It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A question on Tesla?

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 07:17 PM
link   
My question is simply this, would we have to worry about our grid failing if we would have used Tesla's method for power distribution? As we know Tesla showed that we did not need to put electricity in wires in order to power people's homes. I was just thinking that if we were on his (Tesla) system we would not have to worry about a CME event sending us in peril.




posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 07:32 PM
link   
The answer is no

Based on Tesla's ideas the only issue we would have to deal with is atmospheric interference; there would be some localized effects/interuptions but beyond that there would be no long term disruptances beyond the localized interference.

His system was based upon distributed access...ie...only those homes/utilities in the direct path would be temporarily affected, all the rest would be immune.

edit on 4-6-2011 by [davinci] because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 07:50 PM
link   
Not sure about the effect of CME on a Tesla wireless distribution system but if we had adopted even half of Tesla's ideas, we would be 100yrs ahead of where we are today no doubt, if only the government hadn't stolen all his work.
Pretty sure teslaandlyne will be along soon to shed some light on the subject.

edit on 4/6/11 by Morgil because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 08:01 PM
link   
Man what I would not give to have that kind of system in place. I feel since knowing of Tesla and his ideas we as consumers have been in a no - win - take - this type of forced slavery to make the powerful even more so, now I'm not going to beat a dead horse but I cringe to think how much more better off we could all be if history "in some instances" was different.



posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 08:08 PM
link   
Can a system like Tesla's be easier to install instead of retrofitting the existing system to withstand a major solar event. Like replacing the major transmission lines with a wireless distribution one.



posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by basilray
 


Tesla's system of wireless energy transmission by resonant inductive coupling (or electrodynamic induction) can be described as the near field wireless transmission of electrical energy between two coils that are highly resonant whilst operating at the same frequency.(resonance transformer) .Although most transformers utilise resonance, the resonance transformer has a high resistance (Q) value and can be coiled around an air core to help minimise the degredation of electromagnetic inductive energy. These two coils can either comprise a single "slaved" coil or two seperate coils.

The coils generate an oscillating magnetic field and as the coils are extremely resonant,the energy produced within the coil degenerates very slowly ,further,if a second coil is designated as a receiver to the first, this coil can receive a higher proportion of that energy generated by the first coil over a much longer period.
However,as this system is highly dependant on the produced magnetic energy to allow transference,it would inherrently be susceptible to EMP's.



posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by basilray
 


As I understand it, Tesla's system broadcast electrical power at high frequency (but perhaps sub-radio) at high voltages/amplitudes.

At the receiving end, the modulated power was converted to a higher current (lower voltage) via a transformer and rectified back to direct current for powering appliances.

When a CME hits, it forces the atmospheric ionization closer to the surface in places and, in long runs of wire, this causes a potential difference that could swamp conventional power sets.

So Tesla's system would be largely impervious to power fluctuations caused by a CME.

This does not take into account the other shortcomings of wireless distribution of power.

Firstly, wireless distribution is inherently inefficient, the radiated power essentially radiating in a sphere around the transmitting antenna. A cable that directs the power "point-to-point" is immensely more efficient even than the most directional antenna.

Secondly, bizarre physical electrical resonances would induce large voltages in objects not made for that purpose and would likely cause spontaneous fires, electrical damage and injury.

Thirdly, people are (perhaps rightly) wary of the effects on human health of tiny outputs from mobile 'phones and high voltage lines. Imagine the situation if billions of times this much energy were broadcast around us at all times. It simply would not be good.

But star & flag for a clever idea.


edit on 4/6/2011 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Morgil
Not sure about the effect of CME on a Tesla wireless distribution system but if we had adopted even half of Tesla's ideas, we would be 100yrs ahead of where we are today no doubt, if only the government hadn't stolen all his work.
Pretty sure teslaandlyne will be along soon to shed some light on the subject.

edit on 4/6/11 by Morgil because: (no reason given)


Which idea, the death ray or the machine that could split the Earth in half?




posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


I see where you're coming from, but I was really referring to the wireless transmission of power thereby removing the indebtedness to paying vast sums of cash to power companies in the guise of maintaining their transmission network. Also his generally advanced theories on propulsion etc.

As soon as you mention his ideas on a death ray though, it gets all the attention, including mine lol. Although in keeping with the spirit of ATS, maybe Tesla's death ray will help when it comes to fending off those pesky aliens trying to take our resources.....
edit on 4/6/11 by Morgil because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 09:59 PM
link   
reply to post by chr0naut
 

Thanks I thought I had the answer but if the the power lines were buried would that help and by buried I mean everything underground including transformers in some type of closure.



posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Morgil
I see where you're coming from, but I was really referring to the wireless transmission of power thereby removing the indebtedness to paying vast sums of cash to power companies in the guise of maintaining their transmission network. Also his generally advanced theories on propulsion etc.


The point you seem to be missing, is that we would all be paying even more vast sums of cash to power companies than we already are, had the wireless transmission been implemented. While maintenance of the wires would be reduced, this cost savings would be offset by the huge inefficiencies involved in wireless transmission, and then some.

Depending on the implementation, your wireless electric bill might be 10 times higher than it is today, even after accounting for the savings of not having to maintain any wires, because a lot of the wireless electricity generated and transmitted never gets received by anybody, it's wasted. That's why it's inefficient and that's why it's not used, though you now see wireless electricity technology used for recharging batteries, and even in this limited application, it's very inefficient.

Regarding the susceptibility of wireless electricity to CME's, I suspect there is some susceptibility to problems, if your electricity is received by wireless EM waves, and the CME generates wireless EM waves, though it's probably not as catastrophic as the susceptibility with wires. The long wires can act as amplifiers and make the effect of CMEs worse.
edit on 4-6-2011 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 10:25 PM
link   
Telsa's wireless system involved transmission of power through earth.

Because it wouldn't use long conductors, it wouldn't be affected by currents induced by geomagnetic activity.

But, as pointed out, it is an extremely inefficient method of power transmission.



posted on Jun, 5 2011 @ 12:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by basilray
reply to post by chr0naut
 

Thanks I thought I had the answer but if the the power lines were buried would that help and by buried I mean everything underground including transformers in some type of closure.


Burial and enclosure of transmission lines and distribution set would be very expensive!

Placing the lines close to the ground would raise capacitive and inductive effects, changing the amount of energy that is inducted away or wasted in attenuative loops.

By far, the most efficient real-world methods involve raised power lines.

As a precaution against CME induced overloads, the most efficient method is segmentation of long runs.

As the voltages induced by a CME are essentially a large direct current offset, the transmission lines can be segmented into smaller runs and these runs linked through transformers which will pass the alternating component of the power (that which is generated) and block the DC offset.

This stepped voltage/transformer set-up also allows for efficient power factor for various nodes of the unequally loaded transmission line too.

Additional over-voltage protection can be in the form of gas lightning arrestors which shunt power away through an inert gas (a plasma forms when the breakdown voltage is reached and this can shunt away significant power).



posted on Jun, 5 2011 @ 02:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
Telsa's wireless system involved transmission of power through earth.

Because it wouldn't use long conductors, it wouldn't be affected by currents induced by geomagnetic activity.
I think we're pretty much in agreement, though in a way, it does use long conductors, they're just not made out of metal. In addition to ground currents, he planned to use the atmosphere above 5 miles elevation as a conductor, and therefore I don't think we can say the ionosphere (The existing one or the new lower altitude one Tesla created with his apparatus) won't be affected by a CME. This is from his patent:

Source: www.radiomarconi.com... U.S. Patent No. 645,576
“System of Transmission of Electrical Energy”
Notice the references to using the atmosphere as a conductor, especially in #3 where if it's not a conductor, he'll make it one? So if it actually worked as described (and I'm not sure it would) the CME could interfere with the atmospheric conductor and you might have some trouble getting your electricity. However I don't think it would interfere much with the generator and there's no grid as we know it today with wireless. A large enough CME could potentially overload the grid we have today so we'd have to take it offline. With "Tesla's ionosphere" (and the ground) as a conductor, there's nothing to take offline.

This link explains it a little further:

www.tfcbooks.com...&a_038.htm

At the Wardenclyffe facility the ground connection consisted of a 300-foot long vertical pipe driven downward from the bottom of a 120-foot deep shaft, placing the maximum depth of the installation beneath the earth's surface at 420 feet. A conducting path is also establish through the rarified upper level atmosphere between the transmitting and receiving stations elevated high voltage terminals, leading to the name "air-ground system." Tesla clearly stated that his system used conduction and that energy escapes from the system in the form of electromagnetic radiation. The conducting media are the earth below and the atmosphere above 5 miles elevation. While the region from 5 miles up to the ionosphere is not an ohmic conductor, the density or pressure is sufficiently reduced to so that, according to Tesla’s theory, the atmosphere’s insulating properties can be easily impaired allowing an electric current to flow. His theory further suggests that the conducting region is developed through the process of atmospheric ionization, shifting the effected portions thereof to a plasma state.
So basically it sounds like he wanted to "fry" the atmosphere using elevated high voltage terminals, in addition to the ground currents. And probably some of the same people who are worried about HAARP are wondering why we don't have Tesla's wireless electricity. Ironic, isn't it?

And someone built a demonstrator of Tesla's wireless car, it has no ground connection at all:

Tesla Wireless Electric Car Model Demonstration

I read that Tesla actually built such a car but apparently it had a very limited range from the transmitter, though I never saw any good documentation.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join