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.
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.