered with this thing, what are the voltage/current readings at the load and what was the loads resistance? Also when being "tuned" is mentioned are we talking about the resonant frequency or a filter?

reply to post by chr0naut


Star for your incisive response!

I also love seeing that 'light-bulb moment' in certain threads here and there on ATS.

Unfortunately there's normally a troupe of baboons that arrive soon after, smashing all the flickering lightbulbs while others go looking for the breaker switch.

And why? Because the chief baboon told them that he would supply them with free bananas for life, when all the light in the world finally dies at their hands.

Originally posted by derpif
Great thread.
Don't know if this related.
Long time ago I got a radio that worked without batteries.
It was a kit in a magazin I used to buy as a kid.

Crystal set!

I'm building them nowadays! Lots of fun

reply to post by FlyInTheOintment


What on earth are you talking about!?

The technology was studied very well by Hermann Plauson in the 1920's and many since. Plauson even produced a working prototype that generated up to a few kilowatts of power. He increased the efficiency of his collector by doping it with radium. Other inventors have also increased the efficiency by dramatically increasing the surface area of the collector and/or moving the collector about in various ways.

I'm scratching my head as to why you think my figures are at all controversial. This stuff has been studied for decades and is well documented all over the place and understood very well. This sort of stuff is understood very well by Radio Hams. You can read about it in standard books on antenna design.

By the way, I was a great fan of Tesla when younger and built a working Tesla coil and did many experiments. I possess a number of old/rare books on Tesla's work from the turn of the last century. [Added in edit: and I might point out that the diagrams the OP claims have just "resurfaced" are all contained in those books. I challenge the OP to prove this info has just "resurfaced" as they claim.]

I don't understand what you mean by "going with Tesla's insights". Please provide documentary evidence that demonstrates "Tesla's insights" are at all different to the figures I posted. I suspect you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Please prove me wrong.

Originally posted by XtraTL
Someone asked how much electricity you can generate from the atmosphere.

Figures vary between sources, but 100V per metre above sea level is probably a reliable figure. The voltage increases by a factor of 2 or 3 in the winter.

Roughly speaking the current depends on what the area of your collector is. It's around a billionth of a milliampere per square metre.

Let's suppose you had a 100m high collector of 100m x 100m in area. The total power generation would then be 100 * 100 * 100 * 100 / 1000,000,000,000 W = 0.1 milliwatts. You'd need 1000 such collectors to light a standard 100W bulb.

To collect the energy you only need a rectifier and accumulator.

To increase the power you can do two things:

1) Increase the height of the collector

2) Increase the area of the collector

Number 2 is much easier -- no one said it had to be flat!

Of course you can't commercialise the idea because it is patented. See US patent 1,540,998.

No disrespect intended.

Just with my basic oatbox radio and a 50' wire antenna, i can get about 2volts and 15mA. Thats pulling in MW signals though. On the scale the op is building I could see it getting more. 120 VAC and "real" amperage? Dunno. I'm not doubting him just yet. Tesla was able to do amazing things. I wont discount the op without experimenting.

Imagine a generating station as we know them. A generator, within which conductors rotate within a magnetic field. The resultant electricity (in alternating form for efficiency) is then transmitted to us via very long wires.

Tesla simply reversed the long distributing wires with the magnetic field. His was a grand idea and he built a full scale prototype. Edison had been convinced that DC would be most efficient and was about to build a transmission line between his generator at Niagara falls and Buffalo, NY. Because of Tesla's influence upon others he realize the problems of loss with DC and so changed to AC with transformers.

The systems that we use today is a combination of Edison and Tesla. Building a network of transmission lines proved to be much better than radiating towers. Less expensive, greater range and more efficient. We know today also that perhaps those very strong fields could have had a negative effect on biological life (us).

The side effect of any very strong magnetic field is it's tendency to generate electrical current in any conductive material within it's field of influence. Thus if this had been implemented as he designed it we would have soon discovered that if we were to touch something metal we would get a nasty shock. Imagine static electricity multiplied by XXXX. Everything metal would have to have a capacitive discharge protective system attached for safety. This is the main reason we use wires instead of fields.

So hats off to Tesla but do not think that his idea landed in the dustbin of history because we are using it right now except with the switch of components mentioned in the first paragraph.

Originally posted by Agarta
reply to post by leaualorin

 

I don't know, I built a small one and put it in my back yard it runs my deep freezer

Can you post perhaps a picture of this? Or better, a video showing how much power it outputs?

If this was possible, I would think there would be many more people running their deep freezers, but I don't really know...

Originally posted by wycky

Originally posted by Agarta
reply to post by leaualorin

 

I don't know, I built a small one and put it in my back yard it runs my deep freezer.

Do you have any pics or videos of your device working?

DoH!! beaten to it

Knew I should have waited...