That's funny, the first quote almost describes the way the Giza pyramid is said to work by harvesting piezo generated electron holes from vibrations in the granite below.
That was described in the speculative but persuasive work of Christopher Dunn.
ascension and rebirth chamber? how did the ancient kings live for hundreds of years? why was iraq attacked? why was Hillary talking about Gilgamesh's resurrection chamber in those leaked emails? Can elites cheat death?
Yeah I have always thought that the Eygtians were trying to copy what they saw their 'gods' do when in reality they were probably just an advanced civilization using tech like we see in Sci Fi movies for space travel.
Its kind of right in front of us when you think about it.
Yes they did. And if you watch the SG1 series, you can start to understand almost all the technologies available to us once you work around all the twists done to distract us. Also, the Goa'uld isn't one 20" worm, but a bunch of tiny parasitic worms that Ivermectin and other anti-parasitics can take out. NOW you know why they scream about HCQ.
Yeah the played off that angle for the movie. Imagine ancient type man seeing something like that, they would not have the concept of the science involved but would see it extends/saves life and try and replicate as best they could.
Medbeds or Celestial Chambers have an age regression version. Supposedly it can only be used 3 times on a human body. We will find out more as they are released and time goes on.
I hate to be that guy, but is society actually ready for unlimited free energy? Picture your average American, and realize half are dumber than that. What would they do with unlimited energy, would we be safer as a society?
Just saying, that line of thinking is the exact same as the people we fight on a daily basis.
Essentially every globalist BS talking point about climate, guns, etc boils down to the same "We don't think you can use this to our satisfaction, therefore you, the people, don't deserve it wholesale"
This invariably leads to a "have-nots" underclass, which is exactly what we are fighting against. Just because you can envision yourself as a "have" does not make it moral or just.
I think it's a fair topic to explore. When there is no COST for energy, it also means there is no barrier to entry for all sorts of insane ideas which usually would be naturally curtailed by lack of resources. What would be the implications?
But unlimited energy doesn't necessarily mean no barrier to entry. Fundamentally, there is still the factor of time and knowledge for everything, the abundance of energy just makes the prior 2 so much more important.
Right now we're strip mining lithium and pumping out 500+ pound battery packs for vehicles like there's no tomorrow, and in 10 years someone will be needing to dispose of said battery pack. Get the friggin wireless energy going now before the place is totally trashed, and all that lithium has permeated our ground water supply.
I think if it was indeed true (I am skeptical), I don't think we'd be any safer as a society.
The fall out from the downfall of the oil, coal, and natural gas industries would be scary.
That money runs a significant part of the world. It employs tens of millions of people, if not over a hundred million, around the world.
CEOs, CFOs, and executives
High-level managers and strategists
Investors and board members
Petroleum engineers
Geologists and geophysicists
Chemical engineers
Environmental scientists
Roughnecks
Drillers and derrick operators
Welders and machinists
Plant operators and technicians
Process engineers
Safety inspectors
Pipeline workers
Truck drivers
Ship crews for oil tankers
Railroad operators
Janitors and maintenance workers
Caterers and cooks for offshore rigs
IT and cybersecurity professionals
Legal teams
Administrative staff and accountants
Gas station employees
Marketing and sales teams for petroleum
Coal Miners
Mine Foremen and Supervisors
Mine Safety Inspectors
Blasters and Explosives Technicians
Coal Truck Drivers
Coal Processing Plant Workers
Coal Train Operators and Railroad Workers
Barge Operators (Coal Transport)
Coal Terminal Dock Workers
Conveyor Belt Operators
Ash and Slag Handlers
Coal Power Plant Operators
Fly Ash Recycling Workers
Coal Equipment Mechanics
Coal Mine Reclamation Workers
Natural Gas Drillers
Hydraulic Fracturing (Fracking) Technicians
Wellhead Pump Operators
Pipeline Construction Workers
Pipeline Inspectors
Compressor Station Operators
Gas Meter Technicians
LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) Plant Workers
LNG Tanker Ship Crews
Gas Processing Plant Operators
Natural Gas Storage Facility Workers
Gas Distribution System Engineers
Residential and Commercial Gas Installers
Propane Refinery Workers
Natural Gas-Powered Vehicle Technicians
Coal Lobbyists
Gas Industry PR and Marketing Teams
Coal and Gas Industry Lawyers
Gas Utility Customer Service Reps
Coal and Gas Investment Analysts
(Yes, I googled jobs for those industries.)
I think it would be catastrophic if all these tens of millions of people would lose their jobs in such a short time period. The job market would not be able to absorb all of them quickly. People would be financially destroyed and would most likely seek government assistance. That would put a strain on everyone.
Eventually things would begin to even out as the Tesla technology was put into place, replacing the infrastructure of oil, coal, and natural gas industries.
Instead of working for "Big Oil", they would instead work for "Big "Free" Energy".
And this is the part that people don't want to hear.
"Free" Energy wouldn't actually be free. At least, not for the vast majority of people using it.
I think people have this idea that everyone would just generate their own energy, without the need of anyone else. Similar to how people can go off grid with solar energy. But just like it's impractical for everyone to generate their own energy from solar, it would be impractical for everyone to generate their own Tesla energy.
Even if the energy itself is "free," people would still need to build energy receivers, converters, and storage systems to make it useful.
If every home needed its own Tesla tower or specialized receiver, costs would be high.
Maintaining these systems would require technical expertise, making DIY setups impractical for most people.
It would be inevitable that "Big Free Energy" would soon take up the vacuum left by the collapse of "Big Oil", "Big Coal", and "Big Natural Gas".
Even if the energy source itself were freely available, you’d still need infrastructure to capture, store, and distribute it. This includes:
Energy receivers (like Tesla’s Wardenclyffe Tower concept)
Transmission stations to relay power
Storage systems (possibly high-density batteries or superconducting grids)
Maintenance crews to repair and upgrade systems
(Yes, I googled what would be needed for Tesla infrastructure).
Somebody has to fund, build, and maintain this infrastructure. The corporations or governments that own it would almost certainly charge fees for access, upkeep, or premium reliability—just like today’s energy providers.
Even if the energy is abundant, companies could restrict access using proprietary technology or encrypted signals.
Think of how Wi-Fi is technically “wireless,” yet internet service providers charge you for access.
A corporation like “Big Free Energy, Inc.” might give out basic power for free but charge for higher speeds, security features, or uninterrupted service.
Just because energy is abundant doesn’t mean the devices that use it are free.
Companies would still sell cars, machines, smart appliances, and power storage units that tap into the energy grid.
Licensing fees might apply for products that integrate with the free energy system, just like patents on rechargeable batteries today.
Any new energy system would require governance, just like oil and electricity grids today.
Governments could tax energy usage or regulate bandwidth and priority access.
Even in a world where energy is infinitely abundant, businesses will always find ways to monetize convenience, reliability, and control.
Frankly, I think if Tesla’s "Free Energy" was indeed real, it would be the ultimate wet dream for liberals.
They would get to save the world from climate change due to eliminating CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels.
They would have an entirely new monopoly on energy to take advantage of.
They have a new industry to set up with regulations and oversight, subsidies and taxes, legislation and policy, and all the other things they dream of.
They get to force everyone to buy new electric cars (not Teslas though. Obviously.)
They get to gloat about taking down all the oil tycoons and fracking companies they've been going after for years.
So, yeah. If Tesla’s "free" energy is true, no one will be happier than the libs.
I know I've just put a serious dent into the fantasies some people have surrounding Tesla’s Free Energy, but I prefer that people be realistic about what would actually happen.
Lights...blenders, power tools, well water, TV's, stereos, Christmas lights - heck - cover your entire property in 200w incandescent bulbs - like 5,000 of them and just leave them on all day and night...
Yep. He had ideas to broadcast power and information to the entire word for free. Essentially using a series of obelisk looking things to relay the power/energy.
Wardenclyffe towers. There is one in Texas and maybe another near Moscow, where are the others? Hammer some metal rods into the ground and connect them together using a Tesla circuit and you have DC power from the earth. How much are inverters these days?
J.P. Morgan was all about holes that money fell out of into his pockets . "Morgan provided funding for the construction of the Wardenclyffe Tower on Long Island," but he and Westinghouse couldn't monetize "free energy".
Liberals: Free Energy!!! OMG this is great!!! Media: It comes from Tesla, Nikolai Tesla. Liberals: Free Energy is racist!!!! Resist!!! Coal is amazing! 🤩
It's called "genius," the territory beyond an I.Q. of 145. About one person in a thousand, in round numbers. It is a tremendous gift, but they are still human, and still subject to grandiose overconfidence.
While I do not immediately discount the fact that aliens exist (it's a big universe), I believe Elon and Tesla are/were human.
I realized some time ago the nature of human consciousness. We are actually connected at some plain of existence outside of our capabilities to see. There are so many of the same "random chance" discoveries by humans happening on the opposite sides of the world, where communication is impossible. That's why the internet was such a game changer.
Case in point, pyramids. Now, South American models are not precisely the same as Egyptian, but the same idea existed. These things might as well be worlds apart. There's even some in Asia.
Then you have the case of doppelgangers. DNA pairs are infinite but yet two or more people exist that look roughly or exactly the same?
In the case of zero point energy, which Tesla was researching - I believe this was a contemporary rediscovery of physics that our species had stumbled on a long time ago.
And why would they stop him before releasing what he knew, totally discredit him so he died alone, penniless?
#1 - Our entire economy and way of life is built on paying for energy. Wars are fought over energy. You take that away by providing a seemingly endless source, money loses value and the powers that be lose control over us. We would be able to go and do anything we wanted.
#2 - Psychopaths will take that literally, and do anything they can to do what they do. Some people believe that is precisely what happened in the past, whenever this technology is discovered. Civilization collapses and has to rebuild from cavemen-era.
Now, I take that a step beyond - and I'll loop it back around to your alien theory. What if the obvious UFOs that we see (and questionable things on the Moon/Mars) are infact technology from previous civilization that were on Earth? Consider - they know their history, and they are monitoring us to see if we do the same thing.
The process “awakening” I’ve gone through since first discovering Q is vastly larger than anything I could have imagined when I first arrived on the scene.
Its beginning was all about governmental corruption and then it expanded into every aspect of society. At some point it dawned on me that the Q op was much greater than then just corruption, so I went looking for it in new places.
Somewhere along the path I found signs that it was happening in archeology, science and spirituality and I believe those things are the true crux of the Q op. When the dust settles and the world is FINALLY told what has transpired we will find out that ridding society of the lies and corruption were merely a bi-product of a much greater plan.
Then again, I’m just a smooth brain Ape so who the hell knows🙂
While not being an expert in Tesla, I am a keen follower.
Exhibit J:
Could be a Tesla Turbine but more elaborate version of it? I think something different entirely.
Exhibit E:
This is juicy.
"Art of Producing Terrestrial Motions at Distance" - "terrestrial motions"? Does that mean earthquakes or have more subtle nuance?
This is the first time I've seen reference to a "mechanical or electromechanical device bolted to some rocky proturbence". "Bolted" stands out. This is exactly what Wardencliffe was. The jives also with the confirmed discovery of its structure extending deep down into the aquifer below, mirroring the recently claimed discovery at the Great Pyramid.
This also is the first I'm seeing the earth's crust specifically being mentioned as having 'resonance frequency' although this is of course heavily implied by his comment about the Earth "ringing like a bell".
Exhibit M:
This isn't "new" but it IS the first time I'm reading a specific range of his wireless transmission system (12,000 miles) and efficiency / loss factor (5%). That by itself is wild (sounding).
Exhibit P:
"Statements on a new airplane" - this is for Popular Science Monthly 1928. I am curious about this, I dont remember hearing about his ideas for flight. I wonder if this interview is public?
...some innate frequency to the Earths existence...
Thus a frequency that amplified or damped it might have an effect on the gravity of an object while no changing it's mass ?
You & I are just a mass of atoms vibrating near each other at a certain frequency until we stop vibrating. But until then there is a lot of space between to allow tis movement. Kind of like the Universe mostly space with a little dust scattered about.
The spark energy comes from the metabolic energy exerted to shuffle across the carpet. Same thing with a Wimshurst static generator...which has to be externally powered.
That's as foolish as saying"I got this free gun I bought at the gun store!"
Not if they cost less than $ 20 because you are making so many and selling them to the world to protect themselves from Government. They would be like a "Free Lunch" now $20 ( minimum wage in Commiefornia for an hour of "work")
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, and against the worldly governors, the princes of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness, which are in the high places." --Ephesians 6:12 -- 1599 Geneva Bible
Rockefellers rock over medicine. JP Morgan and the banksters didn’t want free medicine. Health and energy has literally steered humanity in the direction we’re in.
Which "he"? What Tesla said was a sales pitch with nothing behind it. What Trump said was for the eyes of the government and was squirreled away. Tesla turbines are out there, but not much used. Apparently there are some practical problems, but I wish they had more prominence.
The Tunkuska event was a bolide, an air blast resulting from the crushing of a meteor by the pressure of its own shock wave. No indication of a ground source.
Tesla was running off at the pen, asserting things for which he had no substantiation.
You said "NT did talk about this [a weapon that could split the earth in half] in some of his papers. I replied that he was "running off at the pen..."
You were the one who mentioned Tunguska. I was simply informing you of what it was. Different paragraphs. Just like you had different paragraphs.
It was a typo, please excuse me. You are wrong to say that is was a bolide, there was no heat damage anywhere at the site , there were no meteorite fragments discovered even after over 100 years of looking for some, no impact craters at all, not even minor ones, just a lot of trees blown down all in a radiating pattern away from a central point.
That's what a bolide does: it implodes from the shock pressure and converts all its kinetic energy to heat energy, vaporizing the meteor. It is a mid-air explosion, and it would only leave what was found: heat and blast effects. There was heat damage (scorched trees) over a wide area, and mineral samples found consistent with the composition of meteorites. The Barringer Meteorite Crater in Arizona has profuse signs of being what it is, but no pieces of the source meteor have been found, either, because it was all vaporized.
lol, there be shills here. Anyone here trashing Tesla still hasn’t learned their lesson about a weaponized press. This didn’t start in 2016 and it wasn’t a result of the smith mundt modernization act. It has been going on for all of history.
You’d think that people would realize after the covid revelations that everything you think you know is false. You can’t know anything you didn’t scientifically prove to yourself, all you can do is repeat what you’ve heard and accepted as truth. You have to work for the truth which is offputting to lazy people. Turn your scepticism inwards, there you will find the problem.
As far as free energy is concerned it is a phrase like Qanon and is used to discredit the idea that you don’t have to put all the energy into a system yourself. You can harness what nature provides if you arrange things correctly.
That's true on the shills. I'm not sure if KsR is a Gr ook3 AI programmed to constantly prevent any further talk about something the Deep State is desperately trying to hold back from us, or just supposed to be a test to see who's ready to graduate past controlled opposition :-). My guess is both.
The problem with Tesla is that he trashes himself by overdriving his headlights. His practical inventions stand the test of time. His flights of fancy do not. Now that we have Dr. Trump's assessment of his last papers, we find that it is a nothingburger. The "secret" is all a myth, no substance.
And those with a solid scientific and engineering background are not subject to a "weaponized press," as the principles and facts of science and engineering must always be supported by reality, or nothing could work as conceived, planned, or designed. So, there is plenty one can know without having to re-invest in 300 years of scientific discovery and development. For you to say that such knowledge is impossible means only that you are ignorant of it. And you don't respond well to experts, because they pop your bubble.
We already have "free energy." It is called nuclear energy and, in its heyday of commercial application, it was literally anticipated that nuclear-generated electricity would be so inexpensive, it would not even be metered. That might still be true, if the government could get out of the way of its application, and the popular phobia about nuclear power (like the phobia over witchcraft) is dispelled by an educational program. By the way, Tesla did not believe in such things as nuclear energy. He rejected quantum physics in its entirety.
Tesla did not have devices for free generation of energy. He claimed you could wirelessly transmit energy for free. And he never got his power station on Long Island working. He wouldn't have died poor if he did.
An AI summary
Tesla's Vision:
Tesla believed in a future where electricity could be transmitted wirelessly, using the Earth itself as a giant conductor, eliminating the need for wires.
Wardenclyffe Tower:
The Wardenclyffe Tower, built on Long Island, New York, was intended to demonstrate this wireless power transmission system.
Not "Free" Energy:
It's important to note that Tesla's system wasn't about creating energy from thin air. The energy would still need to be generated through conventional means, but the transmission would be wireless
Tesla said: "Electric power is everywhere present in unlimited quantities and can drive the world's machinery without the need of coal, oil, gas, or any other of the common fuels."
Money got pulled for Wardencliff by JP Morgan for political money reasons, not for technical reasons. So, doesn't matter when Tesla said it. Yes, still true. And Dunn's pyramid powerplant idea harnesses micro-motions in the pyramid (interestingly the same ones used recenyly with SAR doppler technique, though that's another conversation) through piezo electric effect.
We know nothing about these things. What IS gravity? What IS inertia & momentum? Why does general relativity not work unless we put our finger on the scale with dark matter? Why does our planet have an active electromagnetic field while many others in our solar system do not? How do the UFOs move around without "leaving something behind"?
The assumption is always that, since we exist later in time than people from the past, we know more than them. What if most of our science is true enough to mostly work, but otherwise designed to cover up the real truth?
There is obviously great incentive to do this, since Tesla tech as it was theorized to work would set humankind free, forever.
Gravity has been well-described since Isaac Newton (maybe not well-explained; it is a work in progress). Inertia and momentum are well-defined in any beginning physics class. General Relativity may not work because it involves flawed logic (like the so-called "equivalence principle"). Geomagnetic fields are thought to require molten planetary cores by which a dynamo is generated by convection currents. Some planets or moons seem not to have them. Others have them very strongly. We don't even know if UFOs are "something."
I agree that knowledge can be lost. We have no idea how to make "Greek Fire," for instance. And there are plenty of examples of modern technology that has come and gone, for which we no longer have the knowledge of its construction (such as 16-inch naval cannon). Our science works. It's not designed to "cover up" anything. The very expression is incoherent.
Nothing sets humankind free from humankind. If you had a credit card with a billion-dollar limit, how would you live? As though you were "free"? You don't seem to appreciate what we have, or how huge even small improvements are when you are close to poverty.
Newtonian physics do not accurately predict gravity, never mind explain what it is. We similarly understand what effect inertia and momentum have in a given physics problem, but again we do not know what they are. Why do these phenomena exist?
General relativity scales better, but it still breaks down at the extremes, and thus still doesn’t accurately explain how gravity works. And again, it doesn’t explain what gravity is, why does this phenomenon exist? Its explanations require us to just fudge the numbers and assume that there is extra mass which can’t be observed.
Our science works well enough for our current purposes, but it always breaks down at some extreme or another. A grand unified theory still escapes us. It did not escape Tesla, electricity is key to understanding all these phenomena as well as understanding the ways in which GR and newtonian physics break down.
For example, take inertia and momentum. Imagine that the universe is infinite or at least exceedingly large, and that gravity operates instantaneously and across infinite distance. Inertia is thus the cumulative effect of the gravity of the entire universe operating on a given body, which requires energy to overcome. An object pushed in one direction is thus falling towards one side of the universe and stopping it requires energy as well.
As for what gravity is, it’s electric attraction, the cumulative effect of the electrical charge of every atom in a given physics problem. GR breaks down at the extreme because mass alone doesn’t predict how much pull a given object will have on another: there exist bodies that pull harder and bodies that hardly pull at all. No need for dark matter, no need for black holes.
Yes, Tesla tech could completely free people from our open air prison. It would enable someone to go off to a remote wilderness and generate all the power needed to power a small community and grow plenty of food. It also enables one to “melt” and levitate rocks and other materials like the ancients used to, freeing one from needing a society to provide building materials. Understanding why we’re stuck to the surface of the earth with gravity enables one to move against the gravitational field without “leaving something behind,” it’s pure electric propulsion and could easily send a man to Mars or beyond. This is why we are living in “the matrix” as far as scientific knowledge goes. If we could leave how would they keep us as cattle?
Tesla tech as it was theorized to work would set humankind free, forever.
See what I said about Tesla being a showman.
Tesla lived for decades after JP Morgan cut off his funding.
If he had something that worked he could have just written out exactly what he was talking about. He could have left that to anybody. He could have sold that.
The energy that Tesla was talking about wirelessly transmitting would still need to be generated. The Tesla plant had giant generators And he still had to pay for the fuel to generate that electricity
You're assuming his opponents were nonviolent. What if they blackmailed him with pedo shit like they still do today? What if they threatened someone dear to him if he ever spilled the beans? What if they needed his help to come up with all the fake science we're so proud of today, that perfectly covers up his discoveries?
Investment money reasons. Tesla was at that point nothing but a money pit, pursuing his rivalry with Marconi to be the first transmitter of a message. Nothing salable was forthcoming. And Tesla's idea was based on a false assumption that the air was conductive for electricity, so that would have been a show-stopper.
Marconi's radio technology was specifically designed to cover up Tesla's findings, namely, that messages (and energy) could be broadcast from any point to any point on earth, without direct line of sight, and faster than light.
Marconi was not in the least concerned about Tesla. He was the first to demonstrate that it could be done, with wireless telegraphy. Long-wave radio can be broadcast and heard all over the Earth (if you have enough power and a sensitive receiver). You talk as though it hasn't been a reality for over a century. Where have you been?
Faster than light is BS. It is only as fast as light. And maybe not quite that fast, since the atmosphere has a refractive index that results in a slight reduction of wave propagation speed.
The bankers who funded Marconi knew full well that contemporary science was on the brink of discovering Tesla technology. If it hadn’t been Nikola, it would have eventually been someone else. They needed to head that off with something that would throw future generations off track. Marconi was able to oblige, knowingly in my view.
Radio requires line of sight or something off of which to reflect. Tesla’s transmissions travelled through electromagnetic strata and needed no reflecting to get to the other side of the earth. Radio frequencies low enough to pass through the earth are also low bandwidth and not usable if everyone were to crowd those frequencies.
The speed limit proposed by Einstein is BS and requires us to put our thumb on the scale with “dark matter”. Tesla’s transmissions are instantaneous across any distance as they are transmitted through the ether, while radio is essentially waves produced in a pond of ether and travels at the speed of those waves.
No, the US government said that if Chrysler wanted a loan to save it from bankruptcy it had to cut costs.
Turbines did end up in military vehicles but they were not Chrysler Turbines.
Lycoming Engines makes them.
In the 45 years since no other company has decided to put turbine engines in consumer cars cuz it's a terrible idea.
Turbines are best when operating at maximum power. Which is nowhere close to how most people drive.
They are really inefficient in start and stop traffic. They respond really slowly when accelerating and decelerating. Like wait two seconds after you hit the pedal. Their output is hot enough to melt the paint on the car behind you.
We don't have turbines in cars because they're not a good idea and inefficient
A couple companies tried turbines in buses, but I'm not sure they are still in business.
A new thing now is to use a micro turbine to power an electrical vehicle.
Or because they know it's off limits. Since every single big "business" in existence these days depends on continued credit and other forms of government largesse, they all know they'll never get the financing needed for this tech.
A new thing now is to use a micro turbine to power an electrical vehicle.
Electric cars have been around for more than a century. They would have had this idea in Lee Iacocca's time. But some ideas are simply un-financeable.
Did you even absorb what DueProcessFan had to say? The technology had operational down-sides, which would have prevented widespread customer acceptance. Just because something is nifty does not mean it is good for service. Chrysler continued development into the 1970s, but was unable to eliminate the thorniest problems. The closest we get to it is the turbocharged engine, which is a hybrid of a turbine engine and a piston engine. The piston engine is inserted in place of the turbine combustor. This was done commonly in military aircraft from World War II to the complete replacement of piston engines by turbine engines.
And yet it was good enough for military applications. They don’t want us to have such high efficiency technology because then we’d be less dependent on the gas they happily charge us a fortune for.
Edison and Westinghouse had to ruin Tesla because they saw the massive profit potential of putting a meter on everyone that needed this "new" electricity commodity.
Edison's power transmission technology was specifically designed to cover up Tesla's findings, namely, that energy (and messages) could be broadcast from any point to any point on earth, without wires or metering.
Edison's "power transmission technology" was direct-current power lines. They lost out in competition with Westinghouse's alternating-current system devised by Tesla and still in use today. Long-distance message transmission was first achieved by Marconi (to Tesla's chagrin). Long-distance broadcast power, no way. Bad idea. Tremendously dangerous. I worked on "megawatt-class" laser transmission, and it was a weapon. Civilian power transmission systems start at much higher power levels. You really need to do your research.
You are still assuming Tesla tech was transmitting energy using waves in the ether, instead of transmitting directly through the ether. It is difficult to leave the “matrix” of fake science we’ve lived in our whole lives. Tesla did, and they bankrupted him for his troubles.
They didn't have to lift a finger. Tesla was pursuing a phantom, in this case. You tell me how meterless power could ever be produced by a free market. "Something for nothing" seldom occurs. Who would bear the cost of producing the power or constructing the distribution scheme? (Tesla had already won the competition with Edison over whether alternating current or direct current would be a basis for power distribution.)
You ever see the videos of people high on a mountain top when it's breezy? As the air molecules rush by you, static builds and wants to discharge someplace. An electrical "Aura" will develop that is visible to your naked eye.
Lots of neat electrical phenomena in the air. Corona discharge (St. Elmo's Fire) is one of them, but I haven't had the pleasure of witnessing it. There is, of course, lightning, built up by the same mechanism. Airplanes are built with electrical "wicks" to stream off any surplus charge.
Something deep in the earth's core is producing enough electrical charge to cause non-stop electricity to pass through miles of barely conductive dirt, rock, and soil, and then arc across miles of barely conductive atmosphere and cause the production of ozone high above our heads. This same power source is constantly deflecting the solar wind miles and miles above the surface of the planet.
If you were a clever ant standing atop a running dynamo, you might notice that there is a gradient of electrical charge, going from deeply negative way down beneath your feet, to high positive way above your head.
The earth is a dynamo and relative to it, we are much smaller than ants. What if there were certain points on the earth's surface where the charge differential between deep down beneath us and way high above us could be used to generate power?
I shake my head. The ozone is produced by the ultraviolet radiation from the Sun, not by any nonexistent, undetectable terrestrial power source.
Dynamos are not supposed to have significant external electrical fields or they would short out. Regardless of dynamos, there is a terrestrial electric field gradient. But that's not the same thing as electric power. It is also very weak. The greater likelihood is that it is the result of static electricity produced by the friction of winds across the surface of the Earth. The brainy ones among us have proposed windmills to harvest this wind power. A more expensive, inefficient, and massively wasteful method is yet to be devised.
Did you know ozone is produced on the surface of a plasma globe? An electric charge is generated in the “core” of the plasma globe by a tesla coil, radiates outwards to the surface of the globe, and the high frequency voltage causes oxygen to form ozone. The earth’s charge used to be much stronger than it is today and, wouldn’t you know it, ancient accounts of conditions in those days claim that the sky glowed purple 24/7, same as a plasma globe does.
That is the electrical method for making ozone. If you have a strong enough electrical field, the normal diatomic oxygen will be split into separate atoms, each of which will combine with another oxygen molecule to form an ozone molecule.
What happens at high altitude is that the solar ultraviolet radiation has enough energy in a photon to accomplish the same effect of dissociating regular oxygen, which forms ozone from recombination.
All ozone eventually comes apart as ordinary oxygen.
I doubt that the sky "glowed purple" during the daytime. But this is the first I've heard of "ancient accounts" saying this. Don't you think you need to take this with a grain of salt?
No less than you should take modern “science” with a grain of salt. The solar system cannot be explained by accretion. For example, Venus’ spin is all wrong, it could only have fallen into place from outside the solar system. Mars could never have had water on its surface where it presently sits, and having no plate tectonics it could not have mountains. In fact, its mountains are blisters formed by plasma bolts striking its surface as its charge was equalized with the solar system’s charge as it descended to its current position. Think of myths of zeus casting lighting bolts and smiting lesser gods. We all understand these stories to be astronomically inspired yet when have we seen Jupiter cast lightning bolts?
Earth once orbited Saturn and Saturn was once a brown dwarf. Away from the sun, the earth’s electrical coma was enormous, much bigger than it is now. The charge being generated in earth’s core made a plasma globe of the earth, with a constant beam of charged plasma connecting earth’s coma with that of Saturn, much like we see today between Io and Saturn. Our sky glowed purple in this highly charged plasma field. This also had an effect on Earth’s gravity, which was lighter back then. The dinosaurs couldn’t possibly have existed under today’s gravity, they’re all absurd assuming our gravity was constant. How could a T-rex have balanced well enough to walk, never mind be a fierce predator? How could the pterodactyl ever have flown?? Consider as well, the “giants” of ancient times, and the utterly inexplicable megaliths. Consider our own genetic mysteries, like how our heads evolved to be so dangerously big relative to the birth canal, or the absurd weakness of our backs. We aren’t designed for this gravity, we are mutants who survived where our mother species, the giants, failed.
As Saturn entered the sol system, its coma shrank in the presence of the sun’s much more powerful electric field. Earth was wrested free of Saturn’s orbit, the purple plasma field went dark, and our planet descended to its present orbit. The craters that we suppose were caused by asteroid impacts that killed the dinosaurs are actually plasma bolt blisters, delivered to our planet as a result of the electrical charge differential between the old Saturn system and the Sol system. Our planet avoided Mars’ fate thanks to our core’s constant generation of electricity, which manifests today as lightning arcing from the earth’s surface out into the atmosphere, and the electrical generation of ozone in the atmosphere. You know you can smell the ozone as a lightning storm approaches…
I was reading somewhere that all the megalithic pyramid complexes around the world (Egypt, Mexico, Cambodia, etc.) are aligned on ley lines. Can't find it now.
Look up "The Why Files - Compilation of Ancient Mysteries Vol. 1" on YouTube. Great info on Ley Lines there (still a little short on the technical end of it).
Westinghouse paid Tesla quite a bunch of money. Which Tesla happily spent. Tesla was not successful as a business man and lived in fancy hotels, this why he was why he was in debt so much.
He was a great showman but he ultimately didn't deliver. The myth of Tesla doesn't live up to the reality.
Well, there was also the point where he granted Westinghouse free use of his patents, as Westinghouse was in a financial struggle to stay afloat. That easily stripped Tesla of income---but he realized there was no profit in killing the milk cow, and he was desirous that his technology prevail and be accepted.
Tesla was also under the impression that electric power could be conducted by air. But air is an insulator, so that was not bound to happen. If you could ionize the air, that might be a different story, but then you would be dealing with sustained lightning bolts. Not good for anything in the way, and wasteful of power through radiant emission.
His theory was that electric power could be conducted by the ether, and that air was no barrier to power being transmitted in this fashion. And great amounts of power are being transmitted through the rock and dirt beneath your feet, through your body, through the air all around and above us, miles and miles up into space. Enough of this power is transmitted, without electrical arcing, to deflect solar wind from the entire planet.
Well, it turns out that air is a barrier for electric power, which was the technology he was working with. At this point, so far as we know, there is no "ether." What we can do is radiate radio waves, like microwave beams or cell phone transmissions. There are no frequency assignments available for gigawatt-levels of microwave radiations. I would regard that as an incredibly dangerous method of power distribution.
No power is being transmitted through the Earth, or it would be measurable. You are confusing the energy of an established magnetic field with power. They are not the same thing. I have potential energy in the clothes on my top closet shelf, but they are not radiating any power. (There is geothermal power, but it is hard to extract and is basically heat seepage. It can be useful in places where it is prominent, like Iceland.)
Air is no barrier for the electromagnetic field generated in earth’s core and that repels the solar wind. It is transmitted through the ether and is not affected by air. The amount of energy needed to shield the entire earth is mind bending, and yet none of the negative effects you suppose must attend such a massive transmission of power are present.
The earth’s magnetic field is not in the nature of an established magnetic field, it is in the nature of an electromagnet. Its generation is the source of lightning and the constant electrical charge differential between the earth and the rest of the solar system.
Lots of energy, but very little power. Kind of like a high mountain lake issuing a tiny stream. Lots of potential energy, but very little flow. This is the big difference between energy and power. But the Earth is huge and we have lots of everything without being much bothered by it. You are talking about the MAGNETIC field around the Earth, not an "electromagnetic" field. There is a difference. I did not suppose any negative effects from a natural phenomenon that does not broadcast power.
The best that people have come up with about the terrestrial magnetic field is that it results from core convection of molten iron getting a grip of the solar magnetic field and amplifying it. That's what they say, and I don't defend it much. Where is the electric current? Molten iron cannot be magnetic, due to the Fermi effect. An alternative explanation, which I find attractive, is that the Earth, being a rotating charged body, is thereby a homopolar generator, developing a magnetic field from being a rotating charged sphere. There has been some data correlating the strength of the magnetic field with slight glitches in rotation.
The Earth's magnetic field is not the source of lightning. That is related to charge concentration resulting from air friction with water droplets. Clouds develop huge charge imbalances, which equalize by lightning discharges between clouds or between clouds and the ground. Magnetic fields do not produce static electricity.
I think you need to read more on meteorology and geophysics.
Tesla knew what generates the charge at the centre of the earth. Modern science cannot explain it, it just accepts its presence. Like gravity and inertia and momentum.
I have read all our modern “science” on these subjects. I am not convinced as it does not explain where any of these phenomena come from, and can’t even accurately predict them, they all break down at one extreme or another. They are not accurate!
We suppose that friction causes lightning yet we can’t predict when and where such storms will form. Yet we refuse to consider that this theory with zero predictive value might be wrong. And likewise, we assume we are smarter than the ancients in our profound hubris, yet we can’t explain what they were doing with structures like the pyramids, or the golden domes, both of which spread much further than can be explained by “architectural style that is downstream of local culture.”
Merely repeating this dogma back to me, as though it explains a single thing, is not persuasive.
This is the first I've heard of a charge at the center of the Earth. I don't think it shows up in "modern science," but I also don't think you know much about modern science.
No theory can predict the weather. It is too chaotic (which is a technical term meaning far too many variables and large scale randomness). Our modern science permits us to do much, like travel to other planets, to see into other galaxies, to split the atom, etc. You dismiss that too readily, which indicates your lack of familiarity.
Our electrical theories work well enough that we have designed and built an entire industry and civilization on those theories, so your contention that they have "zero predictive value" is very skewed. Nobody assumes we are smarter than the ancients, but the record is so absent we have NO IDEA how smart the ancients actually were. If there was other technology, it is lost. It is futile to dwell on that.
Those who do not want to learn are immune to persuasion. Unlike you folks, I am ready to explain, in detail, but you just turn up your nose, not having really been schooled in science or engineering, with the idea that if it is not anciently perfect, it is not worth knowing. That's too bad. Do you have a cell phone? Can you find your location by GPS? Do you have a computer? These are everyday miracles that you, by implication, despise because they are built on imperfect science.
That would be the effect of inverse-square spreading of undirected radiation. The answer is to channel it. We do that with electric power lines, easily, and have for many decades. People think we can do that with laser beams, and we can, but the consequences of a mishap are severe. And there are power losses from absorption and scattering. Such systems are inherently weapons. But you are not wrong about needing great amounts of energy, though the objective would be not to lose much of it in the transmission process. I think the transmission efficiency of our power grid is about 90% (I'm not sure if that includes transformer efficiency to step voltage up and down).
This is the summary report on Tesla's papers produced by Dr. John G. Trump at the request of the government. With the exception of Tesla's viscous turbine invention (alive and known today), it is all science fiction bunk, as Dr. Trump understates it. No free energy for anyone. No beamed power (for which we should be glad, as it is the most hazardous way to transport power).
Edit: Wow. Downvoted for stating the naked truth? Tesla Denialist Syndrome (TDS).
What if there were Leprechauns? You can fantasize all you want, but it won't make it true. So, in order to save your favorite delusion, you are prepared to call Dr. Trump a liar? Without any evidence? What has he ever done to you to deserve such disrespect? Suppose he told "the real truth" to his colleagues at MIT and they all sat around and had an uproarious laughing session? The probability is that Dr. Trump knew far more than Tesla about the problems of pushing electromagnetic power through the atmosphere (which is what radar does).
I see you are trying to keep the prevailing narratives from being looked into. My belief, is that you have much vested; obviously, by as much effort as you put into your work.
I am trying to speak on behalf of reality. This is kind of a crisis moment. A huge head of steam has been built up in the Tesla mythology movement about his secrets being contained in his final papers, and that the papers have been hushed up by the government for ulterior purposes. Well, now we have Dr. Trump's assessment, and it turns out to be a nothingburger. The "Tesla Technology" does not exist. The myth was a pipe dream from the very beginning. And now the believers of the myth are confronted with the real test of mental integrity: are you going to recognize reality, or become psychotic and only recognize a myth?
And for you, it is seemingly inconceivable that anyone would care enough about the truth that they would speak for it consistently and strongly, from the standpoint of technical background and experience. Your belief about me is as off the mark as your beliefs about Tesla. That should be a lesson.
This is not an awakening. It is a refusal to leave the dream.
He was told to report that. The oil and coal companies would have gone nuts if he said otherwise. That's why every free energy or efficient invention has been suppressed or classified top secret.
You know, this is where your hope turns into paranoid delusion. You have the papers in front of you. The material was worthless (excepting the turbine) and there was nothing tangible about free energy. You can't stand the truth, so you declare it all a lie...which you can never prove.
Why do you think such a thing as "free energy" is even possible? Don't you understand (as "the oil and gas companies" would clearly have understood) that no technology comes for free. It requires mental and physical effort, materials, facilities, equipment. None of this is free, period. No, this idea that the oil and gas companies were bitter antagonists is a figment of your own economic ignorance, projecting on them a completely childish and thoughtless vision of your own.
Well, I watched it and even took notes. A very mixed bag. The gasoline-vapor carburetor approaches were never analyzed with respect to power output, which apparently was a weak point. You can always improve your mileage if you travel at a low speed. And good luck if you have to step on the gas and there is no prompt response. You can make an airplane that can fly around the world...but the only problem is that you have trouble taking off or landing. Today, we have pollution control requirements on the combustion chemistry, which are an obstacle. But we have computer-controlled fuel injection and turbocharging, and also hybrid gas-electric systems. Hybrid systems were popularized in the 1960s. I used to read the articles. This account seems to focus on inventions that failed to continue, but omits the inventions that came along and were successful.
I have never heard of anyone denying the "zero point energy" notion. The appearance and disappearance of virtual particles is the explanation for the Casimir Force observed experimentally. But the principle of the quantum vacuum is that particles appear (energy production) and disappear (energy reduction) for the length of time that an energy error can exist from the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. But how to get a flow of energy? It appears that no one knows. I am suspicious of successes based on voltage measurement. Nothing easier than to develop thousands of volts from petting your cat. The ones that dealt with watts were more interesting. But what am I to make of all the sob stories he related? Are they real? Name me a poison that causes a brain aneurysm. My grandmother died of a brain aneurysm, and she was not inventing ZPE technology. Tesla's Wardenclyffe establishment has nothing to do with ZPE; he was attempting to beat Marconi to the attainment of long-distance message transmission (and failed). Moreover, it is not credible to think that Tesla would have had any insight on ZPE, considering he denied everything concerning quantum physics.
I recall a story about some fellow who invented a perpetual-motion electric motor based on magnetic rotors, but his popularity seemed to wither and go away. What seems to be the common element among these kinds of machines is that there is no theory of operation, and a complete mystery as to how the inventor came up with his idea. A current example is Andrea Rossi and his Energy Catalyzer ("E-Cat"), which he tries to market---but never wants anyone to look beneath the skirt. We at Boeing looked into his offering, but could never conclude that it was solid, on account of his shifty behavior. My analysis was that he could have developed a technique for turning radioactivity on or off (or fast or slow). Intriguing, but he was his own worst enemy.
All the discussion about T. Townsend Brown and his devices as being "anti-gravity" is ignorant hokum. What he was doing was experimenting with the "ion wind" effect that the Sharper Image catalog popularized in an "air cleaning" device. I had one. You turn it on and a tuft of copper fuzz would produce a breeze of air toward your face. If you make the emitter large enough and the rest of the equipment light enough, it can lift itself up. He does not mention the work done by Alexander de Seversky in developing this "ionocraft," which was once a featured article for a 1964 issue of Popular Mechanics. Never came to pass. Thrust/weight ratio was not high enough. That is another aspect of these wonder inventions: they almost always develop down sides. None of our aircraft use "anti-gravity" technology. I once heard people claiming the B-2 bomber used anti-gravity technology, which was complete nonsense, considering its whole principle (flying wing) was absolutely open to view.
i agree, of course, that "green energy" is a complete fraud and hoax. This has been known essentially since the 1970s.
I have had inventions suppressed for reasons of national security. In one case, I was able to slip by with a rewrite on the feasible use for the invention (I had proposed it as a means of passively detecting stealthy aircraft). In another case (a categorical solution to the problem of visible contrails) was simply squelched---which I thought was ridiculous, since any Iranian grad student could have arrived at the same insight. But they were based on very commonly known principles of physics and chemistry, so it is hard to say they were suppressed for all time. And not every invention is patented, so I do approve of the narrator's advice at the end to simply publish anonymously. Did Elon Musk patent the landing scheme for his booster rockets? Would it matter, considering he is the leader of the pack, anyway?
And this is the flaw in the suppressed technology mythology. There are a LOT of inventions that are happening all the time, many with direct application to military systems or energy production. How do you explain the ones that are not suppressed? So, this is all interesting, but when there is no explanation, there is no possibility of pursuit. I will say this: declassification of withheld patents should be an element of Trump's intention to have transparency of government.
That's funny, the first quote almost describes the way the Giza pyramid is said to work by harvesting piezo generated electron holes from vibrations in the granite below.
That was described in the speculative but persuasive work of Christopher Dunn.
I'll check it out after reading my electric bill. Thanks
Kek!
ascension and rebirth chamber? how did the ancient kings live for hundreds of years? why was iraq attacked? why was Hillary talking about Gilgamesh's resurrection chamber in those leaked emails? Can elites cheat death?
Baby blood. Pharaonic bastards never went away... their society just went secret.
The secret societies literally wear their symbols. Even Alistier Crowley.
Yeah I have always thought that the Eygtians were trying to copy what they saw their 'gods' do when in reality they were probably just an advanced civilization using tech like we see in Sci Fi movies for space travel.
Its kind of right in front of us when you think about it.
Didn’t Stargate SG1 have something called a sarcophagus?
Yes they did. And if you watch the SG1 series, you can start to understand almost all the technologies available to us once you work around all the twists done to distract us. Also, the Goa'uld isn't one 20" worm, but a bunch of tiny parasitic worms that Ivermectin and other anti-parasitics can take out. NOW you know why they scream about HCQ.
Yeah the played off that angle for the movie. Imagine ancient type man seeing something like that, they would not have the concept of the science involved but would see it extends/saves life and try and replicate as best they could.
Medbeds or Celestial Chambers have an age regression version. Supposedly it can only be used 3 times on a human body. We will find out more as they are released and time goes on.
I remember when a famous inspector found one of those "chambers"
1000s of years.
Yes, all the Pyramid structures tied into the Free Energy Network
I hate to be that guy, but is society actually ready for unlimited free energy? Picture your average American, and realize half are dumber than that. What would they do with unlimited energy, would we be safer as a society?
Just saying, that line of thinking is the exact same as the people we fight on a daily basis.
Essentially every globalist BS talking point about climate, guns, etc boils down to the same "We don't think you can use this to our satisfaction, therefore you, the people, don't deserve it wholesale"
This invariably leads to a "have-nots" underclass, which is exactly what we are fighting against. Just because you can envision yourself as a "have" does not make it moral or just.
I think it's a fair topic to explore. When there is no COST for energy, it also means there is no barrier to entry for all sorts of insane ideas which usually would be naturally curtailed by lack of resources. What would be the implications?
But unlimited energy doesn't necessarily mean no barrier to entry. Fundamentally, there is still the factor of time and knowledge for everything, the abundance of energy just makes the prior 2 so much more important.
Right now we're strip mining lithium and pumping out 500+ pound battery packs for vehicles like there's no tomorrow, and in 10 years someone will be needing to dispose of said battery pack. Get the friggin wireless energy going now before the place is totally trashed, and all that lithium has permeated our ground water supply.
I think if it was indeed true (I am skeptical), I don't think we'd be any safer as a society.
The fall out from the downfall of the oil, coal, and natural gas industries would be scary.
That money runs a significant part of the world. It employs tens of millions of people, if not over a hundred million, around the world.
CEOs, CFOs, and executives
High-level managers and strategists
Investors and board members
Petroleum engineers
Geologists and geophysicists
Chemical engineers
Environmental scientists
Roughnecks
Drillers and derrick operators
Welders and machinists
Plant operators and technicians
Process engineers
Safety inspectors
Pipeline workers
Truck drivers
Ship crews for oil tankers
Railroad operators
Janitors and maintenance workers
Caterers and cooks for offshore rigs
IT and cybersecurity professionals
Legal teams
Administrative staff and accountants
Gas station employees
Marketing and sales teams for petroleum
Coal Miners
Mine Foremen and Supervisors
Mine Safety Inspectors
Blasters and Explosives Technicians
Coal Truck Drivers
Coal Processing Plant Workers
Coal Train Operators and Railroad Workers
Barge Operators (Coal Transport)
Coal Terminal Dock Workers
Conveyor Belt Operators
Ash and Slag Handlers
Coal Power Plant Operators
Fly Ash Recycling Workers
Coal Equipment Mechanics
Coal Mine Reclamation Workers
Natural Gas Drillers
Hydraulic Fracturing (Fracking) Technicians
Wellhead Pump Operators
Pipeline Construction Workers
Pipeline Inspectors
Compressor Station Operators
Gas Meter Technicians
LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) Plant Workers
LNG Tanker Ship Crews
Gas Processing Plant Operators
Natural Gas Storage Facility Workers
Gas Distribution System Engineers
Residential and Commercial Gas Installers
Propane Refinery Workers
Natural Gas-Powered Vehicle Technicians
Coal Lobbyists
Gas Industry PR and Marketing Teams
Coal and Gas Industry Lawyers
Gas Utility Customer Service Reps
Coal and Gas Investment Analysts
(Yes, I googled jobs for those industries.)
I think it would be catastrophic if all these tens of millions of people would lose their jobs in such a short time period. The job market would not be able to absorb all of them quickly. People would be financially destroyed and would most likely seek government assistance. That would put a strain on everyone.
Eventually things would begin to even out as the Tesla technology was put into place, replacing the infrastructure of oil, coal, and natural gas industries.
Instead of working for "Big Oil", they would instead work for "Big "Free" Energy".
And this is the part that people don't want to hear.
"Free" Energy wouldn't actually be free. At least, not for the vast majority of people using it.
I think people have this idea that everyone would just generate their own energy, without the need of anyone else. Similar to how people can go off grid with solar energy. But just like it's impractical for everyone to generate their own energy from solar, it would be impractical for everyone to generate their own Tesla energy.
Even if the energy itself is "free," people would still need to build energy receivers, converters, and storage systems to make it useful.
If every home needed its own Tesla tower or specialized receiver, costs would be high.
Maintaining these systems would require technical expertise, making DIY setups impractical for most people.
It would be inevitable that "Big Free Energy" would soon take up the vacuum left by the collapse of "Big Oil", "Big Coal", and "Big Natural Gas".
Even if the energy source itself were freely available, you’d still need infrastructure to capture, store, and distribute it. This includes:
Energy receivers (like Tesla’s Wardenclyffe Tower concept)
Transmission stations to relay power
Storage systems (possibly high-density batteries or superconducting grids)
Maintenance crews to repair and upgrade systems
(Yes, I googled what would be needed for Tesla infrastructure).
Somebody has to fund, build, and maintain this infrastructure. The corporations or governments that own it would almost certainly charge fees for access, upkeep, or premium reliability—just like today’s energy providers.
Even if the energy is abundant, companies could restrict access using proprietary technology or encrypted signals.
Think of how Wi-Fi is technically “wireless,” yet internet service providers charge you for access.
A corporation like “Big Free Energy, Inc.” might give out basic power for free but charge for higher speeds, security features, or uninterrupted service.
Just because energy is abundant doesn’t mean the devices that use it are free.
Companies would still sell cars, machines, smart appliances, and power storage units that tap into the energy grid.
Licensing fees might apply for products that integrate with the free energy system, just like patents on rechargeable batteries today.
Any new energy system would require governance, just like oil and electricity grids today.
Governments could tax energy usage or regulate bandwidth and priority access.
Even in a world where energy is infinitely abundant, businesses will always find ways to monetize convenience, reliability, and control.
Frankly, I think if Tesla’s "Free Energy" was indeed real, it would be the ultimate wet dream for liberals.
They would get to save the world from climate change due to eliminating CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels.
They would have an entirely new monopoly on energy to take advantage of.
They have a new industry to set up with regulations and oversight, subsidies and taxes, legislation and policy, and all the other things they dream of.
They get to force everyone to buy new electric cars (not Teslas though. Obviously.)
They get to gloat about taking down all the oil tycoons and fracking companies they've been going after for years.
So, yeah. If Tesla’s "free" energy is true, no one will be happier than the libs.
I know I've just put a serious dent into the fantasies some people have surrounding Tesla’s Free Energy, but I prefer that people be realistic about what would actually happen.
Sorry. 😕
Yeah...no reason to turn off anything.
Leave everything running... always... forever...
Lights...blenders, power tools, well water, TV's, stereos, Christmas lights - heck - cover your entire property in 200w incandescent bulbs - like 5,000 of them and just leave them on all day and night...
People actually did this when Solar first came out…. Literally did everything you mentioned above… and wondered why they had an electric bill..
I had to make sure everyone knew it was a 120% offset,. & not be wasteful
I have considered this lots over the years.
I don't think humans can handle unlimited free energy unless we have an awakening of our group consciousness, but I think we'll get that first.
You mean we could all just stand in front of the open refrigerator door trying to decide what to eat, and not worry about letting the cold air out?
Not everyone has a good mother.
Let's leave mother out of this. She wouldn't understand.
Yep. He had ideas to broadcast power and information to the entire word for free. Essentially using a series of obelisk looking things to relay the power/energy.
Wardenclyffe towers. There is one in Texas and maybe another near Moscow, where are the others? Hammer some metal rods into the ground and connect them together using a Tesla circuit and you have DC power from the earth. How much are inverters these days?
J.P. Morgan was all about holes that money fell out of into his pockets . "Morgan provided funding for the construction of the Wardenclyffe Tower on Long Island," but he and Westinghouse couldn't monetize "free energy".
JOHN G. TRUMP I seem to remember that name from somewhere. 🤔😮
Bingo
I got attacked on this site when I made the connection. Of course Trump said there was nothing of significance in the papers.
Liberals: Free Energy!!! OMG this is great!!! Media: It comes from Tesla, Nikolai Tesla. Liberals: Free Energy is racist!!!! Resist!!! Coal is amazing! 🤩
Nikola*
But hilarious and accurate take
I think you're going to get a surprise. A big, beautiful surprise. Maybe sooner than anybody thinks.
U/ mrmemeagi Nice username. Well done.
Yeah, but obviously we need to be controlled.
Yes, that is precisely the point.
Recall the Georgia Guidestones.
We are but cattle to those in power - the "better men".
If you haven’t consider Tesla might not have been of this world you might should.
I feel like this “”might”” be true for Elon too🤷♂️
Yes and no. Our genes are wild, maybe within them they occasionally combine to produce people like Musk, Tesler etc. Random chance.
It's called "genius," the territory beyond an I.Q. of 145. About one person in a thousand, in round numbers. It is a tremendous gift, but they are still human, and still subject to grandiose overconfidence.
Rowan Atkinson’s (Mr Bean) iq is 178! 😳
While I do not immediately discount the fact that aliens exist (it's a big universe), I believe Elon and Tesla are/were human.
I realized some time ago the nature of human consciousness. We are actually connected at some plain of existence outside of our capabilities to see. There are so many of the same "random chance" discoveries by humans happening on the opposite sides of the world, where communication is impossible. That's why the internet was such a game changer.
Case in point, pyramids. Now, South American models are not precisely the same as Egyptian, but the same idea existed. These things might as well be worlds apart. There's even some in Asia.
Then you have the case of doppelgangers. DNA pairs are infinite but yet two or more people exist that look roughly or exactly the same?
In the case of zero point energy, which Tesla was researching - I believe this was a contemporary rediscovery of physics that our species had stumbled on a long time ago.
And why would they stop him before releasing what he knew, totally discredit him so he died alone, penniless?
#1 - Our entire economy and way of life is built on paying for energy. Wars are fought over energy. You take that away by providing a seemingly endless source, money loses value and the powers that be lose control over us. We would be able to go and do anything we wanted.
#2 - Psychopaths will take that literally, and do anything they can to do what they do. Some people believe that is precisely what happened in the past, whenever this technology is discovered. Civilization collapses and has to rebuild from cavemen-era.
Now, I take that a step beyond - and I'll loop it back around to your alien theory. What if the obvious UFOs that we see (and questionable things on the Moon/Mars) are infact technology from previous civilization that were on Earth? Consider - they know their history, and they are monitoring us to see if we do the same thing.
Notice, I didn’t call them “alien”.?.
The process “awakening” I’ve gone through since first discovering Q is vastly larger than anything I could have imagined when I first arrived on the scene.
Its beginning was all about governmental corruption and then it expanded into every aspect of society. At some point it dawned on me that the Q op was much greater than then just corruption, so I went looking for it in new places.
Somewhere along the path I found signs that it was happening in archeology, science and spirituality and I believe those things are the true crux of the Q op. When the dust settles and the world is FINALLY told what has transpired we will find out that ridding society of the lies and corruption were merely a bi-product of a much greater plan.
Then again, I’m just a smooth brain Ape so who the hell knows🙂
I was thinking about him yesterday. How nice it would be without all these fricken poles and wires everywhere.
A nice little refresher https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuINhmT3V8Y
While not being an expert in Tesla, I am a keen follower.
Exhibit J: Could be a Tesla Turbine but more elaborate version of it? I think something different entirely.
Exhibit E: This is juicy. "Art of Producing Terrestrial Motions at Distance" - "terrestrial motions"? Does that mean earthquakes or have more subtle nuance? This is the first time I've seen reference to a "mechanical or electromechanical device bolted to some rocky proturbence". "Bolted" stands out. This is exactly what Wardencliffe was. The jives also with the confirmed discovery of its structure extending deep down into the aquifer below, mirroring the recently claimed discovery at the Great Pyramid.
This also is the first I'm seeing the earth's crust specifically being mentioned as having 'resonance frequency' although this is of course heavily implied by his comment about the Earth "ringing like a bell".
Exhibit M: This isn't "new" but it IS the first time I'm reading a specific range of his wireless transmission system (12,000 miles) and efficiency / loss factor (5%). That by itself is wild (sounding).
Exhibit P: "Statements on a new airplane" - this is for Popular Science Monthly 1928. I am curious about this, I dont remember hearing about his ideas for flight. I wonder if this interview is public?
As in using resonance to lift heavy objects or as in anti-gravity ?
Well, I always took that quote to mean that there is some innate frequency to the Earths existence and a bell is essentially a simile.
Thus a frequency that amplified or damped it might have an effect on the gravity of an object while no changing it's mass ?
You & I are just a mass of atoms vibrating near each other at a certain frequency until we stop vibrating. But until then there is a lot of space between to allow tis movement. Kind of like the Universe mostly space with a little dust scattered about.
My mashed potato flakes were flying from the spoon to the sides of the plastic bag. True free energy.
Want to try a fun one? Shuffle across the carpet in your socks and then zap your dog on the nose!
It's all around us.
The spark energy comes from the metabolic energy exerted to shuffle across the carpet. Same thing with a Wimshurst static generator...which has to be externally powered.
Oh go stick a ballon to the wall....
You have to rub the balloon on your sweater to imbue it with a static charge. It sticks to the wall from static polarization.
It's not ""free energy" if you had to do WORK in order to get that tiny electrical charge....
That's as foolish as saying"I got this free gun I bought at the gun store!"
Or "socialism has FREE healthcare!!"
Not if they cost less than $ 20 because you are making so many and selling them to the world to protect themselves from Government. They would be like a "Free Lunch" now $20 ( minimum wage in Commiefornia for an hour of "work")
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, and against the worldly governors, the princes of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness, which are in the high places." --Ephesians 6:12 -- 1599 Geneva Bible
The point is there is no such thing as free energy.
You had to create that energy by doing work
Since thinking is indeed work and "free" is a relative term used in this example to mean negligible cost when monetized over the long term .
Then it's not free energy.
There is no such thing as free energy.
Literally one of the laws of physics and this universe can not break it.
Is their free water ?
Wardenclyffe Towers could provide free wireless energy over the ground plane given the proper excitation; Schuman resonance involved?
That'd piss off the Deep State BIGLY.
Rockefellers rock over medicine. JP Morgan and the banksters didn’t want free medicine. Health and energy has literally steered humanity in the direction we’re in.
Here is a rare Tesla PDF for you:
https://files.catbox.moe/6mw3y4.pdf
Wexit, you rock. Huge thanks.
From Youtube
https://youtu.be/12vX4NH0eZI
The deep state has been using "free energy" underground for decades/centuries.
SOMEONE GET THIS IN FRONT OF ASHTON FORBES, STAT!!
No, Bob Greenyer.
interesting post and thread, I like this substack on Tesla topic https://supersonicuniversal.substack.com/p/john-trumps-analysis-of-the-tesla
It introduces with a few simple visuals theoretical applications for Tesla technology, and has a nice alternative model for atoms
They need tobgive up the tech for free energy.
Trump's point: Tesla had no such technology. You can't give up what you don't have.
Well... that's what he SAID..... publicly.
Which "he"? What Tesla said was a sales pitch with nothing behind it. What Trump said was for the eyes of the government and was squirreled away. Tesla turbines are out there, but not much used. Apparently there are some practical problems, but I wish they had more prominence.
Exhibit E, Telegeodynamics looks like a weapon that could split the earth in half, NT did talk about this in some of his papers.
Some folk believe he tested it on a remote area of Siberia, the Tsunguska event of 1908
The Tunkuska event was a bolide, an air blast resulting from the crushing of a meteor by the pressure of its own shock wave. No indication of a ground source.
Tesla was running off at the pen, asserting things for which he had no substantiation.
He never said or wrote that. He never wrote anything about Tsunguska.
You said "NT did talk about this [a weapon that could split the earth in half] in some of his papers. I replied that he was "running off at the pen..."
You were the one who mentioned Tunguska. I was simply informing you of what it was. Different paragraphs. Just like you had different paragraphs.
It was a typo, please excuse me. You are wrong to say that is was a bolide, there was no heat damage anywhere at the site , there were no meteorite fragments discovered even after over 100 years of looking for some, no impact craters at all, not even minor ones, just a lot of trees blown down all in a radiating pattern away from a central point.
That's what a bolide does: it implodes from the shock pressure and converts all its kinetic energy to heat energy, vaporizing the meteor. It is a mid-air explosion, and it would only leave what was found: heat and blast effects. There was heat damage (scorched trees) over a wide area, and mineral samples found consistent with the composition of meteorites. The Barringer Meteorite Crater in Arizona has profuse signs of being what it is, but no pieces of the source meteor have been found, either, because it was all vaporized.
lol, there be shills here. Anyone here trashing Tesla still hasn’t learned their lesson about a weaponized press. This didn’t start in 2016 and it wasn’t a result of the smith mundt modernization act. It has been going on for all of history.
You’d think that people would realize after the covid revelations that everything you think you know is false. You can’t know anything you didn’t scientifically prove to yourself, all you can do is repeat what you’ve heard and accepted as truth. You have to work for the truth which is offputting to lazy people. Turn your scepticism inwards, there you will find the problem.
As far as free energy is concerned it is a phrase like Qanon and is used to discredit the idea that you don’t have to put all the energy into a system yourself. You can harness what nature provides if you arrange things correctly.
That's true on the shills. I'm not sure if KsR is a Gr ook3 AI programmed to constantly prevent any further talk about something the Deep State is desperately trying to hold back from us, or just supposed to be a test to see who's ready to graduate past controlled opposition :-). My guess is both.
Absolutely that is why they came up with the phrase "free energy".
And just like Qanon, it's being used to cover up the fact that it's real.
I do believe the USA has technology that is based on the same principles that Tesla was working on. And they used it in public, on MH370.
Only a matter of time.
The problem with Tesla is that he trashes himself by overdriving his headlights. His practical inventions stand the test of time. His flights of fancy do not. Now that we have Dr. Trump's assessment of his last papers, we find that it is a nothingburger. The "secret" is all a myth, no substance.
And those with a solid scientific and engineering background are not subject to a "weaponized press," as the principles and facts of science and engineering must always be supported by reality, or nothing could work as conceived, planned, or designed. So, there is plenty one can know without having to re-invest in 300 years of scientific discovery and development. For you to say that such knowledge is impossible means only that you are ignorant of it. And you don't respond well to experts, because they pop your bubble.
We already have "free energy." It is called nuclear energy and, in its heyday of commercial application, it was literally anticipated that nuclear-generated electricity would be so inexpensive, it would not even be metered. That might still be true, if the government could get out of the way of its application, and the popular phobia about nuclear power (like the phobia over witchcraft) is dispelled by an educational program. By the way, Tesla did not believe in such things as nuclear energy. He rejected quantum physics in its entirety.
That’s exactly the kind of thinking I’m talking about. Have we met?
Please do tell me all about the reality of which you speak
Tag for follow up when not on mobile
Tesla did not have devices for free generation of energy. He claimed you could wirelessly transmit energy for free. And he never got his power station on Long Island working. He wouldn't have died poor if he did.
An AI summary
Tesla's Vision: Tesla believed in a future where electricity could be transmitted wirelessly, using the Earth itself as a giant conductor, eliminating the need for wires.
Wardenclyffe Tower: The Wardenclyffe Tower, built on Long Island, New York, was intended to demonstrate this wireless power transmission system.
Not "Free" Energy: It's important to note that Tesla's system wasn't about creating energy from thin air. The energy would still need to be generated through conventional means, but the transmission would be wireless
Tesla said: "Electric power is everywhere present in unlimited quantities and can drive the world's machinery without the need of coal, oil, gas, or any other of the common fuels."
But is it true?
I think he also said that in the '30s decades after he built his Tower in Long Island
Money got pulled for Wardencliff by JP Morgan for political money reasons, not for technical reasons. So, doesn't matter when Tesla said it. Yes, still true. And Dunn's pyramid powerplant idea harnesses micro-motions in the pyramid (interestingly the same ones used recenyly with SAR doppler technique, though that's another conversation) through piezo electric effect.
We now know way more about electromagnetism than Tesla did in his day.
If what he was proposing was technically successful, it would be built by now and companies would be using it the world over.
Tesla was a great showman and he's a great story, but he wasn't infallible
We know nothing about these things. What IS gravity? What IS inertia & momentum? Why does general relativity not work unless we put our finger on the scale with dark matter? Why does our planet have an active electromagnetic field while many others in our solar system do not? How do the UFOs move around without "leaving something behind"?
The assumption is always that, since we exist later in time than people from the past, we know more than them. What if most of our science is true enough to mostly work, but otherwise designed to cover up the real truth?
There is obviously great incentive to do this, since Tesla tech as it was theorized to work would set humankind free, forever.
Gravity has been well-described since Isaac Newton (maybe not well-explained; it is a work in progress). Inertia and momentum are well-defined in any beginning physics class. General Relativity may not work because it involves flawed logic (like the so-called "equivalence principle"). Geomagnetic fields are thought to require molten planetary cores by which a dynamo is generated by convection currents. Some planets or moons seem not to have them. Others have them very strongly. We don't even know if UFOs are "something."
I agree that knowledge can be lost. We have no idea how to make "Greek Fire," for instance. And there are plenty of examples of modern technology that has come and gone, for which we no longer have the knowledge of its construction (such as 16-inch naval cannon). Our science works. It's not designed to "cover up" anything. The very expression is incoherent.
Nothing sets humankind free from humankind. If you had a credit card with a billion-dollar limit, how would you live? As though you were "free"? You don't seem to appreciate what we have, or how huge even small improvements are when you are close to poverty.
Newtonian physics do not accurately predict gravity, never mind explain what it is. We similarly understand what effect inertia and momentum have in a given physics problem, but again we do not know what they are. Why do these phenomena exist?
General relativity scales better, but it still breaks down at the extremes, and thus still doesn’t accurately explain how gravity works. And again, it doesn’t explain what gravity is, why does this phenomenon exist? Its explanations require us to just fudge the numbers and assume that there is extra mass which can’t be observed.
Our science works well enough for our current purposes, but it always breaks down at some extreme or another. A grand unified theory still escapes us. It did not escape Tesla, electricity is key to understanding all these phenomena as well as understanding the ways in which GR and newtonian physics break down.
For example, take inertia and momentum. Imagine that the universe is infinite or at least exceedingly large, and that gravity operates instantaneously and across infinite distance. Inertia is thus the cumulative effect of the gravity of the entire universe operating on a given body, which requires energy to overcome. An object pushed in one direction is thus falling towards one side of the universe and stopping it requires energy as well.
As for what gravity is, it’s electric attraction, the cumulative effect of the electrical charge of every atom in a given physics problem. GR breaks down at the extreme because mass alone doesn’t predict how much pull a given object will have on another: there exist bodies that pull harder and bodies that hardly pull at all. No need for dark matter, no need for black holes.
Yes, Tesla tech could completely free people from our open air prison. It would enable someone to go off to a remote wilderness and generate all the power needed to power a small community and grow plenty of food. It also enables one to “melt” and levitate rocks and other materials like the ancients used to, freeing one from needing a society to provide building materials. Understanding why we’re stuck to the surface of the earth with gravity enables one to move against the gravitational field without “leaving something behind,” it’s pure electric propulsion and could easily send a man to Mars or beyond. This is why we are living in “the matrix” as far as scientific knowledge goes. If we could leave how would they keep us as cattle?
Tesla tech as it was theorized to work would set humankind free, forever.
See what I said about Tesla being a showman.
Tesla lived for decades after JP Morgan cut off his funding.
If he had something that worked he could have just written out exactly what he was talking about. He could have left that to anybody. He could have sold that.
The energy that Tesla was talking about wirelessly transmitting would still need to be generated. The Tesla plant had giant generators And he still had to pay for the fuel to generate that electricity
You're assuming his opponents were nonviolent. What if they blackmailed him with pedo shit like they still do today? What if they threatened someone dear to him if he ever spilled the beans? What if they needed his help to come up with all the fake science we're so proud of today, that perfectly covers up his discoveries?
Investment money reasons. Tesla was at that point nothing but a money pit, pursuing his rivalry with Marconi to be the first transmitter of a message. Nothing salable was forthcoming. And Tesla's idea was based on a false assumption that the air was conductive for electricity, so that would have been a show-stopper.
Marconi's radio technology was specifically designed to cover up Tesla's findings, namely, that messages (and energy) could be broadcast from any point to any point on earth, without direct line of sight, and faster than light.
Marconi was not in the least concerned about Tesla. He was the first to demonstrate that it could be done, with wireless telegraphy. Long-wave radio can be broadcast and heard all over the Earth (if you have enough power and a sensitive receiver). You talk as though it hasn't been a reality for over a century. Where have you been?
Faster than light is BS. It is only as fast as light. And maybe not quite that fast, since the atmosphere has a refractive index that results in a slight reduction of wave propagation speed.
The bankers who funded Marconi knew full well that contemporary science was on the brink of discovering Tesla technology. If it hadn’t been Nikola, it would have eventually been someone else. They needed to head that off with something that would throw future generations off track. Marconi was able to oblige, knowingly in my view.
Radio requires line of sight or something off of which to reflect. Tesla’s transmissions travelled through electromagnetic strata and needed no reflecting to get to the other side of the earth. Radio frequencies low enough to pass through the earth are also low bandwidth and not usable if everyone were to crowd those frequencies.
The speed limit proposed by Einstein is BS and requires us to put our thumb on the scale with “dark matter”. Tesla’s transmissions are instantaneous across any distance as they are transmitted through the ether, while radio is essentially waves produced in a pond of ether and travels at the speed of those waves.
J.P. Morgan pulled the plug as soon as he realized there would be no way to monetize the tech.
JP Morgan isn't the real issue.
If what Tesla was proposing was technically feasible, it could be done by now. Sciences for has advanced far beyond where Tesla was back in his day.
It's not just the money.
The US government prevented Lee Iacocca from putting turbine engines in personal vehicles. The technology later wound up in military vehicles.
This is how they do.
No, the US government said that if Chrysler wanted a loan to save it from bankruptcy it had to cut costs.
Turbines did end up in military vehicles but they were not Chrysler Turbines.
Lycoming Engines makes them.
In the 45 years since no other company has decided to put turbine engines in consumer cars cuz it's a terrible idea.
Turbines are best when operating at maximum power. Which is nowhere close to how most people drive.
They are really inefficient in start and stop traffic. They respond really slowly when accelerating and decelerating. Like wait two seconds after you hit the pedal. Their output is hot enough to melt the paint on the car behind you.
We don't have turbines in cars because they're not a good idea and inefficient
A couple companies tried turbines in buses, but I'm not sure they are still in business.
A new thing now is to use a micro turbine to power an electrical vehicle.
Or because they know it's off limits. Since every single big "business" in existence these days depends on continued credit and other forms of government largesse, they all know they'll never get the financing needed for this tech.
Electric cars have been around for more than a century. They would have had this idea in Lee Iacocca's time. But some ideas are simply un-financeable.
Did you even absorb what DueProcessFan had to say? The technology had operational down-sides, which would have prevented widespread customer acceptance. Just because something is nifty does not mean it is good for service. Chrysler continued development into the 1970s, but was unable to eliminate the thorniest problems. The closest we get to it is the turbocharged engine, which is a hybrid of a turbine engine and a piston engine. The piston engine is inserted in place of the turbine combustor. This was done commonly in military aircraft from World War II to the complete replacement of piston engines by turbine engines.
And yet it was good enough for military applications. They don’t want us to have such high efficiency technology because then we’d be less dependent on the gas they happily charge us a fortune for.
Edison and Westinghouse had to ruin Tesla because they saw the massive profit potential of putting a meter on everyone that needed this "new" electricity commodity.
The more you learn about Edison, the more you realize what a scumbag he was. I think Alexander Graham Bell was similar if my memory is correct.
Edison's power transmission technology was specifically designed to cover up Tesla's findings, namely, that energy (and messages) could be broadcast from any point to any point on earth, without wires or metering.
Edison's "power transmission technology" was direct-current power lines. They lost out in competition with Westinghouse's alternating-current system devised by Tesla and still in use today. Long-distance message transmission was first achieved by Marconi (to Tesla's chagrin). Long-distance broadcast power, no way. Bad idea. Tremendously dangerous. I worked on "megawatt-class" laser transmission, and it was a weapon. Civilian power transmission systems start at much higher power levels. You really need to do your research.
You are still assuming Tesla tech was transmitting energy using waves in the ether, instead of transmitting directly through the ether. It is difficult to leave the “matrix” of fake science we’ve lived in our whole lives. Tesla did, and they bankrupted him for his troubles.
They didn't have to lift a finger. Tesla was pursuing a phantom, in this case. You tell me how meterless power could ever be produced by a free market. "Something for nothing" seldom occurs. Who would bear the cost of producing the power or constructing the distribution scheme? (Tesla had already won the competition with Edison over whether alternating current or direct current would be a basis for power distribution.)
You ever see the videos of people high on a mountain top when it's breezy? As the air molecules rush by you, static builds and wants to discharge someplace. An electrical "Aura" will develop that is visible to your naked eye.
Here's a great example: Energy from the atmosphere.
Lots of neat electrical phenomena in the air. Corona discharge (St. Elmo's Fire) is one of them, but I haven't had the pleasure of witnessing it. There is, of course, lightning, built up by the same mechanism. Airplanes are built with electrical "wicks" to stream off any surplus charge.
Something deep in the earth's core is producing enough electrical charge to cause non-stop electricity to pass through miles of barely conductive dirt, rock, and soil, and then arc across miles of barely conductive atmosphere and cause the production of ozone high above our heads. This same power source is constantly deflecting the solar wind miles and miles above the surface of the planet.
If you were a clever ant standing atop a running dynamo, you might notice that there is a gradient of electrical charge, going from deeply negative way down beneath your feet, to high positive way above your head.
The earth is a dynamo and relative to it, we are much smaller than ants. What if there were certain points on the earth's surface where the charge differential between deep down beneath us and way high above us could be used to generate power?
I shake my head. The ozone is produced by the ultraviolet radiation from the Sun, not by any nonexistent, undetectable terrestrial power source.
Dynamos are not supposed to have significant external electrical fields or they would short out. Regardless of dynamos, there is a terrestrial electric field gradient. But that's not the same thing as electric power. It is also very weak. The greater likelihood is that it is the result of static electricity produced by the friction of winds across the surface of the Earth. The brainy ones among us have proposed windmills to harvest this wind power. A more expensive, inefficient, and massively wasteful method is yet to be devised.
Did you know ozone is produced on the surface of a plasma globe? An electric charge is generated in the “core” of the plasma globe by a tesla coil, radiates outwards to the surface of the globe, and the high frequency voltage causes oxygen to form ozone. The earth’s charge used to be much stronger than it is today and, wouldn’t you know it, ancient accounts of conditions in those days claim that the sky glowed purple 24/7, same as a plasma globe does.
That is the electrical method for making ozone. If you have a strong enough electrical field, the normal diatomic oxygen will be split into separate atoms, each of which will combine with another oxygen molecule to form an ozone molecule.
What happens at high altitude is that the solar ultraviolet radiation has enough energy in a photon to accomplish the same effect of dissociating regular oxygen, which forms ozone from recombination.
All ozone eventually comes apart as ordinary oxygen.
I doubt that the sky "glowed purple" during the daytime. But this is the first I've heard of "ancient accounts" saying this. Don't you think you need to take this with a grain of salt?
No less than you should take modern “science” with a grain of salt. The solar system cannot be explained by accretion. For example, Venus’ spin is all wrong, it could only have fallen into place from outside the solar system. Mars could never have had water on its surface where it presently sits, and having no plate tectonics it could not have mountains. In fact, its mountains are blisters formed by plasma bolts striking its surface as its charge was equalized with the solar system’s charge as it descended to its current position. Think of myths of zeus casting lighting bolts and smiting lesser gods. We all understand these stories to be astronomically inspired yet when have we seen Jupiter cast lightning bolts?
Earth once orbited Saturn and Saturn was once a brown dwarf. Away from the sun, the earth’s electrical coma was enormous, much bigger than it is now. The charge being generated in earth’s core made a plasma globe of the earth, with a constant beam of charged plasma connecting earth’s coma with that of Saturn, much like we see today between Io and Saturn. Our sky glowed purple in this highly charged plasma field. This also had an effect on Earth’s gravity, which was lighter back then. The dinosaurs couldn’t possibly have existed under today’s gravity, they’re all absurd assuming our gravity was constant. How could a T-rex have balanced well enough to walk, never mind be a fierce predator? How could the pterodactyl ever have flown?? Consider as well, the “giants” of ancient times, and the utterly inexplicable megaliths. Consider our own genetic mysteries, like how our heads evolved to be so dangerously big relative to the birth canal, or the absurd weakness of our backs. We aren’t designed for this gravity, we are mutants who survived where our mother species, the giants, failed.
As Saturn entered the sol system, its coma shrank in the presence of the sun’s much more powerful electric field. Earth was wrested free of Saturn’s orbit, the purple plasma field went dark, and our planet descended to its present orbit. The craters that we suppose were caused by asteroid impacts that killed the dinosaurs are actually plasma bolt blisters, delivered to our planet as a result of the electrical charge differential between the old Saturn system and the Sol system. Our planet avoided Mars’ fate thanks to our core’s constant generation of electricity, which manifests today as lightning arcing from the earth’s surface out into the atmosphere, and the electrical generation of ozone in the atmosphere. You know you can smell the ozone as a lightning storm approaches…
You mean like the Antarctic area?
I don't know what's up with antarctica honestly. I was thinking of ley lines.
I was reading somewhere that all the megalithic pyramid complexes around the world (Egypt, Mexico, Cambodia, etc.) are aligned on ley lines. Can't find it now.
Look up "The Why Files - Compilation of Ancient Mysteries Vol. 1" on YouTube. Great info on Ley Lines there (still a little short on the technical end of it).
That’s the main reason I was thinking of them.
Nope.
Westinghouse paid Tesla quite a bunch of money. Which Tesla happily spent. Tesla was not successful as a business man and lived in fancy hotels, this why he was why he was in debt so much.
He was a great showman but he ultimately didn't deliver. The myth of Tesla doesn't live up to the reality.
Well, there was also the point where he granted Westinghouse free use of his patents, as Westinghouse was in a financial struggle to stay afloat. That easily stripped Tesla of income---but he realized there was no profit in killing the milk cow, and he was desirous that his technology prevail and be accepted.
Tesla was also under the impression that electric power could be conducted by air. But air is an insulator, so that was not bound to happen. If you could ionize the air, that might be a different story, but then you would be dealing with sustained lightning bolts. Not good for anything in the way, and wasteful of power through radiant emission.
His theory was that electric power could be conducted by the ether, and that air was no barrier to power being transmitted in this fashion. And great amounts of power are being transmitted through the rock and dirt beneath your feet, through your body, through the air all around and above us, miles and miles up into space. Enough of this power is transmitted, without electrical arcing, to deflect solar wind from the entire planet.
Well, it turns out that air is a barrier for electric power, which was the technology he was working with. At this point, so far as we know, there is no "ether." What we can do is radiate radio waves, like microwave beams or cell phone transmissions. There are no frequency assignments available for gigawatt-levels of microwave radiations. I would regard that as an incredibly dangerous method of power distribution.
No power is being transmitted through the Earth, or it would be measurable. You are confusing the energy of an established magnetic field with power. They are not the same thing. I have potential energy in the clothes on my top closet shelf, but they are not radiating any power. (There is geothermal power, but it is hard to extract and is basically heat seepage. It can be useful in places where it is prominent, like Iceland.)
Air is no barrier for the electromagnetic field generated in earth’s core and that repels the solar wind. It is transmitted through the ether and is not affected by air. The amount of energy needed to shield the entire earth is mind bending, and yet none of the negative effects you suppose must attend such a massive transmission of power are present.
The earth’s magnetic field is not in the nature of an established magnetic field, it is in the nature of an electromagnet. Its generation is the source of lightning and the constant electrical charge differential between the earth and the rest of the solar system.
Lots of energy, but very little power. Kind of like a high mountain lake issuing a tiny stream. Lots of potential energy, but very little flow. This is the big difference between energy and power. But the Earth is huge and we have lots of everything without being much bothered by it. You are talking about the MAGNETIC field around the Earth, not an "electromagnetic" field. There is a difference. I did not suppose any negative effects from a natural phenomenon that does not broadcast power.
The best that people have come up with about the terrestrial magnetic field is that it results from core convection of molten iron getting a grip of the solar magnetic field and amplifying it. That's what they say, and I don't defend it much. Where is the electric current? Molten iron cannot be magnetic, due to the Fermi effect. An alternative explanation, which I find attractive, is that the Earth, being a rotating charged body, is thereby a homopolar generator, developing a magnetic field from being a rotating charged sphere. There has been some data correlating the strength of the magnetic field with slight glitches in rotation.
The Earth's magnetic field is not the source of lightning. That is related to charge concentration resulting from air friction with water droplets. Clouds develop huge charge imbalances, which equalize by lightning discharges between clouds or between clouds and the ground. Magnetic fields do not produce static electricity.
I think you need to read more on meteorology and geophysics.
Tesla knew what generates the charge at the centre of the earth. Modern science cannot explain it, it just accepts its presence. Like gravity and inertia and momentum.
I have read all our modern “science” on these subjects. I am not convinced as it does not explain where any of these phenomena come from, and can’t even accurately predict them, they all break down at one extreme or another. They are not accurate!
We suppose that friction causes lightning yet we can’t predict when and where such storms will form. Yet we refuse to consider that this theory with zero predictive value might be wrong. And likewise, we assume we are smarter than the ancients in our profound hubris, yet we can’t explain what they were doing with structures like the pyramids, or the golden domes, both of which spread much further than can be explained by “architectural style that is downstream of local culture.”
Merely repeating this dogma back to me, as though it explains a single thing, is not persuasive.
This is the first I've heard of a charge at the center of the Earth. I don't think it shows up in "modern science," but I also don't think you know much about modern science.
No theory can predict the weather. It is too chaotic (which is a technical term meaning far too many variables and large scale randomness). Our modern science permits us to do much, like travel to other planets, to see into other galaxies, to split the atom, etc. You dismiss that too readily, which indicates your lack of familiarity.
Our electrical theories work well enough that we have designed and built an entire industry and civilization on those theories, so your contention that they have "zero predictive value" is very skewed. Nobody assumes we are smarter than the ancients, but the record is so absent we have NO IDEA how smart the ancients actually were. If there was other technology, it is lost. It is futile to dwell on that.
Those who do not want to learn are immune to persuasion. Unlike you folks, I am ready to explain, in detail, but you just turn up your nose, not having really been schooled in science or engineering, with the idea that if it is not anciently perfect, it is not worth knowing. That's too bad. Do you have a cell phone? Can you find your location by GPS? Do you have a computer? These are everyday miracles that you, by implication, despise because they are built on imperfect science.
Even in space, I believe, you get less energy the more the distance traveled.
So to move energy great distances requires great amounts of energy
That would be the effect of inverse-square spreading of undirected radiation. The answer is to channel it. We do that with electric power lines, easily, and have for many decades. People think we can do that with laser beams, and we can, but the consequences of a mishap are severe. And there are power losses from absorption and scattering. Such systems are inherently weapons. But you are not wrong about needing great amounts of energy, though the objective would be not to lose much of it in the transmission process. I think the transmission efficiency of our power grid is about 90% (I'm not sure if that includes transformer efficiency to step voltage up and down).
This is the summary report on Tesla's papers produced by Dr. John G. Trump at the request of the government. With the exception of Tesla's viscous turbine invention (alive and known today), it is all science fiction bunk, as Dr. Trump understates it. No free energy for anyone. No beamed power (for which we should be glad, as it is the most hazardous way to transport power).
Edit: Wow. Downvoted for stating the naked truth? Tesla Denialist Syndrome (TDS).
What if he told the government one thing, but secretly told his favorite nephew the real truth?
What if there were Leprechauns? You can fantasize all you want, but it won't make it true. So, in order to save your favorite delusion, you are prepared to call Dr. Trump a liar? Without any evidence? What has he ever done to you to deserve such disrespect? Suppose he told "the real truth" to his colleagues at MIT and they all sat around and had an uproarious laughing session? The probability is that Dr. Trump knew far more than Tesla about the problems of pushing electromagnetic power through the atmosphere (which is what radar does).
I see you are trying to keep the prevailing narratives from being looked into. My belief, is that you have much vested; obviously, by as much effort as you put into your work.
I am trying to speak on behalf of reality. This is kind of a crisis moment. A huge head of steam has been built up in the Tesla mythology movement about his secrets being contained in his final papers, and that the papers have been hushed up by the government for ulterior purposes. Well, now we have Dr. Trump's assessment, and it turns out to be a nothingburger. The "Tesla Technology" does not exist. The myth was a pipe dream from the very beginning. And now the believers of the myth are confronted with the real test of mental integrity: are you going to recognize reality, or become psychotic and only recognize a myth?
And for you, it is seemingly inconceivable that anyone would care enough about the truth that they would speak for it consistently and strongly, from the standpoint of technical background and experience. Your belief about me is as off the mark as your beliefs about Tesla. That should be a lesson.
This is not an awakening. It is a refusal to leave the dream.
He was told to report that. The oil and coal companies would have gone nuts if he said otherwise. That's why every free energy or efficient invention has been suppressed or classified top secret.
You know, this is where your hope turns into paranoid delusion. You have the papers in front of you. The material was worthless (excepting the turbine) and there was nothing tangible about free energy. You can't stand the truth, so you declare it all a lie...which you can never prove.
Why do you think such a thing as "free energy" is even possible? Don't you understand (as "the oil and gas companies" would clearly have understood) that no technology comes for free. It requires mental and physical effort, materials, facilities, equipment. None of this is free, period. No, this idea that the oil and gas companies were bitter antagonists is a figment of your own economic ignorance, projecting on them a completely childish and thoughtless vision of your own.
Go watch this extremely well researched video by The Why Files then come back and chat. https://youtu.be/-ZRwlYtAMps
Well, I watched it and even took notes. A very mixed bag. The gasoline-vapor carburetor approaches were never analyzed with respect to power output, which apparently was a weak point. You can always improve your mileage if you travel at a low speed. And good luck if you have to step on the gas and there is no prompt response. You can make an airplane that can fly around the world...but the only problem is that you have trouble taking off or landing. Today, we have pollution control requirements on the combustion chemistry, which are an obstacle. But we have computer-controlled fuel injection and turbocharging, and also hybrid gas-electric systems. Hybrid systems were popularized in the 1960s. I used to read the articles. This account seems to focus on inventions that failed to continue, but omits the inventions that came along and were successful.
I have never heard of anyone denying the "zero point energy" notion. The appearance and disappearance of virtual particles is the explanation for the Casimir Force observed experimentally. But the principle of the quantum vacuum is that particles appear (energy production) and disappear (energy reduction) for the length of time that an energy error can exist from the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. But how to get a flow of energy? It appears that no one knows. I am suspicious of successes based on voltage measurement. Nothing easier than to develop thousands of volts from petting your cat. The ones that dealt with watts were more interesting. But what am I to make of all the sob stories he related? Are they real? Name me a poison that causes a brain aneurysm. My grandmother died of a brain aneurysm, and she was not inventing ZPE technology. Tesla's Wardenclyffe establishment has nothing to do with ZPE; he was attempting to beat Marconi to the attainment of long-distance message transmission (and failed). Moreover, it is not credible to think that Tesla would have had any insight on ZPE, considering he denied everything concerning quantum physics.
I recall a story about some fellow who invented a perpetual-motion electric motor based on magnetic rotors, but his popularity seemed to wither and go away. What seems to be the common element among these kinds of machines is that there is no theory of operation, and a complete mystery as to how the inventor came up with his idea. A current example is Andrea Rossi and his Energy Catalyzer ("E-Cat"), which he tries to market---but never wants anyone to look beneath the skirt. We at Boeing looked into his offering, but could never conclude that it was solid, on account of his shifty behavior. My analysis was that he could have developed a technique for turning radioactivity on or off (or fast or slow). Intriguing, but he was his own worst enemy.
All the discussion about T. Townsend Brown and his devices as being "anti-gravity" is ignorant hokum. What he was doing was experimenting with the "ion wind" effect that the Sharper Image catalog popularized in an "air cleaning" device. I had one. You turn it on and a tuft of copper fuzz would produce a breeze of air toward your face. If you make the emitter large enough and the rest of the equipment light enough, it can lift itself up. He does not mention the work done by Alexander de Seversky in developing this "ionocraft," which was once a featured article for a 1964 issue of Popular Mechanics. Never came to pass. Thrust/weight ratio was not high enough. That is another aspect of these wonder inventions: they almost always develop down sides. None of our aircraft use "anti-gravity" technology. I once heard people claiming the B-2 bomber used anti-gravity technology, which was complete nonsense, considering its whole principle (flying wing) was absolutely open to view.
i agree, of course, that "green energy" is a complete fraud and hoax. This has been known essentially since the 1970s.
I have had inventions suppressed for reasons of national security. In one case, I was able to slip by with a rewrite on the feasible use for the invention (I had proposed it as a means of passively detecting stealthy aircraft). In another case (a categorical solution to the problem of visible contrails) was simply squelched---which I thought was ridiculous, since any Iranian grad student could have arrived at the same insight. But they were based on very commonly known principles of physics and chemistry, so it is hard to say they were suppressed for all time. And not every invention is patented, so I do approve of the narrator's advice at the end to simply publish anonymously. Did Elon Musk patent the landing scheme for his booster rockets? Would it matter, considering he is the leader of the pack, anyway?
And this is the flaw in the suppressed technology mythology. There are a LOT of inventions that are happening all the time, many with direct application to military systems or energy production. How do you explain the ones that are not suppressed? So, this is all interesting, but when there is no explanation, there is no possibility of pursuit. I will say this: declassification of withheld patents should be an element of Trump's intention to have transparency of government.