Most of his later life involved him lying about progress to get funding that he used on an entirely separate project about wireless energy transmission. While wireless energy transmission at a large scale is possible, the way he was going about, from the evidence we do have, was pretty badly mistaken.
That's not to say he wasn't a visionary; he was. He was far more scientific than Edison and he was far less focused on the money, both to his benefit, and to his detriment.
He was right about wireless communications, but utilizing the earth or the atmosphere for wireless power conduction was a bit of a dud. He tried really hard to make it work, but it really wasn't meant to be.
There are forms of wireless electrical transfer, but any useful ones typically involve microwave energy and don't require the atmosphere as a conductor. I'm not an expert, but my understanding is that the main problem is just the order of magnitude of difference between the wireless transmission of waves/energy required for communications vs practical provision of power.
That's not to mention that things like he speculated as well as the more realistic microwave alternatives being experimented with have serious health concerns that make the (imo vastly over-exaggerated) risks of 5g look like a walk in the park.
At the end of the day it's simply not practical for most instance. Wires worked well enough, and the modern solution of on-site power generation to meet the demand tends to work even better.
As a tangent, you can see that at work in developing nations; instead of centralized grids and networks of stuff, it has proven to be more practical to utilize small mobile and modular systems; small solar arrays or wind generators to power a single or a few buildings. It avoids the costs of infrastructure and preserves integrity in the event of natural disasters.
I have people I can ask for more specifics on the technical side; folks that have been doing electronics and the likes for decades and know far more than most about how this kind of tech would or wouldn't work. If you really want, I can get you better answers from them.
Could you back that claim up with some evidence?
Most of his later life involved him lying about progress to get funding that he used on an entirely separate project about wireless energy transmission. While wireless energy transmission at a large scale is possible, the way he was going about, from the evidence we do have, was pretty badly mistaken.
That's not to say he wasn't a visionary; he was. He was far more scientific than Edison and he was far less focused on the money, both to his benefit, and to his detriment.
How/where did you find this? It’s becoming increasingly difficult to find facts. Everything seems to be re-written for “public consumption” .... grrr
Honestly it was a little while back, either an old documentary or a biography.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wireless_System I know it's wikipedia but it details it fairly well, and given that it's not a political target it's probably fairly safe.
He was right about wireless communications, but utilizing the earth or the atmosphere for wireless power conduction was a bit of a dud. He tried really hard to make it work, but it really wasn't meant to be.
There are forms of wireless electrical transfer, but any useful ones typically involve microwave energy and don't require the atmosphere as a conductor. I'm not an expert, but my understanding is that the main problem is just the order of magnitude of difference between the wireless transmission of waves/energy required for communications vs practical provision of power.
That's not to mention that things like he speculated as well as the more realistic microwave alternatives being experimented with have serious health concerns that make the (imo vastly over-exaggerated) risks of 5g look like a walk in the park.
At the end of the day it's simply not practical for most instance. Wires worked well enough, and the modern solution of on-site power generation to meet the demand tends to work even better.
As a tangent, you can see that at work in developing nations; instead of centralized grids and networks of stuff, it has proven to be more practical to utilize small mobile and modular systems; small solar arrays or wind generators to power a single or a few buildings. It avoids the costs of infrastructure and preserves integrity in the event of natural disasters.
I have people I can ask for more specifics on the technical side; folks that have been doing electronics and the likes for decades and know far more than most about how this kind of tech would or wouldn't work. If you really want, I can get you better answers from them.
Thanks for the info! No need for the technical. I prefer the abstract. :)