Perspective on Tesla vs Marconi

Tesla was neither deluded nor mistaken, though some electrodynamicists have mistakenly considered him in that light. On the other hand, Jackson — one of the leading electrodynamicists of our time — pays Tesla a significant compliment as follows {268}.

"In U.S. patent no. 787,412 (April 18, 1905), reprinted in Nikola Tesla, Lectures and Patents and Articles. Nikola Tesla Museum, Beograd, Yugoslavia (1956), this remarkable genius clearly outlines the idea ofthe earth as a resonating circuit (he did not know ofthe ionosphere), estimates the lowestresonantfrequency as 6 Hz (close to the 6.6 Hz for a perfectly conducting sphere), and describes generation and detection ofthese low-frequency waves. I thank V. L. Fitch for this fascinatingpiece ofhistory.

We also point out that many present science texts err by continuing to credit Marconi with the discovery of radio, although he certainly did much to pioneer it and received a Nobel Prize in 1909. Hertz must be given credit for the first deliberate signal transmission per se, during the period 1886-1888. As his transmitting antenna, Hertz used an end-loaded dipole with a gap, and as his receiver he used a resonant square loop antenna with a gap {269}. Sparks produced at the gap in his transmission antenna resulted in sparks appearing at the gap in his receiving antenna.

Marconi became obsessed with Hertz's results nearly a decade later, and in mid-December 1901 Marconi announced the reception of signals at St. John's, Newfound that were transmitted across the Atlantic from Cornwall, England. He later recorded radio signals transmitted around the Earth, and began regular trans-Atlantic message service in 1903.

Marconi's patent {270}, however, was eventually overturned by U.S. Supreme Court decision {271}, because Tesla's patents (and demonstrations) substantially preceded it. Tesla also demonstrated radio transmission before Marconi, and Marconi actually used a modified Tesla circuit in his famed transmission in 1901. Nonetheless, this is not to detract from Marconi's accomplishments; he definitely put "wireless communications" on the map. It is simply to give discoverer ofradio credit where credit is due.

Tesla was also closer to the truth of the form of an EM wave in space than are modern electrical engineering and most electrodynamics texts. In the present book we have stated that what exists in 3-space as the so-called "transverse EM wave" are actually longitudinal EM waves and functions of them, with the energy entering each 3-space point from the accompanying time-polarized (conjugate) EM wave at that point (i.e., from the time domain) and emerging in 3-space in the form of a longitudinal EM wave, in 1:1 correspondence.116 This is followed by a return of the energy from 3-space back to the time domain. This "circulation" from the time domain to 3-space and back to the time domain occurs at every point dipole in 3-space. Only the presence and combination of both the time-polarized photon and the longitudinal photon at each point in an EM wave makes the wave "observable", when we translate into wave phenomena the photon phenomena pointed out by Mandl and Shaw {19}. What spreads as EM energy flow in space (from a source charge) is the local polarization of the vacuum, associated with this giant negentropy circulation from time to the negative charge, to the positive charge, and back to time.

The notion of the transverse EM wave flowing through space is an artifact of the ubiquitous substitution ofthe effectfor the cause in Maxwellian electrodynamics. E.g., a completely erroneous "definition" of the causal field (as it exists in space prior to interaction with charged mass) is given as the effect ofits interaction with a ubiquitously assumed unit point charge at every point in space where the field is present:. This in fact substitutes the effect (existing after the interaction) for the cause existing prior to the interaction. That of course is a gross non sequitur.

We give a concrete example from the first edition of a standard dictionary of physics and mathematics {272}:

"electricfield... 1. one ofthe fundamentalfields in nature, causing a charged body to be attracted to or repelled by other charged bodies; associated with an electromagnetic wave or a changing magnetic field. 2. Specifically, the electric force per unit test charge."

116 Later we shall deal a little further with how EM energy iteratively recurs statically in 3-space and propagates dynamically and continuously in 4-space, in more detail. The solution to the long-vexing particle-wave duality is the process of observation. Before observation, an entity is dynamic and continuous in spacetime, not 3-space. After observation (by emission of a photon), it is a momentary frozen 3-snapshot (particle) at a single instant of time. At the next immediate instant, a photon is absorbed, reconverting the "static snapshot" into a dynamic 4-entity again. Since observation (photon emission) and de-observation (photon absorption) iterates at extremely high rate, the entity and each tiniest part of it oscillate back and forth between being a frozen 3-entity (particle) and a dynamic 4-entity (wave).

In the first definition, the field is given as the "cause" of the interaction that exists between like and unlike charges. In the second definition, the field is given as the effect — of the interaction with a test charge — of something undefined as the cause.

An entirely different "definition" is given by Gray and Isaacs {273}:

""electricfield... The space surrounding an electric charge within which it is capable ofexerting a perceptible force on another electric charge."

Here it is defined as simply the space around an electric charge, and not really the cause or effect of anything, unless that local spacetime has been curved (which it has).

Not to belabor the point, this sort of thing led Feynman to "define" the EM field in this fashion {274}:

"...the existence of the positive charge, in some sense, distorts, or creates a ""condition" in space, so that when we put the negative charge in, it feels a force. This potentialityfor producing aforce is called an electricfield. "

So Feynman made the electric field a condition in space surrounding a charge, where the condition can produce (has a potentiality for producing) a force on another charge. He also was aware that force is an effect of the reaction of the causal field with charged mass, in the following statement {275}:

"...in dealing with force the tacit assumption is always made that the force is equal to zero unless some physical body is present... One of the most important characteristics offorce is that it has a material origin... "

In Maxwell's theory, the electron, atom, and nucleus had not yet been discovered, and electricity was considered a thin material fluid, flowing in a wire (hence the name "currents") much like water through a pipe. The surrounding space was considered filled with a thin material fluid called the luminiferous ether. A very rough notion existed that the "shaking" of the ether disturbance coming in to an antenna would disturb or perturb the electric fluid in the wire directly. Hence, if one "measured" a transverse oscillation of the electric fluid in the wire due to this "detection", it conclusively "proved" that the incoming ether-perturbations were also transverse. On that notion — together with Faraday's notion that "field lines" were taut physical strings, so that "field perturbations" were naught but plucked oscillations of these taut strings — the entire notion of the transverse EM force field wave in space was created.

It really is not that way, as is easily shown with modern re-examination of what happens in the receiving wire, considering the Drude electron gas {276} and electron drift velocity. Today we know that the electrons move longitudinally down the wire only with a small drift velocity (usually a few inches per hour), while the signal (field) races longitudinally down the wire at essentially light speed or nearly so.

The electrons are longitudinally constrained in the wire because of the vast number of electrons ahead of them that tend to repel their longitudinal movement. The electrons are far less constrained laterally in the wire. However, each electron is also spinning, and its 3-space performance may be compared to a spinning gyro, whose spin axes are now longitudinal restrained. Accordingly, the electrons readily precess laterally in the wire117 when perturbed longitudinally by the incoming longitudinal 3-space components of the "wave in vacuum" — by gyroscope precession theory. The electrons at the surface layer of the wire are somewhat less constrained longitudinally, and they "slip" a little down the wire in each oscillation, accounting for the very slow electron longitudinal drift velocity.

Accordingly, one of the most important dynamics of the circuit is the dynamics of the surface charges, as pointed out by electrodynamicists {277}.

If the incoming waves were true lateral waves, there would be no longitudinal force component on the laterally precessing electrons, and coherent current would not flow longitudinally in the wire at all. Instead, one would just get some longitudinal to and fro noise in the coherent lateral motions of the electrons, due to electron collisions.

117 It is this lateral precession movement of the electrons that is "detected" in most of our instruments. To the early electrodynamicists prior to the discovery of the electron, this detected lateral motion was considered the "shaking of the material electric fluid" in the detecting wire. It was thought that the incoming "electric fluid" from space also had to be material (in the material ether) and transverse, because otherwise the oscillations from space could not have mechanically transferred their "lateral oscillation" to the electric fluid in the wire. Faraday's "material lines of force" concept and the notion that EM disturbances (waves) were simply the mechanical pluckings of these taut strings which also involved similar "material ether" concepts.

Nonetheless, it seems we are stuck with the ubiquitous transverse EM wave model. For more than 100 years, scientists have universally substituted effect for cause in the case of much of electrodynamics — as in the continuing substitution of what is diverged from the field and potential at each point in them, by an assumed static point charge, as being the magnitude of the field or potential itself at that point. At best, what is diverged from the field or potential is an indication of the point intensity of the energy flows comprising the field or potential at each point, and in the case of the field, of the prevailing direction.

So electrodynamics is still riddled with that nearly all-pervasive error, and it seems it will likely never be corrected. The leaders of the scientific community do not seem to wish it done and will not allow it to be funded. In short, the community is so comfortable with that grave error that it will almost defend it to the death. The so-called transverse EM wave in 3-space has come to be accepted as if it were a law of nature.

0ccasionally a journal will point out the terrible non sequitur in the prevailing notion of the EM wave in space as a "plane wave of oscillating orthogonal E and H fields along the x- and y- axes moving at light speed in the z- axis direction." Romer, former editor of American Journal of Physics, provides a prime example {278}. Romer takes to task:

"...that dreadful diagram purporting to show the electric and magnetic fields ofa plane wave, as a function ofposition (and/or time?) that besmirch the pages ofalmost every introductory book.. ...it is a horrible diagram. 'Misleading' would be too kind a word; 'wrong' is more accurate. " "...perhaps then, for historical interest, [we should] find out how that diagram came to contaminate our literature in the firstplace.

At any rate, once we understand how the real EM wave exists in space, then we can sympathize with Tesla's view of it from the following {279}:

"Tesla upholds the startling theoryformulated by him long ago, that the radio transmitters as now used, do not emit Hertz waves, as commonly believed, butwaves of sound... He says that a Hertz wave can only be possible in a solid ether, but he has demonstrated already in 1897that the ether is a gas, which can only transmit waves of sound; that is such as are propagated by alternate compressions and rarefactions of the medium in which transverse waves are absolutely impossible."

In Tesla's own words {280}:

"...I showed that the universal medium is a gaseous body in which only longitudinal pulses can be propagated, involving alternating compressions and expansions similar to those produced by soundwaves in the air. Thus, a wireless transmitter does not emit Hertz waves which are a myth, but soundwaves in the ether, behaving in every respect like those in the air, except that, owing to the great elasticforce and extremely small density ofthe medium, their speed is that of light."

From quantum field theory, the instantaneous scalar potential in space is actually a coupling of a scalar photon and a longitudinal photon {19}. The only EM component in 3-space is that longitudinal photon.118 Transforming to wave language, Tesla appears to have been correct in his view of the longitudinal form of the EM wave in 3-space, whereas all the texts are still wrong even today.119 However, Tesla was also noted for grandiose pronouncements, a trait which certainly did not endear him to the struggling electrodynamicists of the time, even when he was correct and they were wrong. An example is the following {281}:

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

Unfortunately, in electrodynamics we are still stuck with that "most remarkable and inexplicable aberration" today, and we will remain stuck with it until the leaders of the scientific community (such as the National Academy of Sciences and National Science Foundation) recognize it and fund a complete overhaul of the foundations of classical electrodynamics, which is so sorely needed. On the other hand, one should not hold one's breath while waiting for the mountain to come to Muhammad! One might as well ask the stars to fallfrom the sky as to ask the leaders ofthe scientific community to correct the serious foundations errors in physics and especially in electrodynamics.

118 Hence it is not surprising that all EM in 3-space decomposes into bundles of longitudinal EM waves and their dynamics, as shown by Whittaker {85, 91b}.

119 However, Tesla did not appear to realize the involvement of time-energy transduction to longitudinal KM 3-space wave energy and vice versa.

Solar Power

Solar Power

Start Saving On Your Electricity Bills Using The Power of the Sun And Other Natural Resources!

Get My Free Ebook


Post a comment