Edison vs. Tesla

[King of the Americas]

It would seem that history says "Edison" won the the war...

Personally, I'd never even heard of Victor Tesla until I went to college. Edison 'invented' electricity, the light bulb, and the current we use out of the light plug. Or, so I was told, in grade school.

However, upon further reflection and much research, I think Tesla got screwed by history AND Edison.

So, what say all of you?

What would have happened, and what kind of world would we be living in today, IF Tesla had won the debate?

[Jeff Corey]

Tesla ultimately won.http://www.teslasociety.com/ac.htm

[Starthinker]

If Tesla had really won we'd have wireless electricity and death rays.

[RoboTimbo]

What were the criteria for winning?

[Jeff Corey]

We are wired up with AC, not Edison's DC and in 1944, the SCOTUS awarded him the patent for radio.

[King of the Americas]

What were the criteria for winning?

Infrastructural application...

[Skwinty]

We are wired up with AC, not Edison's DC and in 1944, the SCOTUS awarded him the patent for radio.

So it would be more accurate to say that Tesla was screwed by George Westinghouse, although this tends to happen to weak businessmen.

[King of the Americas]

We are wired up with AC, not Edison's DC and in 1944, the SCOTUS awarded him the patent for radio.

And yet, I'd wager that most people know neither where "AC" current came from, nor that Marconey DIDN'T invent the radio.

Tesla got screwed, both by hsitory and Edison.

[Tanja]

Personally, I'd never even heard of Victor Tesla until I went to college.


I never heard of Victor Tesla either ;)

I've certainly heard of Nikola Tesla (he was born in Croatia, like me. That's however pretty much the only thing I have in common with him)

[technoextreme]

So it would be more accurate to say that Tesla was screwed by George Westinghouse, although this tends to happen to weak businessmen.
True and he was probably a bit botched in the head which would probably make it even easier. And come on if you never heard of Tesla before you aint no scientist.

[King of the Americas]

I never heard of Victor Tesla either ;)

I've certainly heard of Nikola Tesla (he was born in Croatia, like me. That's however pretty much the only thing I have in common with him)

DARN DARN DARN...I HATE when I do that. I have written more than one piece on "Nikola Tesla", and I KEEP calling him "Victor"... I should have my eye gouged out, and my tongue taken out and boiled.

I've never referred to Edison as anything other than "Thomas"...

I suck, it is just that plain and simple.

[Pope130]

DARN DARN DARN...I HATE when I do that. I have written more than one piece on "Nikola Tesla", and I KEEP calling him "Victor"... I should have my eye gouged out, and my tongue taken out and boiled.

I've never referred to Edison as anything other than "Thomas"...

I suck, it is just that plain and simple.

And, strangely enough, I thought the point of this thread was that Tesla was not the "Victor".

[Steelmage]

If Tesla had really won we'd have wireless electricity and death rays.

I would say Telsa won, or you would not have civilization as it is today.
IMHO, Telsa was a true inventor, and it seems to me Edison was a hack.

[TX50]

And yet, I'd wager that most people know neither where "AC" current came from, nor that Marconey DIDN'T invent the radio.


Or that Edison DIDN'T invent incandescent lights.

[Z]

So what DID Edison do, exactly?

[Jeff Corey]

I was at the Edison laboratory in Ft. Meyers FL this January, and the list is quite impressive. http://www.thomasedison.com/Inventions.htm
One of his projects was to develop a local source of rubber. He and Ford and Firestone tried to cultivate a native weed to do this. I was surprised to find out what it was.
He was a slogger and compulsive tinkerer. Tesla was brilliant, however, and should have won the Nobel Prize for the invention of the radio and AC, at the least.

[Z]

Edison also slept with one of my (x)wife's ancestors, apparently... :p

[technoextreme]

He was a slogger and compulsive tinkerer. Tesla was brilliant, however, and should have won the Nobel Prize for the invention of the radio and AC, at the least.
Historically, I don't remember AC being as clear cut a winner as you think it was.
Or that Edison DIDN'T invent incandescent lights.
I think the reason why is because he took it from freaky science exhibit to something that is actually practical.

[Jeff Corey]

From the link in post#2, "Tesla introduced his motors and electrical systems in a classic paper, “A New System of Alternating Current Motors and Transformers” which he delivered before the American Institute of Electrical Engineers in 1888."

Was there work done prior to this?

[sol invictus]

Historically, I don't remember AC being as clear cut a winner as you think it was.

Con Edison turned off the last DC power service in New York City in 2007 (http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/14/off-goes-the-power-current-started-by-thomas-edison/).

Of course that's Con Edison...

[Checkmite]

Nikola Tesla "lost" because he went crazy - whether due to some medical issue or because he couldn't handle the stress of this "competition".

[Steelmage]

Here is more on NiKola Tesla:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla

http://www.pbs.org/tesla/

gt8Y93k0pB0

[fuelair]

It would seem that history says "Edison" won the the war...

Personally, I'd never even heard of Victor Tesla until I went to college. Edison 'invented' electricity, the light bulb, and the current we use out of the light plug. Or, so I was told, in grade school.

However, upon further reflection and much research, I think Tesla got screwed by history AND Edison.

So, what say all of you?

What would have happened, and what kind of world would we be living in today, IF Tesla had won the debate?
Edison screwed over a lot of better people- and possibly had at least one disappeared (re: Motion picture equipment.).

[fuelair]

Although this is about Edison, the thief, I feel that those interested in this might be interested in the long term theft of television from it's rightful inventor: Philo Farnsworth. Examples source:http://www.amazon.com/Philo-Farnsworth-Televisions-Forgotten-Unlocking/dp/1584151765/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1240116270&sr=8-5

[CaveDave]

... and my tongue taken out and boiled.


[HOMER SIMPSON]

Mmmmm...boiled tongue...Slurrrrrrp.

[/HOMER SIMPSON]


Can I have the tender part near the tip? That's the best part of beef tongue.:D

ETA:

Archie Bunker: "What's for dinner, Edith, I'm hungry."
Edith: "We're having cow's tongue, Archie"
AB: "Cow's tongue! Jeez, Edith, I don't wanna' eat something from a cow's mouth!"
E: "But Archie, that's all I've fixed, what can I do?"
AB: "Go back in that kitchen and fix me something else. Just cook me some eggs."

- - - - - - - -

If T.A. Edison was such a genius as some histories claim...
AND...
He claimed invention of the moving picture on film...
AND...
He claimed invention of the phonographic method of sound recording...
YET...
It never occurred to him to synchronize the two to make talking pictures?

Am I the only one smelling rotten fish?

Enquiring minds want to know.:D



Cheers,

Dave

[fuelair]

[HOMER SIMPSON]

Mmmmm...boiled tongue...Slurrrrrrp.

[/HOMER SIMPSON]


Can I have the tender part near the tip? That's the best part of beef tongue.:D

ETA:

Archie Bunker: "What's for dinner, Edith, I'm hungry."
Edith: "We're having cow's tongue, Archie"
AB: "Cow's tongue! Jeez, Edith, I don't wanna' eat something from a cow's mouth!"
E: "But Archie, that's all I've fixed, what can I do?"
AB: "Go back in that kitchen and fix me something else. Just cook me some eggs."

- - - - - - - -

If T.A. Edison was such a genius as some histories claim...
AND...
He claimed invention of the moving picture on film...
AND...
He claimed invention of the phonographic method of sound recording...
YET...
It never occurred to him to synchronize the two to make talking pictures?

Am I the only one smelling rotten fish?

Enquiring minds want to know.:D



Cheers,

DaveHe was working on it (with a much better person) in the late 1890's. Some success as long as synchronization was not at all critical (i.e. music backgrounds of a general nature. The disc allowed better synch but was still awhile and Edison Co. not much involved in winninger system or, IIRC, it's only real competitor. Didn't matter for long, as fairly quickly after the sound-on-film system came in and took over (much less room for problems and one piece of equiptment.)

[technoextreme]

Con Edison turned off the last DC power service in New York City in 2007 (http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/14/off-goes-the-power-current-started-by-thomas-edison/).

Of course that's Con Edison...
Thank you Sol. I remember the reason why they held out was because of lifetime contracts. Stupid stupid and more stupid.
From the link in post#2, "Tesla introduced his motors and electrical systems in a classic paper, “A New System of Alternating Current Motors and Transformers” which he delivered before the American Institute of Electrical Engineers in 1888."

Was there work done prior to this?
If we are talking about in general then yes there was work prior to his motor but if we are talking about the AC motor then I don't think so. A lot of this stuff was worked upon Faraday also.

[shadron]

The history of electronics seems to be full of genuses with zilch business sense, who were run over by the bean counters. There's Tesla vs Westinghouse for electricity generation and distribution, Farnsworth vs Zworkin and Sarnoff for TV, and Edwin Armstrong vs Lee de Forest and David Sarnoff for AM and FM radio.

Armstrong was the first person to truly understand the way in which vacuum tubes (invented by de Forest), AM signal detection (called super-regeneration) and FM detection (super-heterodyning) worked; he had patents for he latter two that were litigated beyond his death by suicide. He sunk his company's fortune into developing FM radios before WWII, but Sarnoff managed to get the FCC to change the frequency band they were going to allot to FM, and Armstrong was ruined. We also got FM radio about 20-30 years later than we would have. Like Farnsworth, he won a Pyrhhic victory at the patent office, only to loose the fortune that should have followed.

[davefoc]

Con Edison turned off the last DC power service in New York City in 2007 (http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/14/off-goes-the-power-current-started-by-thomas-edison/).

Of course that's Con Edison...

That story is amazing. I had not the slightest idea that DC service in the country had not ended before I was born (1949).

The story did put up some misleading information.

There are some real advantages for DC:
1. DC is less dangerous. AC in the frequency range of 40 to 400 Hz or so has the ability to disrupt the heart and conceivably stop it. So it is possible to be electrocuted with far less AC current than DC current.

2. There is less power loss to transmit DC than AC at the same voltage. The advantage for AC is that transformers only work with AC and for most of the history of the development of electricity use and the only practical method for raising and lowering voltages was with the direct use of transformers.

Today alternatives exist and to reduce transmission losses DC is sometimes used in the longest, highest voltage transmission lines.

I have wondered if we were starting from scratch if the advantages of DC wouldn't be enough to make it so that we would adopt DC power as the standard.

On the issue of Westinghouse screwing Tesla:
I'm not sure. Tesla does seem to have given Westinghouse key patents that helped Westinghouse when he was in trouble, but Westinghouse continued to fund Tesla's craziness long after there was much rational reason to do so. Tesla was a pathetic fellow for much of his career and various wacko conspiracy theories like to ignore that fact. This is not to take anything from his early years. He was one of the most influential people of all time and he was flat out brilliant.

On the issue of Armstrong and Farnsworth being screwed:
Totally agree. Sarnoff was a total jerk. Interestingly, (to me at least), when I asked my father who invented the television he told me that it was a grand corporate achievement and never mentioned Farnsworth. I think that was largely representational of how successful Sarnoff was at screwing Farnsworth. It was many years after that before I ever heard of Farnsworth. Farnsworth was a friggin genious of the highest order and was largely responsible for the independent invention of what is one of the most important inventions of the twentieth century. He also played around with fusion and created a device that bears his name, the Farnsworth Fusor.

[MattusMaximus]

Well, if you're asking about Tesla the man vs. Edison the man, that's one thing.

But if you're asking about AC vs. DC, then the answer is pretty clear: AC won, hands down.

[orange31]

As others pointed out long ago, the most relevant modern similar figure to Edison would be Bill Gates; certainly a smart and innovative scientist, but whose real talent and motivation lie in being an utterly ruthless winner-take-all businessman.

[technoextreme]

1. DC is less dangerous. AC in the frequency range of 40 to 400 Hz or so has the ability to disrupt the heart and conceivably stop it. So it is possible to be electrocuted with far less AC current than DC current.

First of all all currents have the ability to stop your heart. Second of all far less is not 10ma (For a fiftith percentile person)which I had to eyeball on my chart o' killer currents in my textbook. Higher frequencies are safer than lower. Admittedly, the skeptometer went through the roof because there are numerous variables affecting that value.

[Steelmage]

I think, not sure, but one of the advantages of AC over DC was AC could travel further. But not sure check got this information:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_Currents


Tesla had worked for Edison but was undervalued (for example, when Edison first learned of Tesla's idea of alternating-current power transmission, he dismissed it: "[Tesla's] ideas are splendid, but they are utterly impractical."[2]). Bad feelings were exacerbated because Tesla had been cheated by Edison of promised compensation for his work.[3][4] Edison would later come to regret that he had not listened to Tesla and used alternating current.[5]



Transmission loss
The advantage of AC for distributing power over a distance is due to the ease of changing voltages with a transformer. Power is the product current × voltage (P = IV). For a given amount of power, a low voltage requires a higher current and a higher voltage requires a lower current. Since metal conducting wires have a certain resistance, some power will be wasted as heat in the wires. This power loss is given by P = I²R. Thus, if the overall transmitted power is the same, and given the constraints of practical conductor sizes, low-voltage, high-current transmissions will suffer a much greater power loss than high-voltage, low-current ones. This holds whether DC or AC is used.

Transforming DC power from one voltage to another was difficult and expensive due to the need for a large spinning rotary converter or motor-generator set, whereas with AC the voltage changes can be done with simple and efficient transformer coils that have no moving parts and require no maintenance. This was the key to the success of the AC system. Modern transmission grids regularly use AC voltages up to 765,000 volts. [10]


and

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_the_advantages_of_AC_electrical_current_o ver_DC_electrical_current


One of the advantages of AC over DC is that AC is easy to be transported over long distances without comparatively less loss of power than DC.

Moreover, AC can be easily converted into DC but vice versa is more difficult.

Other Factlets

AC is usually used for transmission because DC cannot be run through a transformer.
Edison's original system was DC. It required many power generating stations because the voltage couldn't be stepped up/down like AC. This is why Westinghouse's (Well, Tesla's IIRC. Westinghouse bought it.) AC system lasted in the long run.
Sometimes high voltage DC is used for transmission, but it requires special equipment on both ends.

[Holler Hoojer]

I know Tesla's work fairly well, and I think I could reasonably say that Tesla did "win" the technical contest, just not the financial one (of course, neither did George Westinghouse who actually lost the use of his own name). Many motors and transformers in the US can trace their ancestry directly back to the Westinghouse East Pittsburgh plant where Tesla was one of the leading engineers. Most non-engineers don't understand that engineering is a collaborative process and that there generally is a sort of "right time" for inventions. This means that lots of people at East Pittsburgh worked on three-phase motors and, had Tesla never lived, would almost surely have come out with the same products, perhaps a year or so later. And, there were parallel efforts going on in Italy, germany, Sweden, and possibily England. There is even an open question as to whether Tesla copied a lot of Ferrari's work.

As to dc versus ac, the question always comes down to distribution. If you had generating stations every few miles (an idea being revisited by DOE), dc makes pretty good sense. There's no skin effect and little noise and many motors love dc. For the most part, electronics and light bulbs don't care. Safety is not really a consideration. Sixty Hertz is bad for causing fibrillation, but not many people are electrocuted in the US and, anecdotally, many of those are killed by currents far above the fatal minimum. Really, the existance of high current semiconductors changes the argument greatly.

[dudalb]

Tesla was like Newton: A brilliant scientest who sadly lost it and spent most of his later years on batcrap crazy projects.

[dudalb]

As others pointed out long ago, the most relevant modern similar figure to Edison would be Bill Gates; certainly a smart and innovative scientist, but whose real talent and motivation lie in being an utterly ruthless winner-take-all businessman.


It seems to take that type to get the public to accept new technology. For some reason it seems as though few people who can come up with brilliant technology are good at either putting into mass production or getting the public to accept it.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I think, not sure, but one of the advantages of AC over DC was AC could travel further. But not sure check got this information:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_Currents

and

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_the_advantages_of_AC_electrical_current_o ver_DC_electrical_current

I think your memory is correct and you have a Wonkie Wiki! ;)

DC transmission lines have lower losses than comparable AC lines. from: http://www.highvoltageinfo.com/2007/08/dc-high-voltage-transmission-lines.html

Probably what Wiki was trying to say was that, because you can step AC voltage up and down, it is easier to create the high voltages for required long distance transmission.

As others have noted, this is now possible with DC without huge losses.

[pchams]

We are wired up with AC, not Edison's DC and in 1944, the SCOTUS awarded him the patent for radio.

Westinghouse won the war.
AC voltage is cheaper to transmit than DC.
Tesla worked for Westinghouse.

[davefoc]

First of all all currents have the ability to stop your heart. Second of all far less is not 10ma (For a fiftith percentile person)which I had to eyeball on my chart o' killer currents in my textbook. Higher frequencies are safer than lower. Admittedly, the skeptometer went through the roof because there are numerous variables affecting that value.

I am not exactly sure what this post meant, but from the Wikipedia article on electrocution:

A low-voltage (110 to 220 V), 50 or 60-Hz AC current through the chest for a fraction of a second may induce ventricular fibrillation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ventricular_fibrillation) at currents as low as 60 mA. With DC, 300 to 500 mA is required. If the current has a direct pathway to the heart (e.g., via a cardiac catheter (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cardiac_catheter&action=edit&redlink=1) or other kind of electrode (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrode)), a much lower current of less than 1 mA, (AC or DC) can cause fibrillation. If not immediately treated by defibrillation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defibrillation), fibrillations are usually lethal because all the heart muscle cells move independently. Above 200 mA, muscle contractions are so strong that the heart muscles cannot move at all.I have read in several places about the increased risk of electrocution from AC over DC in the frequencies generally used for power distribution. The Wikipedia quote is consistent with that. I believe in the world of people who deal with the risk of electrocution it is accepted as established fact. If somebody has evidence to the contrary I'd be interested in seeing it.

[davefoc]

On the advantages of DC for long distance electrical power transmission:

In order to simplify or perhaps because the author doesn't understand the situation it is stated often that AC is better for long distance power distribution than DC.

This is an over simplification which is not entirely accurate.

What the author of those types of comments is trying to convey is that at the time electrical power distribution was being implemented technology existed that allowed AC power voltages to be stepped up and down while similar technology did not exist for DC voltages. Up to a point it is more efficient to distribute electrical power at higher voltages. So if the method for shifting voltages works only with AC voltages, the situation might be simply characterized as AC power can be transmitted more efficiently than DC.

However I was careful to say that DC transmission lines are more efficient than AC transmission lines at the same voltage.

There are at least two reasons for this:
1. The skin effect.
This is the term for the fact that as the frequency increases current transmission is concentrated towards the skin of the conductor.

2. AC voltage is actually higher than DC voltage.
AC voltages are normally given as a root mean square value. The actual peak voltage is higher. For an AC transmission line to transmit the same power as a DC transmission line its peak voltage must be significantly higher. A DC line with the same peak voltage as an AC line can transmit more power.

Additionally I believe that on very long transmission lines, loss through radiation of the 60 Hertz signal can be another source of loss.

It seemed like this was what Holler Hoojer was saying. I thought that it might be useful to explain the situation in a little more detail.

ETA:edited a few times to eliminate typos, poor grammar and poor writing in general. I was in a hurry to get to dinner. Sorry.

[davefoc]

A few more words on the skin effect since my post didn't explain this very well.

As stated above the skin effect is the name for a physical phenomena that results in the concentration of electrical alternating current towards the edge of a conductor.

The uneven distribution of current in the conductor causes the effective resistance of the conductor to be higher.

A conductor with a higher resistance will lose more power to resistive heating than a conductor with a lower resistance.

[technoextreme]

I am not exactly sure what this post meant, but from the Wikipedia article on electrocution:

It's wrong and pretty dam vague iwhich is why I don't particularly like Wikipedia. My biomedical engineering book shows that there really isn't that much of a difference.

[Holler Hoojer]

A few more words on the skin effect since my post didn't explain this very well.

As stated above the skin effect is the name for a physical phenomena that results in the concentration of electrical alternating current towards the edge of a conductor.

The uneven distribution of current in the conductor causes the effective resistance of the conductor to be higher.

A conductor with a higher resistance will lose more power to resistive heating than a conductor with a lower resistance.

Yep, that's pretty much what I was trying to say. Halfway through, I realized I probably shouldn't go into conductor geometry, so I cut the post a little short.

[davefoc]

It's wrong and pretty dam vague iwhich is why I don't particularly like Wikipedia. My biomedical engineering book shows that there really isn't that much of a difference.

Perhaps you could quote the relevant section from your biomedical engineering book.

A few more web sources:
http://www.highvoltageconnection.com/articles/ElectricShockQuestions.htm
(Cites Deleterious Effects of Electric Shock by Charles F. Dalziel)

Some entries from table 2 of the article linked to above:
Painful and severe shock—breathing difficult, muscular control lost by 99.5%
DC current required (men) - 90 ma
AC current required (men) - 23 ma
Possible ventricular fibrillation: 3 second shocks
DC current required 500 ma
AC current required 100 ma

From Physiological effects of electricity
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_1/chpt_3/2.html
How AC affects the body depends largely on frequency. Low-frequency (50- to 60-Hz) AC is used in US (60 Hz) and European (50 Hz) households; it can be more dangerous than high-frequency AC and is 3 to 5 times more dangerous than DC of the same voltage and amperage. Low-frequency AC produces extended muscle contraction (tetany), which may freeze the hand to the current's source, prolonging exposure. DC is most likely to cause a single convulsive contraction, which often forces the victim away from the current's source.

[technoextreme]

Perhaps you could quote the relevant section from your biomedical engineering book.

I'd rather not because I'll end up butchering the text with my poor typing skills. I will obtain the source giving the let go currents and there precentile. Just because I want to know how they actually got those values without killing anyone. Also, Im curious as to why my sources and your sources are so old. My book cites a paper in the 1970s and yours is from the 60s.
EDIT:
Well I figured out where the confusion comes from because my book goes into much more detail than anything you've cited. Your numbers correct albeit very very very generialized.

[blutoski]

Thank you Sol. I remember the reason why they held out was because of lifetime contracts. Stupid stupid and more stupid.

This is how the Wright bros screwed themselves, too. Shortsighted greed.

[blutoski]

It seems to take that type to get the public to accept new technology. For some reason it seems as though few people who can come up with brilliant technology are good at either putting into mass production or getting the public to accept it.

It's not surprising: entrepreneurship and technical knowledge are different skillsets, so it's rare to see them in one individual. It's the same reason there are very few doctors who are also electrical engineers.

There's a bit of hubris that afflicts inventors and they get greedy and decide that the only thing worse than losing the opportunity to make a killing with a new invention is to make a killing but have to share it with a business partner.

[ponderingturtle]

I would say Telsa won, or you would not have civilization as it is today.
IMHO, Telsa was a true inventor, and it seems to me Edison was a hack.

Edison was a great manager of inventors.

[blutoski]

Edison was a great manager of inventors.

There's a real Cult of Tesla out there - has been for years - and a lot of it is an exaggerated sense that his ideas were actually suppressed, as opposed to discarded.

I remember reading Tesla stories in large print in Readers' Digest when I was a kid. An everyman martyr to Big Science, except the opposite is closer to the truth.

[ponderingturtle]

There's a real Cult of Tesla out there - has been for years - and a lot of it is an exaggerated sense that his ideas were actually suppressed, as opposed to discarded.


Tesla makes a great fictional mad genius. Well he was a mad genius but in a more realistic pathetic manner.

[Ziggurat]

On the advantages of DC for long distance electrical power transmission:

Another advantage (though not a matter of efficiency per se) of backbone DC power transmission is that phase doesn't matter. If two power plants are coupled together on an AC grid, and they get out of phase (which can happen if, say, one slows down because of a load surge), they end up yanking a LOT of current back and forth between the two, enough to possibly crash the grid. If they're coupled together on a DC grid, that doesn't happen.

[dudalb]

There's a real Cult of Tesla out there - has been for years - and a lot of it is an exaggerated sense that his ideas were actually suppressed, as opposed to discarded.

I remember reading Tesla stories in large print in Readers' Digest when I was a kid. An everyman martyr to Big Science, except the opposite is closer to the truth.

No kidding. I have encountered some of these "Tesla was an infallible genius" cultist myself.

[Zeuzzz]

gt8Y93k0pB0


Hmmm, that video looks oddly familiar :D Proven very popular.

Highly recommended viewing people, addresses the rivalry between Tesla and Edison head on. Tesla Won Hands Down. He just wasn't interested in money or business like Eddison who made a name for himself due due his (some might say selfish) business accumen.

I cant see how anyone can say that Tesla lost to Eddison. Eddison was primarily a businessman with a good scientific understanding that got angry at Tesla's AC system and resorted to electricuting Elephants to death in public to prove how "dangerous" AC electricity was. As Shadron said, many great inventors (especially in the area of electronics) have produced great inventions but got all the credit stolen.

The history of electronics seems to be full of genuses with zilch business sense, who were run over by the bean counters. There's Tesla vs Westinghouse for electricity generation and distribution, Farnsworth vs Zworkin and Sarnoff for TV, and Edwin Armstrong vs Lee de Forest and David Sarnoff for AM and FM radio.



Tesla invented the technology for AC electricity, Neon Lights, Radio transmission, The basic electric motor, wireless electricity/energy transfer, remote control, basic hydraulics systems, lasers and even started off some areas of robotics and other things. Yet if you check in most classical textbooks you will see the invention of these things attributed not to the original inventor, but the people who made it into a commercially fruitful business and stole the credit.

He went pretty nuts in his later years, but which great scientists didn't? I could list of hundreds, Kurt Godel went mad, Ludwig Boltzman committed suicide just before experiment verified his work, George Ellery Hale went nuts, John Nash too, many a scientist who has made amazing contributions to science turns a bit mad, but this is often forgotten over their far reaching contributions. It just seems to me anyway that Tesla's slightly mad episodes are used too frequently to dismiss him as just a mad crackpot and to understate his genius and contributions. Most people doing physics will have only have heard of Tesla as the guy that the unit of magnetism is named after (The Tesla [T]). Thats about it. Even degree level electronic classes or science history lessons his true contributions are often overlooked. He was truly a remarkable man, and I am continually shocked about how under appreciated he is in most education and in the general public. He was an incredible guy, he battled with hallucinations his entire life due to his thoughts being so vivid he could not tell his mental imagery from reality, often being unable to tell if what he was seeing was tangible or not, he fluently spoke six languages, he had synesthesia and amazingly vivid powers of visualisation (like was revealed in the spatial and visual cognition areas of Einsteins brain when it was disected: New Features Found in Einstein's Brain (http://www.physorg.com/news159536686.html))

And as a punishment for his contributions to human kind and attempts to better humanity with his free inventions he died pennyless and alone while other businessmen made millions off his inventions. Such a sad story. Now with the internet people are beginning to appreciate just what a genius he was.

[jj]

Don't forget Steinmetz.

[TjW]

This is how the Wright bros screwed themselves, too. Shortsighted greed.

Umm... I don't know how to break it to you, but the Wright Brothers didn't screw themselves. The "patent wars" problem was solved by the government fiat of the "patent pool" legislation of 1917.
Which didn't affect the Wright Brothers at all, because Wilbur died of a fever in 1912, and Orville sold the Wright Company in 1915 for a huge amount of money.
About ten months later, the company merged with the Curtiss company.

The longest running patent dispute was not filed by the Wrights, but by the heirs of John J. Montgomery against the Wrights and the U.S. government. It wasn't settled until 1928.

[davefoc]

I watched the video. Mostly I thought it was reasonable but
my understanding of the JP Morgan situation was quite a bit different than presented there.

I believe there were lots of people at the time who had the engineering expertise to tell Tesla that distributing power through the air was not going to be feasible. The theory that Morgan stopped funding the project because he didn't want people inventing ways to give away electricity that he wanted to charge for is almost certainly wrong.

Morgan funded Tesla for years. He tired of it and eventually came to believe that Tesla had some screws loose and eventually he stopped the funding. I think it's as simple as that. From what I recall, Morgan had to cut Tesla off from any access because Tesla kept after him to keep funding projects that Morgan was being told were useless.

[BillC]

The main reasons for employing DC rather than AC on long overhead lines are voltage control and stability.

[davefoc]

The main reasons for employing DC rather than AC on long overhead lines are voltage control and stability.

Wikipedia has an article on high voltage direct current power distribution:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HVDC

It still seems like, at least according to the article, increased efficiency and increased capacity of the distribution system are important drivers.

The article listed a number of other advantages including facilitating the interconnection of power networks with different frequencies and voltages which goes in part to what you and Ziggurat were talking about.

[Zeuzzz]

I believe there were lots of people at the time who had the engineering expertise to tell Tesla that distributing power through the air was not going to be feasible. The theory that Morgan stopped funding the project because he didn't want people inventing ways to give away electricity that he wanted to charge for is almost certainly wrong.

Morgan funded Tesla for years. He tired of it and eventually came to believe that Tesla had some screws loose and eventually he stopped the funding. I think it's as simple as that.


I think thats about right, I mean Tesla's claim that he could use it to give free energy to the "whole world" wirelessley was obviously not literally from that one tower at wardencliffe. He just thought of buiding lots of them and not making people pay for energy could be a possibility, but businessmen soon took over that idea and continued with AC and DC electricty in wires which became so prominent (as it was much more efficient).

[Zeuzzz]

This thread should have had a poll. And anyone who votes for eddison over tesla should be shot.

[sol invictus]

This thread should have had a poll. And anyone who votes for eddison over tesla should be shot.

You think Tesla "won"?

Edison died at the age of 84, famous, wealthy, surrounded by six children, universally acknowledged as one of the great figures of his age. Tesla died alone in a hotel room, destitute, with no children, probably bitter from the lack of recognition of his accomplishments.

Hmm....

[Zeuzzz]

Sol, I trump your statement with a 44 second clip from family guy that shows, on a humain level, why Tesla ultimately won over edison.

Family Guy - Thomas Edison
-omkGjVJ6N4

A persons business success and greed is another thing entirely from scientific genius and a want to better humanity for free. Tesla was not a businessman, he cared not for money, and he suffered the consequences. He invented a heck of a lot more than Edison ever dreamed of.

[jj]

The main reasons for employing DC rather than AC on long overhead lines are voltage control and stability.

Uh, DC doesn't radiate from the powerline. Any powerline is also an antenna. It radiates part of the power put down it at 60Hz or 50Hz. In fact, this radiation is quite substantial.

DC does not do this. The one-way flow does, however, create some problems with couplings and joints in the wires,etc.

[Cuddles]

A persons business success and greed is another thing entirely from scientific genius and a want to better humanity for free. Tesla was not a businessman, he cared not for money, and he suffered the consequences. He invented a heck of a lot more than Edison ever dreamed of.

Unfortunately he was also completely nuts.

[blutoski]

Umm... I don't know how to break it to you, but the Wright Brothers didn't screw themselves. The "patent wars" problem was solved by the government fiat of the "patent pool" legislation of 1917.
Which didn't affect the Wright Brothers at all, because Wilbur died of a fever in 1912, and Orville sold the Wright Company in 1915 for a huge amount of money.
About ten months later, the company merged with the Curtiss company.

The longest running patent dispute was not filed by the Wrights, but by the heirs of John J. Montgomery against the Wrights and the U.S. government. It wasn't settled until 1928.

I'm referring more to the Scientific American prize. Their decision to postpone public demonstration was related to their back-end negotiations with other parties to license trade secrets, in order to perpetuate a monopoly on certain aspects of the design. The decision later was that there was not much value in this approach, and they opted for the more reasonable patent route.

However, by this time, others had demonstrated controlled flight and were eligible for the prize.

The fallout from this that is relevant to skepticism is that there are quotes by engineers and physicists refusing to believe in the Wrights' accomplishment. These are misrepresented as assertions that they thought flight was impossible, whereas, they were merely referring to the Wrights' claim to priority.

[Zeuzzz]

Unfortunately he was also completely nuts.


I would say fortunately he was completey nuts. I doubt if he didn't have all his idiosyncrasies, synesthesia and 'mystic' qualities he would not have invented half the stuff he did. In fact these combinations of unique psychological conditions probably contributed to his genius, take a look at Daniel Tammet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Tammet), he's a savant who has epilepsy, Asperger Syndrome and very vivid synaesthesia. A very unique case. He, like Tesla, has learnt something like 6-8 languages easily, and can learn an entire language in a week (he learnt icelandic in 7 days!) He can recite Pi to 22,514 digits. One of the most mysterious brains in the world, but he (unlike many people with these conditions) is able to function nearly perfectly ordinarily and describe how he does what he does. Check out this docu for more info on him: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pt5VCj75X5g

Tesla was bonkers. But an extremely productive and talented guy at the same time, as his inventions showed time after time, but he just had zero business accumen.

If you think Tesla was bad you should see some of Newtons eccentric views :jaw-dropp

[Steelmage]

I would say fortunately he was completey nuts. I doubt if he didn't have all his idiosyncrasies, synesthesia and 'mystic' qualities he would not have invented half the stuff he did. In fact these combinations of unique psychological conditions probably contributed to his genius, take a look at Daniel Tammet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Tammet), he's a savant who has epilepsy, Asperger Syndrome and very vivid synaesthesia. A very unique case. He, like Tesla, has learnt something like 6-8 languages easily, and can learn an entire language in a week (he learnt icelandic in 7 days!) He can recite Pi to 22,514 digits. One of the most mysterious brains in the world, but he (unlike many people with these conditions) is able to function nearly perfectly ordinarily and describe how he does what he does. Check out this docu for more info on him: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pt5VCj75X5g

Tesla was bonkers. But an extremely productive and talented guy at the same time, as his inventions showed time after time, but he just had zero business accumen.

If you think Tesla was bad you should see some of Newtons eccentric views :jaw-dropp

From what it sounds like from his visions and he also heard voices (I believe it was aliens plotting to take over the world), he might have suffered from schizophrenia. It is really sad. He seem to be a wonderful human being with a great mind. We would not be were we are today without his accomplishments.

[Holler Hoojer]

Umm... I don't know how to break it to you, but the Wright Brothers didn't screw themselves. The "patent wars" problem was solved by the government fiat of the "patent pool" legislation of 1917.
Which didn't affect the Wright Brothers at all, because Wilbur died of a fever in 1912, and Orville sold the Wright Company in 1915 for a huge amount of money.
About ten months later, the company merged with the Curtiss company.

The longest running patent dispute was not filed by the Wrights, but by the heirs of John J. Montgomery against the Wrights and the U.S. government. It wasn't settled until 1928.

And Curtiss-Wright has a couple good sized plants within an hour's drive from me. Doing well, they are. Now, Langley was the one that got screwed (Whatta ya mean, there's no runway. I ordered a runway! Didn't you get my e-mail?)

[Holler Hoojer]

I would say fortunately he was completey nuts. I doubt if he didn't have all his idiosyncrasies, synesthesia and 'mystic' qualities he would not have invented half the stuff he did. In fact these combinations of unique psychological conditions probably contributed to his genius, take a look at Daniel Tammet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Tammet), he's a savant who has epilepsy, Asperger Syndrome and very vivid synaesthesia. A very unique case. He, like Tesla, has learnt something like 6-8 languages easily, and can learn an entire language in a week (he learnt icelandic in 7 days!) He can recite Pi to 22,514 digits. One of the most mysterious brains in the world, but he (unlike many people with these conditions) is able to function nearly perfectly ordinarily and describe how he does what he does. Check out this docu for more info on him: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pt5VCj75X5g

Tesla was bonkers. But an extremely productive and talented guy at the same time, as his inventions showed time after time, but he just had zero business accumen.

If you think Tesla was bad you should see some of Newtons eccentric views :jaw-dropp

Tesla invented what he did because he worked in the East Pittsburgh Patent Machine. They had a system there, lots of very good engineers supporting one another, labs to work in, an owner who supported (and benefited from) them, and very close to vertical market domination in the US. All those old guys churned out inventions by the dozens. Tesla was brilliant, but had he worked for somebody else, he likely would have been a fizzle.