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.

 

Nikola Tesla Censored From An Electromagnetic Physics Textbook

page: 1
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 08:06 PM
link   
I noticed this last year, thought I'd bring upon it now.

Many here know that the "Tesla" is a unit of measure, specifically the measurement of a magnetic field. Most of these terms in this area of physics, such as the Farad, the Ohm, Biot-Savart's Law, and the Tesla, and many more are named after specific individuals who were pioneers in their respective fields.

In general, these textbooks unveil these terms with a brief background on the derivations of said terms, or at least a mention of the individual it has been named for. What I have found within a major textbook for this course is the censoring of anything describing where the unit measure "Tesla" actually comes from, while the introduction of over 12 other unit of measure terms clearly at least mention the individual of which the term is based, if not a brief background.




Google Preview Book Link...



The Farad





The Ohm





The Biot-Savart Law





Now we get to the introduction of the "Tesla" unit of measure. Clearly you can see there is no attempt to identify the origins of the term..



Not a single mention as to where this term "Tesla" comes from...


There are at least 12 examples throughout this textbook of this kind of thing, and terms being introduced with actual proper backgrounds provided in this textbook, however the google book previews are limited in their page scope, and I don't have a good phone camera at the moment.

Surely you can see what's going here, no?

Your thoughts?
Good day...




posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 08:15 PM
link   
What is going on is simple enough...Tesla was a mad scientist who was WAY ahead of his time who envisioned a future of, among other things, Free Energy...and with the development of spingronics and some recent quantum physics breakthroughs and new nanomaterials, it's turning out that a hundred years or so later...he's been pretty spot on...



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 08:15 PM
link   
thats pretty much exactly how I discovered tesla to begin with, except I also wondered where those 'tesla towers' from command and conquer came from xD no joke.

but yea, lots of books missed out tesla, and from memory before college the only thing science teachers told us was that edison was god amongst men and ac is dangerous as heck. they we're right about the ac but dc isn't exactly safe either.

my college seams to accept his existance however, but its not like we're making radiant energy collectors on the syllabus, he's just another genius in a long line, soon everyone will know the man who made lightning and soon after that it'll be in the history book like it should have been.

what still puzzles me is tesla's court case. he's adamant he wasn't using electricity anymore, hazard a guess if you will but the road leads me to no place.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by madhatr137
 

Not so spot on. A very good engineer. Not so good on theory. Here's what he said about radio (Hertzian waves) in 1919.

The Hertz wave theory of wireless transmission may be kept up for a while, but I do not hesitate to say that in a short time it will be recognized as one of the most remarkable and inexplicable aberrations of the scientific mind which has ever been recorded in history.

www.tfcbooks.com...



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 08:41 PM
link   
Simple answer to this is boycott the textbook as incomplete. I used to delight in finding errors in my Maths 2B Textbook equation answers. Remember human error. This is why we have Ver 1, 1.2, 1.2.1 etc.

As part of my job I write processes and work instructions. Where communication is good and an error is highlighted I update the process to remedy the error. Perhaps a satisfying endeavor would be for you to write to the good people who publish this book in a professional peer reviewing manner and see if they update this in the next edition.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 08:48 PM
link   
I think thats a wonderful idea =)

I had a good read of tesla's take on the theory, he mentions ground alot, theres also mention of not using hertz waves, which in my language tells me make the waves cancel, not to not use them, and maybe you'll get a ground effect like what he's describing. think i'll re-read it tomorrow, some of it is a bit far out but then far out seams to be this decades flavour.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Thanks for stopping in, Phage. I guess my point was the censorship factor, but I appreciate you're information as well...



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 10:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Well I would say that most of his THEORIES were spot on since he actually applied them and had over hundreds of patents >Not to mention how many things he didnt get credit for.If you are talking of his gravity theory I might agree with that but I dont know of anyone actually seeing it because the government seized all of his work at death.We owe much of modern societies way of life to his theories that proved to be fact.They stole his work and ideas and discredited the greatest inventor of all time into a mad looney scientist NOT TRUE.Have you ever seen the debate article with him and Einstien.In some ways they were both right.Tesla said science took a wrong turn and someday he would be proven right.I know most disagree with his ether theory but time may prove differently here is what tesla had to say 'You are wrong, Mr. Einstein - ether does exist!'

Pretty powerful words. Again purported from Nikola Tesla's discovered manuscripts. It continues.

"They say much about the Einstein's theory now. According to Einstein the ether does not exist and many people agree with him. But it is a mistake in my opinion. Ether's opponents refer to the experiments of Maykelson - Morli [Michelson-Morley] who made attempts to detect the Earth's movement relative to the fixed-bed ether. These experiments failed, however it didn't mean the ether's non-existence. I always based as fact the existence of mechanical ether in my works and therefore I could achieve positive success." Nikola Tesla The fact that Tesla put into reality his ideas and theories makes me a true believer in his genius .It is foolish to discredit one of the greatest minds ever without proof based on non applied theories.Einsteins theories dont answer all the questions either.Man I wish someone had a copy of his Gravity theory that we could all see he was way advanced for his time and maybe our time.Not disagreeing with you Phage have enjoyed your debunking quite often but How can anyone not see the GENIUS of Tesla especially when it comes to theory .Calling Tesla a Very good Engineer is like saying Babe Ruth played a little baseball> I think the powers that be stole his work and discredited him to keep the hounds off the trail just my opinion but someday maybe in our lifetimes we might see his other theories might have been on to something as well Peace and thank God for Tesla one of the fathers of modern society.
edit on 12-9-2011 by objectivist because: reworded



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 12:25 AM
link   
reply to post by objectivist
 


I think we will find that the macroscopic world breaks down to be just as freaky as the 'quantum' world of subatomic particles.

For example, Einstein's relativity, when applied, sets a constant reference. An object in motion will red and blue shift light emitted from it - up until the blue-shift attempts to exceed Planck limits. This is a speed maximum - which means that there must be -something- to which all motion is relative. Space, itself, can be seen as a reference point.

This will get funky, and function much like "virtual particles" do. The scientific community is still rather divided on whether or not virtual particles actually exist, or whether they function as a mathematical convenience. The same can be said for "ether." It both exists and doesn't exist, depending upon your frame of reference and what you are looking at.

Again - that's merely my thought on the matter. There will always be more questions than answers, and I enjoy answering the same question multiple ways.

Honestly, it's quite likely the text-book authors simply didn't know about Tesla. He is simply a sort of forgotten figure in electronics. It is quite unfortunate, as the man contributed much to the world of electronics - but it seems that many in the field keep mentioning him at a distance, as he did hold a number of whacky ideas... not to mention his sanity and integrity were both in question in his later years.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 12:37 AM
link   
reply to post by rstregooski
 

Maybe the editors just thought Tesla was so famous there was no point to elaborating on the unit name?



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 06:28 AM
link   
I suppose the argument of censorship would be more convincing if they changed the "tesla" unit to something else entirely. Otherwise this idea has no electricity to it....



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 06:36 AM
link   
It's not censorship, it's lack of common knowledge. Did you know that Fleming was not solely responsible for penicillin? It's unlikely you'll read about the precursors in textbooks. Is it a conspiracy? No, it's just not common knowledge. Enough of the paranoid "censorship!" argument.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 06:39 AM
link   
reply to post by madhatr137
 


See, this is where the Cult of Tesla leaves reality and inhabits a purely fantasy world. He was a great engineer who did some great things, but he was also a lousy scientist who was more than just a little bit crazy, something that got worse over time. He was not some super being, he was a flawed character who, as well as achieving great things, also made false/misleading/delusional claims. Enough of the cult worship, already, he was not infallible.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by objectivist
reply to post by Phage
 


Well I would say that most of his THEORIES were spot on since he actually applied them and had over hundreds of patents >Not to mention how many things he didnt get credit for.

Patents are not validation of anything.


If you are talking of his gravity theory I might agree with that but I dont know of anyone actually seeing it because the government seized all of his work at death.

So if the government seized his work, how do you know about it? Have you seen the seized work?


We owe much of modern societies way of life to his theories that proved to be fact.

Theories do not become fact. The fact that your scientific literacy ain't so hot makes me very sceptical as to whether you can discern the pseudo-science from the real science.


They stole his work and ideas and discredited the greatest inventor of all time into a mad looney scientist NOT TRUE.

Ok, do you have any evidence to the contrary?


Have you ever seen the debate article with him and Einstien.In some ways they were both right.Tesla said science took a wrong turn and someday he would be proven right.I know most disagree with his ether theory but time may prove differently here is what tesla had to say 'You are wrong, Mr. Einstein - ether does exist!'
What exactly was the context of the debate and how is it relevant?


Pretty powerful words. Again purported from Nikola Tesla's discovered manuscripts. It continues.

You said that all of his work was confiscated by the government. Now you're saying there's "discovered manuscripts"? Where were they discovered and how can you be sure of their authenticity? Clearly the government didn't do such a good job of seizing his work...


"They say much about the Einstein's theory now. According to Einstein the ether does not exist and many people agree with him. But it is a mistake in my opinion. Ether's opponents refer to the experiments of Maykelson - Morli [Michelson-Morley] who made attempts to detect the Earth's movement relative to the fixed-bed ether. These experiments failed, however it didn't mean the ether's non-existence. I always based as fact the existence of mechanical ether in my works and therefore I could achieve positive success." Nikola Tesla The fact that Tesla put into reality his ideas and theories makes me a true believer in his genius .It is foolish to discredit one of the greatest minds ever without proof based on non applied theories.

So he couldn't demonstrate the existence of ether objectively? Opinions don't count for anything, objective evidence does. You're a "true believer" in what? Where is the actual evidence that makes your belief so strong?


Einsteins theories dont answer all the questions either.

No-one says they do.


Man I wish someone had a copy of his Gravity theory that we could all see he was way advanced for his time and maybe our time.

Have you seen it? You speak as if it no longer exists. How can you be sure it's "way advanced for it's time" when you've never laid eyes on it, nor have the academic training to be able to critically evaluate it against existing scientific theories?


Not disagreeing with you Phage have enjoyed your debunking quite often but How can anyone not see the GENIUS of Tesla especially when it comes to theory .Calling Tesla a Very good Engineer is like saying Babe Ruth played a little baseball> I think the powers that be stole his work and discredited him to keep the hounds off the trail just my opinion but someday maybe in our lifetimes we might see his other theories might have been on to something as well Peace and thank God for Tesla one of the fathers of modern society.
edit on 12-9-2011 by objectivist because: reworded


And this is exactly my problem with Tesla zealots. They take all his claims on faith, they lack the scientific literacy to deduce questionable statements from credible ones and, more importantly, have little to no understanding of the mainstream theories they dismiss in place of Tesla's more questionable ideas. How can you cheer-lead something you do not understand? How can you be so sure that mainstream science is wrong when you have pretty much no understanding of it?



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 07:25 AM
link   
Yeah, he was just crazy. All he did was invent:

The electric motor
The generator
AC power in general
Radio
Remote control

Without him you wouldn't even be able to post on this website.

Einstein? Did nothing, really, except lead science down a dead end path. Invented nothing, created nothing. Did some "thought experiments" , an oxymoron if there ever was one.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 07:38 AM
link   
reply to post by CaptChaos
 

See? This is exactly what I'm talking about. Einstein didn't invent anything for the rather obvious reason that he wasn't an inventor
His theories gave birth to modern physics and all the technology derived from it. ]

Care to elaborate exactly how Einstein's theories lead science down a "dead end"?



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by CaptChaos
 




Einstein? Did nothing, really, except lead science down a dead end path. Invented nothing, created nothing. Did some "thought experiments" , an oxymoron if there ever was one.


Tesla worked mostly from his mind and his "thought-experiments." That is, essentially, what many of his later-years were about.

What plagued Tesla was his mind and ambitions rapidly exceeded his resources. He was very good at tinkering and applying a thought-up concept to a working device. He was not a man ahead of time - he was a man who -defined- the time by taking what was already laying around in front of us and applying it in a functional manner.

He would have likely continued to make a number of other devices and discovered a number of uses for phenomena (perhaps still underutilized to this day) had he the resources to continue tinkering in his more grandiose manner... but I think, what we see toward the end of his life, is more indicative of Tesla's reason for success in his early years.

Early on, Tesla grabbed hold of some concept in his mind and endeavored to make it work in reality. Inherently, this is going to lead to many failed attempts, and/or trial and error revisions. That is how Tesla worked. When he started branching out into 'super projects' that required funding orders of magnitude above developing AC induction motors and ultra-high-voltage transformers, the cause for his previous success quickly became his reason for failure. That kind of development is very costly and time consuming on the scale Tesla was attempting it.

Tesla's theories and ramblings that came about in his later years are an indication of where he would have ended up directing his development efforts - but many are quick to liken this to Tesla actually meeting with success in these areas.

In the end, I think it's time we stop worshiping Tesla and begin looking at what is sitting in front of us, just waiting to be put together and used. I think Tesla would agree with me, were he still around to do so.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   
The Tesla did not come from Tesla.
He worked with voltage, charge and force.
Voltage induced in copper motor windings opposes the stator voltage
or charges as like charges or voltages oppose one another with a force.
Tesla continued by coils to make oscillation and high voltages and not
magnetism effects in any way. Voltage is used throughout making
fertilizer to ozone. Tesla states he moves air and gases and fine matter
back and forth to make illumination in bulbs. Tesla states his oscillations
are not EM. We can't go any further as we did not even get this far with
our prescribed books. There is more if you wish to study by research.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 12:51 PM
link   


Without him you wouldn't even be able to post on this website.


need I say more. he wasn't crazy, he was assumed to be crazy.

ed; the tesla unit is because of his magnetic egg experiment, the tesla unit refers to a magnetic force.
edit on 13/9/2011 by whatsinaname because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 12:58 PM
link   
It was my understanding that the "Tesla", as a form of measurement, was named for him, by someone else as a tribute to him. The other measurements that are listed were defined by the people that they are named after. I don't think that this is as much censorship as it is accuracy.




top topics



 
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join