Tesla, Mad genius, or underpaid scientist???

[rigney]

Massive discoveries in science are attributed to this mans inquisitive nature and profound knowledge, yet today he is tolerated by many who characterize him only as a crackpot. Why?

 

http://www.hbci.com/~wenonah/new/tesla.htm

[insane_alien]

because he was good at one specific area and totally bonkers on others. Most scientists value his work in electronics as some of the best there is, world class science. but then you get the stuff where he started to branch out. none if it makes any sense and if you test it, it falls flat on its face. complete lunacy.

 

just because the guy was a genius in one subject, does not mean that genius transfers to all others.

 

For instance, I'm reasonably good at chemistry but don't for the love of god take my advice on what to have for dinner. It is definitely classed as crackpot. tasty crackpot but crackpot none the less.

Edited February 17, 2012 by insane_alien

[rigney]

because he was good at one specific area and totally bonkers on others. Most scientists value his work in electronics as some of the best there is, world class science. but then you get the stuff where he started to branch out. none if it makes any sense and if you test it, it falls flat on its face. complete lunacy.

 

just because the guy was a genius in one subject, does not mean that genius transfers to all others.

 

For instance, I'm reasonably good at chemistry but don't for the love of god take my advice on what to have for dinner. It is definitely classed as crackpot. tasty crackpot but crackpot none the less.

You're not suggesting "Haggis" as a course? Just kidding! As far as Tesla is concerned, the remedy and reasoning as to his incompanance has gone far beyond the man, and his greatness. Edited February 17, 2012 by rigney

[insane_alien]

haggis, and on its own its fine. it doesn't need to be tinkered with.

 

I tend to go more along the lines of:

 

1/take a dead posh meal.

2/cram as much of it as possible between two slices of bread

3/eat infront of a food snob for maximum enjoyment.

[rigney]

haggis, and on its own its fine. it doesn't need to be tinkered with.

 

I tend to go more along the lines of:

 

1/take a dead posh meal.

2/cram as much of it as possible between two slices of bread

3/eat infront of a food snob for maximum enjoyment.

I really liked the knee jerk reaction! Like you, most on the forum are just too quick for me. But then, I actually did try "Haggis" at a good friends bed and breakfast up on the Ness, "COLD"; But as part of your breakfast?, Naa!!!! Being a hill billy, I think he was just F---ing with me. As I remember, his sister wasn't too happy with the results. Edited February 17, 2012 by rigney

[Tres Juicy]

haggis, and on its own its fine. it doesn't need to be tinkered with.

 

I tend to go more along the lines of:

 

1/take a dead posh meal.

2/cram as much of it as possible between two slices of bread

3/eat infront of a food snob for maximum enjoyment.

 

 

doesn't sound like crack-pottery to me

[imatfaal]

doesn't sound like crack-pottery to me

 

there would be pots cracked if anyone tried it on the concoctions my girlfriend spends hours cooking up

[rigney]

doesn't sound like crack-pottery to me

Not crack pottery at all! But you aught to know what someone is feeding you. If I had tried "Pepper Pot or Chittlins" on him back home, he would have no doubt freaked out. Head cheese and tripe may have been even worse. But the chittlins? C'mon!

[Temporocitor]

Massive discoveries in science are attributed to this mans inquisitive nature and profound knowledge, yet today he is tolerated by many who characterize him only as a crackpot. Why?

 

http://www.hbci.com/...h/new/tesla.htm

 

 

It is a well known fact that science is a very jealous field. Those in the field very often usurp the work of others and if someone points them out as being the second to arrive at some conclusion or process, they strike out after their life's ambition is suddenly shattered. It happens in both directions. Consider Dr. Philo Farnsworth. He battled for years to retain the patent rights for the TV he rightly was the inventor of but RCA had bigger bucks and essentially starved him out of his rights. He later had some success with fusion, but he died before it could be perfected and the work went by the wayside.

 

Tesla has opened doors for many other areas of science to include accelerator technology. Just because he also included time travel in his repertoire, but couldn't duplicate the effect he claimed, is no reason to discount his rights to respect as a scientist. Was he mad? Not as likely as merely having severe character flaws that many others have. Maybe some remember the movioe "Rain Man." Was Raymond mad, a genius or simply different? Many autistic people are extreme one trick ponies. Do we discount the one who can play mozart by ear at age 5 and beyond because he can't tie his shoes? He brings something good to the world. Tesla did too. If we must label him, why not "typical" genius?

[insane_alien]

Just because he also included time travel in his repertoire, but couldn't duplicate the effect he claimed, is no reason to discount his rights to respect as a scientist.

 

People only respect the work he did that was actually correct and not riddled with errors in irreproducibility as has been said many times before. He was a good scientest and then he took the train to crazy town and the good work didn't appear so frequently. It happens to a lot of geniuses. Just because they produced good work for some(or even most) of their careers, doesn't mean that EVERYTHING was good.

 

In science, your work stands on its own merit, not that of its producer.

 

Teslas correct work is lauded as excellent, his incorrect work is regarded as crap appropriately.

 

then you get people coming along saying 'but he was so great, why is <insert idea from crazy phase> just dismissed?' well, its because it didn't hold a candle to this little thing called reality.

 

So, tesla coils: Genius

time travel, matter transmission, free energy etc. : crap

 

And if anybody is disputing how much scientists like the guy, we name the unit of magnetism after him, the Tesla. Thats like the science hall of fame.

[ajb]

For instance, I'm reasonably good at chemistry but don't for the love of god take my advice on what to have for dinner. It is definitely classed as crackpot. tasty crackpot but crackpot none the less.

 

We all have ideas that just don't work out. Either they are just too difficult to realise, inappropriate for whatever reason or just wrong. It is how we deal with this that matters.

 

Anyway, what is your suggestion for lunch?

[rigney]

Poor Tesla! And just think, today people are funded to run around looking for Little Green Men and Big Feet, Foot(s) or something like that? Yet, no one dare call them nut cases, unless it's under their breath.

Edited February 18, 2012 by rigney

[iNow]

today people are funded to run around looking for Little Green Men and Big Feet, Foot(s) or something like that? Yet, no one dare call them nut cases, unless it's under their breath.

That's quite an interesting little reality you've manufactured for yourself.

[mississippichem]

Poor Tesla! And just think, today people are funded to run around looking for Little Green Men and Big Feet, Foot(s) or something like that? Yet, no one dare call them nut cases, unless it's under their breath.

 

insane_alien just said we have a unit named after him! That means he's a member of the scientific pantheon of people that have units named after them! That includes Newton, Farady, Coloumb, Gauss, Bohr, Dalton, Planck...all highly respected, if not worshiped, scientists.

 

So rigney, why "poor Tesla"? He has received credit where credit was due. Not all the greats get a unit named after them.

Edited February 18, 2012 by mississippichem

[rigney]

insane_alien just said we have a unit named after him! That means he's a member of the scientific pantheon of people that have units named after them! That includes Newton, Farady, Coloumb, Gauss, Bohr, Dalton, Planck...all highly respected, if not worshiped, scientists.

 

So rigney, why "poor Tesla"? He has received credit where credit was due. Not all the greats get a unit named after them.

 

I know, and only a few of these great men have ever attained such. Perhaps some of Teslas ideas were "a bit out of here",

but to ridicule the man and diagnose him as a crack pot is totally disingenuous, even if you have your own accomplishments to lean on.

Edited February 18, 2012 by rigney

[Tres Juicy]

... Newton, Farady, Coloumb, Gauss, Bohr, Dalton, Planck...

 

You missed me out

[insane_alien]

I know, and only a few of these great men have ever attained such. Perhaps some of Teslas ideas were "a bit out of here",

but to ridicule the man and diagnose him as a crack pot is totally disingenuous, even if you have your own accomplishments to lean on.

 

I think there is a bit of selection bias here. 99% of the time when Tesla is brought up (especially on a scienceforum) is when somebody has heard about one of his crackpot ideas and is harping on about how all the crap was supresed by the government and it really works if only somebody would try it.

 

Of course we're going to talk about Tesla as being a crackpot here because he WAS. He was still an accomplished scientist but he did produce a lot of cracked pottery as well.

 

I'm quite sure if the situation was reversed and people usually brought up Tesla to talk about his real science that there would be people posting threads like this going:

 

'Look at this crap, Tesla was a crackpot! why can't you see this etc etc.'

[rigney]

I think there is a bit of selection bias here. 99% of the time when Tesla is brought up (especially on a scienceforum) is when somebody has heard about one of his crackpot ideas and is harping on about how all the crap was supresed by the government and it really works if only somebody would try it.

 

Of course we're going to talk about Tesla as being a crackpot here because he WAS. He was still an accomplished scientist but he did produce a lot of cracked pottery as well.

 

I'm quite sure if the situation was reversed and people usually brought up Tesla to talk about his real science that there would be people posting threads like this going:

 

'Look at this crap, Tesla was a crackpot! why can't you see this etc etc.'

 

 

You're right. Visa Ve, most everyone wants a shot at the underdog regardless of which side of the fence they are on. Many here on this forum will never divulge their inner thoughts due to this very dread, and will never discuss the things they deem credible, due to the impending ridicule.

[insane_alien]

I think you're wrong there. See, we can admit where we've made a mistake, the only time ridicule comes into it is when they are still adamant but have no evidence and ignore contrary evidence. This becomes very tiring very quickly. We aren't robots so of course we get frustrated. I'd be worried if we didn't.

[rigney]

I think you're wrong there. See, we can admit where we've made a mistake, the only time ridicule comes into it is when they are still adamant but have no evidence and ignore contrary evidence. This becomes very tiring very quickly. We aren't robots so of course we get frustrated. I'd be worried if we didn't.

You are probaly right that I'm wrong again. I've only been on the forum a couple years now and most of my questions are snap thoughts on theories many of you may have been familiar with for several years. I'v had little training in any science other than trig that was necessary for the electrical apprenticeship. But for 50 years I made a descent living as a construction and maintenance electrician. And after such a time you sort of get set in your ways. I literally stay on google today looking at science in a whole different light than I did only a few short years ago. So when someone stiffs me with a very condenscending, "I told you so", or you should have already known that, it pisses me. So I hunt the internet until I find some rebuttle, and ask again. Not to be obstinate, just looking for an explanation. During my years on the job, I never heard a dumb question, only some that I couldn't answer immediatly and a few I couldn't answer at all. That's when you go looking for answers yourself. When hundreds, if not thousands of man hours depend on an electrician, nitro man or even a good sweeper to keep things up and running, you want them to get it right. Even more so if you are strapped to the nose cone of a rocket or sitting in a shuttle waiting for liftoff. And yes, I have known a few eccentrics in my time, but they also had a ton of talent.

Something like this may also account for a few idiosyncrasies?: http://www.eblogx.com/Videos/21102/Fail-Compilation-Januar-2012/

Edited February 19, 2012 by rigney

[D H]

Of course we're going to talk about Tesla as being a crackpot here because he WAS. He was still an accomplished scientist but he did produce a lot of cracked pottery as well.

Of course he was. Almost all of the great scientists were cracked. It pretty much goes hand in hand with being one of the greats. Just some examples:

 

Galileo was a bit cracked politically, and more than a bit politically inept. Just as tax evasion was the excuse the US government used to put Capone behind bars, Galileo's published views on the nature of the Jovian satellites were the excuse used by the Catholic church to put Galileo under house arrest. His rantings against the Catholic church were what truly raised the ire of the church.

 

Newton was utterly cracked. Per Newton, the world is going to end in 2060, or perhaps 2034. He was a deeply religious man who read the Bible daily, and read things into the Bible on a fairly frequent basis. He was also an alchemist. Newton spent a lot more time and effort, a whole lot more, investigating the Bible and looking for the recipe for the philosopher's stone than he did on the things for which we remember him.

 

Einstein was a bit cracked. He was friends with Velikovsky and gave positive reviews of Velikovsky's works. Einstein was so biased against the non-realistic nature of quantum mechanics that he, along with Podolsky and Rosen came up with a paradox to illustrate the flaws in quantum mechanics. We remember the EPR paradox nowadays because it is so precisely wrong. If you want a physics windmill to tilt against, you should look to Bell's Theorem, not Einstein's concepts. (You'll still be tilting against a windmill, however.)

 

 

The list goes on and on. Orthodox scientists rarely if ever came up ideas that turned science upside down. The great scientists necessarily had to have a bit of the crackpot in their nature to first come up with their revolutionary ideas and then to champion those ideas against the sometimes great resistance from those with more orthodox views.