Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter - Part 5: Communication and navigation
Internet and GPS would have been available in 1902, had Tesla completed his Wardenclyffe project.
Well, not internet as we know it because there were no computers back then. But it would have given us a worldwide communication network without wires.
The Art of Individualization
That is what Tesla called his method of using different combinations of frequencies to trigger specific receivers. He mentions it in many articles,
- June, 1900, “The Problem of Increasing Human Energy”
- March 5th, 1904, “The Transmission of Electrical Energy Without Wires”
- Jan. 7th, 1905, “The Transmission of Electrical Energy Without Wires as a Means for
Furthering Peace” - March 3rd, 1907, “Tesla's Tidal Wave to Make War impossible”
Just to mention a few, which again shows that the “Where do I put the meter”-story that I mentioned at the end of part 4 is unlikely to be true.
In 1898 Tesla demonstrated this principle by showing the worlds first remote controlled device, a boat in Madison Square Garden. Afterwards Tesla was asked to open the boat to show that there wasn’t anyone, or some trained animal inside. This boat is fully described in his patent 613,809.
Many lines
In his 25th Oct, 1907 article “Tesla on Wireless”, Tesla elaborates:
Just to illustrate what can be done, suppose that only four vibrations were isolated on each transmitter. let those on one side be respectively a, b, c, and d. Then the following individualized lines would be ab, ac, ad, bc, bd, cd, abc, abd, acd, bcd and abcd. The same article on the other side will give similar combinations, and both together twenty-two lines, which can be simultaneously operated.
He calls the different combinations “lines”, because they can be used in a similar manner. You can use them to control a light or a rudder, but you can also send voices over such a “line”.
Although Tesla had worked out this mechanism in sufficient detail and even proven it to work, it appears as if this was not yet fully incorporated in his TMT. I say this because in his Long Island Notes you can find numerous different designs to make the TMT have more than one frequency.
For example on June 13th, 1901 he is considering, among others, these 4 designs:
Also in the four diagrams that we got through Leland Anderson (can be found in my earlier posts Part 1 and Part 3), the second diagram uses two different secondary transformers possibly to create different frequencies, and the third diagram is much like diagram d here above.
It appears as if he had not yet decided how to build this into the TMT even though he had sold this project to JP Morgan as a communication tower.
Global Positioning System
Because the wave that the TMT produces in the Earth travels over the surface in a very peculiar way it becomes possible to determine in what direction the TMT is to be found and how far. More precisely suppose the TMT was at the North Pole, then by measuring the impulses you can determine your latitude (say 52 degrees) but you do not know whether you are on the northern or southern hemisphere. So with just one TMT you can draw 2 circles on the globe knowing that you must be somewhere on one of those circles. With two TMT’s at different locations two more circles can be drawn and you know that you are on one of the four intersections. With three TMT’s your location can (in most cases) be determined.
This is a system that Tesla explains in some articles but there is no record of him having done any experiment to this extent. One obvious reason is that there have never been 3 operational TMT’s.
This concludes my series on Tesla’s Magnifying Transmitter. I hope you have enjoyed reading it. If you would like a file with my collected Tesla articles or patents feel free to download them here.
If you have any questions or suggestion for additional Tesla related subjects to write on, please comment below.
The thing about Tesla's wireless energy that is vastly different than what we use, his was perfectly healthy for the body in fact "rejuvenating" is what people said they felt like stand near the larger transmitters. No today we work in the lower microwave ranges and give brain cancer.
Upvoted and followed.
It is indeed completely different. Today everything is based on electro-magnetic radiation (through the air), Tesla used electrical conduction through the Earth.
This post has been ranked within the top 50 most undervalued posts in the first half of Feb 09. We estimate that this post is undervalued by $4.64 as compared to a scenario in which every voter had an equal say.
See the full rankings and details in The Daily Tribune: Feb 09 - Part I. You can also read about some of our methodology, data analysis and technical details in our initial post.
If you are the author and would prefer not to receive these comments, simply reply "Stop" to this comment.
We as yet have a great need for this. How sweet would be a mesh communications network comprised of tens of thousands of individuals who each owned such a means of communication.
With an adequately connected ground, and respect for the earth's resonant frequency, could each of us install an "earth station" at our personal location and communicate using electrical conduction to our counterparts on the opposite side of the planet? Or anywhere on the planet?
Even on a single frequency, with some sort of token-passing network scheme, could we not pass information packets about? And, with "the art of individualization," though I have yet to understand how that would work, how many different "lines" or channels might be established? Is there a minimum amount of power required to traverse such distances?
I.M.H.O., it would be grand to, once and for all, take the "internet" out of the hands of any and all central control.
Thank you, friend @mage00000, for your marvelous series! 😄😇😄
With today's electronics "the art of individualization" has already taken a few more steps beyond what Tesla envisioned. Look how many cellphones we can connect through the air in big cities. The same can be done through the Earth.
To send a pulse through the Earth you'll need some more power than when sending it to a nearby receiver through the air, but you can first receive that power. The Magnifying Transmitters take up a little energy that they first put into the Earth and use it to attract energy from our atmosphere, then they put the "magnified energy" back into the Earth making sure that there is enough energy for everyone to use.
You'd use a different (smaller) receiver to receive some energy, change it into your specific frequency pattern, modulate your voice or data on it and send it back into the Earth. That is how you would communicate with the TMT-web.
Thank you for your answers. They of course trigger more questions. ;)
What is the minimum feasible size of a magnifying transmitter?
It is clear from your series that a single MT can be a catalyst to initiate a resonant action of the earth that can gather atmospheric energy globally, and that an appropriately placed set of modulated MTs could allow for GPS-like localization. This raises many more questions.
Is there an optimal number of MTs? Could an "anti-MT" be introduced that would interfere with the system? If only a small number MTs were allowed or used, would that effectively concentrate the network control into a few hands?
A separate set of questions: If my goal is merely global communication, and not the generation of energy, and I have an adequate quality connection to the ground and a source of power, can I create a powered transceiver for global communication?
If so, how much power might be required to join a global network? And, if the resonance interval / frequency of the earth is ~84ms / 11.77Hz, can higher frequency modulation be superimposed upon that effectively? Could an unlimited number of nodes be possible in such a network? Or, restated: What might be the limiting total bandwidth of such a global network?
Thanks again for your very stimulating series!
A MT needs to generate over a million volts and that sets the lower limits for size and power. I could generate about 1.5 MV with roughly 2.5 KW, I think that is about the absolute minimum requirement. The 1.5 MV needs a height of at least 6 m.
An optimal number of MTs? ... I really don't know. What would define "optimal"? At some point, when MT's are draining atmospheric electricity, we will not have lightning storms anymore. That may be a good sign to stop building.
I think you can disrupt frequency bands, just like you can in atmospheric transmissions.
The MT's will provide power for the entire world, it can be sent to selective receivers or to "the general public". In the latter case you (anyone with enough resources) can build a MT and have it started by another, existing one. From that moment on it will produce power.
Yes, you can build a powered transceiver. From my experiments and my interpretation of Tesla's work you will need at least 800W to send signals across the world.
Yes, you will need a higher working frequency for your coils, according to Tesla the best range is 30KHz-35KHz, but as I understand that would give you a too small bandwidth for audio. I have not really spend much time on understanding the ins and outs of the communication scheme, I'm afraid, my focus was power generation.
This is such excellent and encouraging information. While I am not disinterested in the power possibilities, I am more immediately curious about communication.
I am quite excited to hear that a powered transceiver is likely to be a real possibility, and with less than 1Kw!
My thoughts (which I believe many may share) reflect some concern that the "powers that be" might at some point seek to disrupt the internet. However, with independent network nodes "popping up" anywhere, that would become impossible.
It however sounds as though the bandwidth would be extremely limited? Actually, 30KHz-35KHz would support speech, but not much more. We have become quite used to and dependent upon an internet with a very high bandwidth to each subscriber. But even so, it would be of great interest to me to see if messages might be sent anywhere on the globe...
Thanks again for your feedback.