----- Original Message -----

From: Chris Swinson

To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 6:34 PM

Subject: Re: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe

 

----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Anderton
To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 6:25 PM
Subject: Re: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe

>Exactly, and JP Morgan was a financial genius so he should have seen how to
>make a profit from practically anything.

Does not make much sense does it really. People would had to have brought
RX units, so why not just rent them out ?! I guess it was the "anyone can
run up an antenna" thing which did it, but even so, how many people would
have actually had the skill to build the device anyway ?! Can't help but
feel theres a lot more to the story somewhere.

Chris

----- Original Message -----

From: Roger Anderton

To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 6:50 PM

Subject: Re: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe

The official story has to be a smokescreen for something else.

 

If you build your own tv, you still have to pay licence in uk.

 

JP Morgan would have seen how to make the profit by arranging for the laws to be set up to his advantage.

 

Special exemptions for his device, extra taxes to keep Government happy, etc.

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Chris Swinson

To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 6:34 PM

Subject: Re: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe

 

----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Anderton
To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 6:25 PM
Subject: Re: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe

>Exactly, and JP Morgan was a financial genius so he should have seen how to
>make a profit from practically anything.

Does not make much sense does it really. People would had to have brought
RX units, so why not just rent them out ?! I guess it was the "anyone can
run up an antenna" thing which did it, but even so, how many people would
have actually had the skill to build the device anyway ?! Can't help but
feel theres a lot more to the story somewhere.

Chris

---

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2906 - Release Date: 05/30/10 10:21:00

----- Original Message -----

From: Rick

To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 5:20 PM

Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe -- The Myth of "Free" Energy

 

. . . Enter another player, Bernard Baruch, then a bright young stockbroker. According to Andrija Puharich it was this man who planted in J.P. Morgan's ear the misconceptions that have persisted to this day. Baruch told the financier that Tesla was crazy, that he was offering this broadcast energy for "free" and that investors would go broke supporting him. (Ref. 5)

Baruch's source for this notion may in turn have been an article in an 1896 Sunday magazine section of the World, which announced Tesla's wireless broadcast of a song. With a view to protecting his secrets, Tesla had confused the reporter by not explaining that the energy for this musical transmission had come from one of his oscillators on the other side of Pike's Peak, four miles away. Thus this article planted the erroneous idea that Tesla's wireless transmission had been possible because the earth was filled with unlimited "free" energy. (Ref. 6)

A canny but cautions investor, Morgan had got rich by thinking ahead. To protect his other corporate structures, including the banking and mining aspects that would be greatly enriched by the building of networks of wires, he sabotaged the Tesla business he controlled. The concepts of a wayward inventor, however brilliant, would have required him to gamble too much on a single throw. . . .

Source: http://pesn.com/2006/08/03/9500295_wireless_transmission/


--- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "vonu" <vanvonu@...> wrote:
>
> The funding was withdrawn as soon as J. P. discovered the inability to derive a profit from a power system that couldn't be metered and sold.
>
> Tesla's power transmission system would have operated like a NPR radio station, many of those who benefit wouldn't pay in, and there isn't room for more than one in most markets.
>
> The economics of the commons is the one part of the free market premise that bedevils the most accomplished capitalists.
>
> --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, dave pierson dave_p@ wrote:
> >
> > > ... "Wardenclif"
> >
> > Wardenclyffe
> >
> > seems to be the usual...
> >
> > >never ran,
> >
> > One gets into semantics of 'ran', and 'completed'.
> > Power plant, 'Tesla Coil', tower, etc were completed
> > enough that they were powered up, some initial
> > testing done. 'Ongoing Development' never went on.
> >
> > > having run out of funding before the laboratory was
> > > completed.
> >
> > More or less concur. One could argue that funding
> > was withdrawn: funding was for 'a communication
> > system'. Once research did not deliver one...
> >
> > best
> >
> > New dwp: dave_p@
> >
>

----- Original Message -----

From: Roger Anderton

To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 7:03 PM

Subject: Re: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe -- The Myth of "Free" Energy

 

according to that site JP Morgan owned 51 per cent of the company, so he could have done whatever he liked with it. He could have slowly have downsized his other operations and built up the power broadcast company at whatever pace suited him.

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Rick

To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 5:20 PM

Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe -- The Myth of "Free" Energy

 

. . . Enter another player, Bernard Baruch, then a bright young stockbroker. According to Andrija Puharich it was this man who planted in J.P. Morgan's ear the misconceptions that have persisted to this day. Baruch told the financier that Tesla was crazy, that he was offering this broadcast energy for "free" and that investors would go broke supporting him. (Ref. 5)

Baruch's source for this notion may in turn have been an article in an 1896 Sunday magazine section of the World, which announced Tesla's wireless broadcast of a song. With a view to protecting his secrets, Tesla had confused the reporter by not explaining that the energy for this musical transmission had come from one of his oscillators on the other side of Pike's Peak, four miles away. Thus this article planted the erroneous idea that Tesla's wireless transmission had been possible because the earth was filled with unlimited "free" energy. (Ref. 6)

A canny but cautions investor, Morgan had got rich by thinking ahead. To protect his other corporate structures, including the banking and mining aspects that would be greatly enriched by the building of networks of wires, he sabotaged the Tesla business he controlled. The concepts of a wayward inventor, however brilliant, would have required him to gamble too much on a single throw. . . .

Source: http://pesn.com/2006/08/03/9500295_wireless_transmission/


--- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "vonu" <vanvonu@...> wrote:
>
> The funding was withdrawn as soon as J. P. discovered the inability to derive a profit from a power system that couldn't be metered and sold.
>
> Tesla's power transmission system would have operated like a NPR radio station, many of those who benefit wouldn't pay in, and there isn't room for more than one in most markets.
>
> The economics of the commons is the one part of the free market premise that bedevils the most accomplished capitalists.
>
> --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, dave pierson dave_p@ wrote:
> >
> > > ... "Wardenclif"
> >
> > Wardenclyffe
> >
> > seems to be the usual...
> >
> > >never ran,
> >
> > One gets into semantics of 'ran', and 'completed'.
> > Power plant, 'Tesla Coil', tower, etc were completed
> > enough that they were powered up, some initial
> > testing done. 'Ongoing Development' never went on.
> >
> > > having run out of funding before the laboratory was
> > > completed.
> >
> > More or less concur. One could argue that funding
> > was withdrawn: funding was for 'a communication
> > system'. Once research did not deliver one...
> >
> > best
> >
> > New dwp: dave_p@
> >
>

----- Original Message -----

From: vonu

To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 6:42 PM

Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe

 

In conformance with the legal jurisdiction of the appropriate statutory authority if deriving a profit therefrom. There is no license required to possess or use a device of your own manufacture as long as you don't attempt to transfer it, because no one will know you have it. If you choose to expose your creation, you have no one but yourself to blame for the results.
I'm talking about licenses. You are talking about licences, which I know nothing of.

--- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@...> wrote:
>
> The licence would be for using the device or being in possession of it.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: vonu
> To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 5:53 PM
> Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
>
>
>
> A license is a legal authorization to do legally what would be illegal without the license. The Communications Act of 1934 establishes the universal right to receive any form of electromagnetic emanation without a license, requiring only the license to re-disseminate same.
> If one receives an electromagnetic signal and doesn't retransmit it, no license is required.
> Do you have a permit to absorb the electromagnetic output of the sun?
>
> --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@> wrote:
> >
> > operating outside the licence would be illegal same as operating outside any other licence, and you would be prosecuted by the full force of the law
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: vonu
> > To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 5:28 PM
> > Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
> >
> >
> >
> > How are you going to collect from those who build their own, as John Galt would have?
> >
> > --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > The funding was withdrawn as soon as J. P. discovered the inability to derive a profit from a power system that couldn't be metered and sold.
> > >
> > > --- which is a silly excuse; because after selling the receiver-device you could then sell renewal licence to use it
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---- Original Message -----
> > >
> > > From: vonu
> > > To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 4:38 PM
> > > Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The funding was withdrawn as soon as J. P. discovered the inability to derive a profit from a power system that couldn't be metered and sold.
> > > Tesla's power transmission system would have operated like a NPR radio station, many of those who benefit wouldn't pay in, and there isn't room for more than one in most markets.
> > > The economics of the commons is the one part of the free market premise that bedevils the most accomplished capitalists.
> > >
> > > --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, dave pierson <dave_p@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > ... "Wardenclif"
> > > >
> > > > Wardenclyffe
> > > >
> > > > seems to be the usual...
> > > >
> > > > >never ran,
> > > > One gets into semantics of 'ran', and 'completed'.
> > > > Power plant, 'Tesla Coil', tower, etc were completed
> > > > enough that they were powered up, some initial
> > > > testing done. 'Ongoing Development' never went on.
> > > >
> > > > > having run out of funding before the laboratory was
> > > > > completed.
> > > > More or less concur. One could argue that funding
> > > > was withdrawn: funding was for 'a communication
> > > > system'. Once research did not deliver one...
> > > >
> > > > best
> > > >
> > > > New dwp: dave_p@
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Since this dialogue isn't accomplishing anything for those who can't understand
the legal authority which isn't being presented, there is no further to be
gained by participation.

--- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@...> wrote:
>
> licence = license alternative spellings
>
>
>
> A licensor may grant licence under intellectual property laws to authorize a
use (such as copying software or using a (patented) invention) to a licensee,
sparing the licensee from a claim of infringement brought by the licensor.[1] A
license under intellectual property commonly has several component parts beyond
the grant itself, including a term, territory, renewal provisions, and other
limitations deemed vital to the licensor.
>
> Term: many licences are valid for a particular length of time. This protects
the licensor should the value of the licence increase, or market conditions
change. It also preserves enforceability by ensuring that no licence extends
beyond the term of IP ownership.
>
> Territory: a licence may stipulate what territory the rights pertain to. For
example, a licence with a territory limited to "North America" (United
States/Canada) would not permit a licensee any protection from actions for use
in Japan.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/License
>
>
>
> with broadcast power licence you would probably pass certain laws to limit its
use, special exemptions to other licences, special conditions to conform to
safety standards and government guidelines, setting up an authority to enforce
regulations and so forth. equals lots of money
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: vonu
>   To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 6:42 PM
>   Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
>
>
>
>   In conformance with the legal jurisdiction of the appropriate statutory
authority if deriving a profit therefrom. There is no license required to
possess or use a device of your own manufacture as long as you don't attempt to
transfer it, because no one will know you have it. If you choose to expose your
creation, you have no one but yourself to blame for the results.
>   I'm talking about licenses. You are talking about licences, which I know
nothing of.
>
>   --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@> wrote:
>   >
>   > The licence would be for using the device or being in possession of it.
>   >
>   > ----- Original Message -----
>   > From: vonu
>   > To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
>   > Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 5:53 PM
>   > Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > A license is a legal authorization to do legally what would be illegal
without the license. The Communications Act of 1934 establishes the universal
right to receive any form of electromagnetic emanation without a license,
requiring only the license to re-disseminate same.
>   > If one receives an electromagnetic signal and doesn't retransmit it, no
license is required.
>   > Do you have a permit to absorb the electromagnetic output of the sun?
>   >
>   > --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@> wrote:
>   > >
>   > > operating outside the licence would be illegal same as operating outside
any other licence, and you would be prosecuted by the full force of the law
>   > >
>   > >
>   > > ----- Original Message -----
>   > > From: vonu
>   > > To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
>   > > Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 5:28 PM
>   > > Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
>   > >
>   > >
>   > >
>   > > How are you going to collect from those who build their own, as John
Galt would have?
>   > >
>   > > --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@>
wrote:
>   > > >
>   > > >
>   > > > The funding was withdrawn as soon as J. P. discovered the inability to
derive a profit from a power system that couldn't be metered and sold.
>   > > >
>   > > > --- which is a silly excuse; because after selling the receiver-device
you could then sell renewal licence to use it
>   > > >
>   > > >
>   > > >
>   > > >
>   > > >
>   > > >
>   > > >
>   > > >
>   > > >
>   > > >
>   > > >
>   > > >
>   > > >
>   > > > ---- Original Message -----
>   > > >
>   > > > From: vonu
>   > > > To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
>   > > > Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 4:38 PM
>   > > > Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
>   > > >
>   > > >
>   > > >
>   > > > The funding was withdrawn as soon as J. P. discovered the inability to
derive a profit from a power system that couldn't be metered and sold.
>   > > > Tesla's power transmission system would have operated like a NPR radio
station, many of those who benefit wouldn't pay in, and there isn't room for
more than one in most markets.
>   > > > The economics of the commons is the one part of the free market
premise that bedevils the most accomplished capitalists.
>   > > >
>   > > > --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, dave pierson <dave_p@> wrote:
>   > > > >
>   > > > > > ... "Wardenclif"
>   > > > >
>   > > > > Wardenclyffe
>   > > > >
>   > > > > seems to be the usual...
>   > > > >
>   > > > > >never ran,
>   > > > > One gets into semantics of 'ran', and 'completed'.
>   > > > > Power plant, 'Tesla Coil', tower, etc were completed
>   > > > > enough that they were powered up, some initial
>   > > > > testing done. 'Ongoing Development' never went on.
>   > > > >
>   > > > > > having run out of funding before the laboratory was
>   > > > > > completed.
>   > > > > More or less concur. One could argue that funding
>   > > > > was withdrawn: funding was for 'a communication
>   > > > > system'. Once research did not deliver one...
>   > > > >
>   > > > > best
>   > > > >
>   > > > > New dwp: dave_p@
>   > > > >
>   > > >
>   > >
>   >
>

----- Original Message -----

From: vonu

To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 7:55 PM

Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe

 

Since this dialogue isn't accomplishing anything for those who can't understand the legal authority which isn't being presented, there is no further to be gained by participation.

--- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@...> wrote:
>
> licence = license alternative spellings
>
>
>
> A licensor may grant licence under intellectual property laws to authorize a use (such as copying software or using a (patented) invention) to a licensee, sparing the licensee from a claim of infringement brought by the licensor.[1] A license under intellectual property commonly has several component parts beyond the grant itself, including a term, territory, renewal provisions, and other limitations deemed vital to the licensor.
>
> Term: many licences are valid for a particular length of time. This protects the licensor should the value of the licence increase, or market conditions change. It also preserves enforceability by ensuring that no licence extends beyond the term of IP ownership.
>
> Territory: a licence may stipulate what territory the rights pertain to. For example, a licence with a territory limited to "North America" (United States/Canada) would not permit a licensee any protection from actions for use in Japan.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/License
>
>
>
> with broadcast power licence you would probably pass certain laws to limit its use, special exemptions to other licences, special conditions to conform to safety standards and government guidelines, setting up an authority to enforce regulations and so forth. equals lots of money
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: vonu
> To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 6:42 PM
> Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
>
>
>
> In conformance with the legal jurisdiction of the appropriate statutory authority if deriving a profit therefrom. There is no license required to possess or use a device of your own manufacture as long as you don't attempt to transfer it, because no one will know you have it. If you choose to expose your creation, you have no one but yourself to blame for the results.
> I'm talking about licenses. You are talking about licences, which I know nothing of.
>
> --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@> wrote:
> >
> > The licence would be for using the device or being in possession of it.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: vonu
> > To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 5:53 PM
> > Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
> >
> >
> >
> > A license is a legal authorization to do legally what would be illegal without the license. The Communications Act of 1934 establishes the universal right to receive any form of electromagnetic emanation without a license, requiring only the license to re-disseminate same.
> > If one receives an electromagnetic signal and doesn't retransmit it, no license is required.
> > Do you have a permit to absorb the electromagnetic output of the sun?
> >
> > --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@> wrote:
> > >
> > > operating outside the licence would be illegal same as operating outside any other licence, and you would be prosecuted by the full force of the law
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: vonu
> > > To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 5:28 PM
> > > Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > How are you going to collect from those who build their own, as John Galt would have?
> > >
> > > --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The funding was withdrawn as soon as J. P. discovered the inability to derive a profit from a power system that couldn't be metered and sold.
> > > >
> > > > --- which is a silly excuse; because after selling the receiver-device you could then sell renewal licence to use it
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---- Original Message -----
> > > >
> > > > From: vonu
> > > > To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 4:38 PM
> > > > Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The funding was withdrawn as soon as J. P. discovered the inability to derive a profit from a power system that couldn't be metered and sold.
> > > > Tesla's power transmission system would have operated like a NPR radio station, many of those who benefit wouldn't pay in, and there isn't room for more than one in most markets.
> > > > The economics of the commons is the one part of the free market premise that bedevils the most accomplished capitalists.
> > > >
> > > > --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, dave pierson <dave_p@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > ... "Wardenclif"
> > > > >
> > > > > Wardenclyffe
> > > > >
> > > > > seems to be the usual...
> > > > >
> > > > > >never ran,
> > > > > One gets into semantics of 'ran', and 'completed'.
> > > > > Power plant, 'Tesla Coil', tower, etc were completed
> > > > > enough that they were powered up, some initial
> > > > > testing done. 'Ongoing Development' never went on.
> > > > >
> > > > > > having run out of funding before the laboratory was
> > > > > > completed.
> > > > > More or less concur. One could argue that funding
> > > > > was withdrawn: funding was for 'a communication
> > > > > system'. Once research did not deliver one...
> > > > >
> > > > > best
> > > > >
> > > > > New dwp: dave_p@
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

When you are discussing a legal issue, you must bring legal authority to support
your contention. There are only three types of relevant legal authority:
statutory, judicial, and persuasive, and yours isn't any of them.

--- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@...> wrote:
>
> being presented is - change the rules to get a profit, something JP Morgan
would have realised as to what to do, and which is standard practice to do so by
many mega- corporations.
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: vonu
>   To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 7:55 PM
>   Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
>
>
>
>   Since this dialogue isn't accomplishing anything for those who can't
understand the legal authority which isn't being presented, there is no further
to be gained by participation.
>
>   --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@> wrote:
>   >
>   > licence = license alternative spellings
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > A licensor may grant licence under intellectual property laws to authorize
a use (such as copying software or using a (patented) invention) to a licensee,
sparing the licensee from a claim of infringement brought by the licensor.[1] A
license under intellectual property commonly has several component parts beyond
the grant itself, including a term, territory, renewal provisions, and other
limitations deemed vital to the licensor.
>   >
>   > Term: many licences are valid for a particular length of time. This
protects the licensor should the value of the licence increase, or market
conditions change. It also preserves enforceability by ensuring that no licence
extends beyond the term of IP ownership.
>   >
>   > Territory: a licence may stipulate what territory the rights pertain to.
For example, a licence with a territory limited to "North America" (United
States/Canada) would not permit a licensee any protection from actions for use
in Japan.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/License
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > with broadcast power licence you would probably pass certain laws to limit
its use, special exemptions to other licences, special conditions to conform to
safety standards and government guidelines, setting up an authority to enforce
regulations and so forth. equals lots of money
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > ----- Original Message -----
>   > From: vonu
>   > To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
>   > Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 6:42 PM
>   > Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > In conformance with the legal jurisdiction of the appropriate statutory
authority if deriving a profit therefrom. There is no license required to
possess or use a device of your own manufacture as long as you don't attempt to
transfer it, because no one will know you have it. If you choose to expose your
creation, you have no one but yourself to blame for the results.
>   > I'm talking about licenses. You are talking about licences, which I know
nothing of.
>   >
>   > --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@> wrote:
>   > >
>   > > The licence would be for using the device or being in possession of it.
>   > >
>   > > ----- Original Message -----
>   > > From: vonu
>   > > To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
>   > > Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 5:53 PM
>   > > Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
>   > >
>   > >
>   > >
>   > > A license is a legal authorization to do legally what would be illegal
without the license. The Communications Act of 1934 establishes the universal
right to receive any form of electromagnetic emanation without a license,
requiring only the license to re-disseminate same.
>   > > If one receives an electromagnetic signal and doesn't retransmit it, no
license is required.
>   > > Do you have a permit to absorb the electromagnetic output of the sun?
>   > >
>   > > --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@>
wrote:
>   > > >
>   > > > operating outside the licence would be illegal same as operating
outside any other licence, and you would be prosecuted by the full force of the
law
>   > > >
>   > > >
>   > > > ----- Original Message -----
>   > > > From: vonu
>   > > > To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
>   > > > Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 5:28 PM
>   > > > Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
>   > > >
>   > > >
>   > > >
>   > > > How are you going to collect from those who build their own, as John
Galt would have?
>   > > >
>   > > > --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@>
wrote:
>   > > > >
>   > > > >
>   > > > > The funding was withdrawn as soon as J. P. discovered the inability
to derive a profit from a power system that couldn't be metered and sold.
>   > > > >
>   > > > > --- which is a silly excuse; because after selling the
receiver-device you could then sell renewal licence to use it
>   > > > >
>   > > > >
>   > > > >
>   > > > >
>   > > > >
>   > > > >
>   > > > >
>   > > > >
>   > > > >
>   > > > >
>   > > > >
>   > > > >
>   > > > >
>   > > > > ---- Original Message -----
>   > > > >
>   > > > > From: vonu
>   > > > > To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
>   > > > > Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 4:38 PM
>   > > > > Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
>   > > > >
>   > > > >
>   > > > >
>   > > > > The funding was withdrawn as soon as J. P. discovered the inability
to derive a profit from a power system that couldn't be metered and sold.
>   > > > > Tesla's power transmission system would have operated like a NPR
radio station, many of those who benefit wouldn't pay in, and there isn't room
for more than one in most markets.
>   > > > > The economics of the commons is the one part of the free market
premise that bedevils the most accomplished capitalists.
>   > > > >
>   > > > > --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, dave pierson <dave_p@> wrote:
>   > > > > >
>   > > > > > > ... "Wardenclif"
>   > > > > >
>   > > > > > Wardenclyffe
>   > > > > >
>   > > > > > seems to be the usual...
>   > > > > >
>   > > > > > >never ran,
>   > > > > > One gets into semantics of 'ran', and 'completed'.
>   > > > > > Power plant, 'Tesla Coil', tower, etc were completed
>   > > > > > enough that they were powered up, some initial
>   > > > > > testing done. 'Ongoing Development' never went on.
>   > > > > >
>   > > > > > > having run out of funding before the laboratory was
>   > > > > > > completed.
>   > > > > > More or less concur. One could argue that funding
>   > > > > > was withdrawn: funding was for 'a communication
>   > > > > > system'. Once research did not deliver one...
>   > > > > >
>   > > > > > best
>   > > > > >
>   > > > > > New dwp: dave_p@
>   > > > > >
>   > > > >
>   > > >
>   > >
>   >
>

> Baruch's source for this notion may in turn have
> been an article in an 1896

     1896?????  cf below....

> Sunday magazine section of the World, which announced
> Tesla's wireless broadcast of a song. With a view to
> protecting his secrets, Tesla had confused the reporter
> by not explaining that the energy for this musical
> transmission had come from one of his oscillators on
> the other side of Pike's Peak, four miles away. Thus
> this article planted the erroneous idea that Tesla's
> wireless transmission had been possible because the
> earth was filled with unlimited "free" energy.
> (Ref. 6)

     Hmmmmmmm.
     Tesla's lab in Colorado Springs was in use
     1899-1900.  A previous visit in 1896 would
     be 'interesting'.

    best
     New dwp:     dave_p@...

> I always thought there has to be more too it.
> Seems to be a few versions of why his tower got
> trashed,
     The tower stood until mid WWI (would need to check
     exact date.).  The lab stands to this day, tho
     other industries have used it.

> and maybe even his workshop.  Maybe JP would not back
> Tesla, but Tesla already had the tower, so maybe Tesla
> tried to go ahead with the project anyway,
     The steam power plant, elaborate lab and tower
     were completed, used in test.  All this is
     documented various places, including court records.

> JP had his tower blown up?
     Probably not.  He was aging out.

> The story says it was blow up for scrap parts or something
> I think.
     I've seen that, likely the scrap was salvaged.
     Someplace that struck meas reliable (be nice to
     run down...) had, roughly:
      By mid WWI 'a couple of' towers existed on
      Long Island, one owned by Telefunken (German
      Co.)  While US was nominally neutral, the
      Telefunken tower was used for nominally
      commercial messaging.  It was ALSO used
      to transmit to U Boats: when THAT was
      figured out it was seized, and destroyed.
      WHOMever then noticed the Tesla facility,
      with tower, standing idle/derelict and at
      risk of being used for 'similar purposes',
      (Towers were needed, at the time, for that
      class of work.)  So the Tesla Tower came down.
      I DO NOT have a good cite for this, as i say,
      It would be interesting to run down.
       Tesla Bankruptcy Hearing?
      NO idea when the power plant/technofittings
      were removed?  Same Hearings?

     best
      New dwp:     dave_p@...

[at the risk of getting OT...]

> > You are talking about the television tax, which is only collected on
> > televisions that are in operation, which originated in the British
> > government's monopoly of television broadcasting.  You should read up on
> > the commons problem of a free market economy.

> Thats how its supposed to be yes, companies can do what they
> like regardless of law.
    Welllll.  8)>>
    While the entity is called the British Broadcasting
    CORPORATION, it is in fact a GOVERNMENT MONOPOLY.
    Its the gummint doing what they like: they MAKE the
    laws....

best
New dwp:     dave_p@...

When surveying Tesla's patents, we should notice the Radiant Energy Receiver
which was patented around the same time he was building Wardenclyffe.  That was
obviously intended to be the ultimate power source for his systems.  In the
meantime, while that was being developed and tested, any already known power
source could be used.  I've been told by people who surveyed the property that
he had a small coal-fired generator on site.  That's what it looks like in
photographs.

As for the "Wizard" book, material on Wardenclyffe covers several chapters in
the book.  So there's no point in doing a specific citation.  This is one reason
why the book is so highly recommended.  It's packed with information on what
we're discussing.

-----Original Message-----

From: vonu

Sent: May 30, 2010 10:42 AM

To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe

       Who pays for the generation of thunderstorms?

Got a complete citation for "Wizard?"



--- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, EVP <evp@...> wrote:

>

>     Remember that Tesla's proposed sytem transmitted power, not

> generated it.  If it had worked the power would have had to come from

> somewher and someone would have had to pay for it!  Suggest reading the

> treatment of the subject in Wizard.

>

> Ed

>

> "The funding was withdrawn as soon as J. P. discovered the inability to

> derive a profit from a power system that couldn't be metered and sold.

> Tesla's power transmission system would have operated like a NPR radio

> station, many of those who benefit wouldn't pay in, and there isn't room

> for more than one in most markets.

> The economics of the commons is the one part of the free market premise

> that bedevils the most accomplished capitalists."

>


-- Michael Riversong
Tesla Academy
Cheyenne, Wyoming
www.teslaacademy.info
rivedu@...

----- Original Message -----

From: vonu

To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 8:43 PM

Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe

 

When you are discussing a legal issue, you must bring legal authority to support your contention. There are only three types of relevant legal authority: statutory, judicial, and persuasive, and yours isn't any of them.

--- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@...> wrote:
>
> being presented is - change the rules to get a profit, something JP Morgan would have realised as to what to do, and which is standard practice to do so by many mega- corporations.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: vonu
> To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 7:55 PM
> Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
>
>
>
> Since this dialogue isn't accomplishing anything for those who can't understand the legal authority which isn't being presented, there is no further to be gained by participation.
>
> --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@> wrote:
> >
> > licence = license alternative spellings
> >
> >
> >
> > A licensor may grant licence under intellectual property laws to authorize a use (such as copying software or using a (patented) invention) to a licensee, sparing the licensee from a claim of infringement brought by the licensor.[1] A license under intellectual property commonly has several component parts beyond the grant itself, including a term, territory, renewal provisions, and other limitations deemed vital to the licensor.
> >
> > Term: many licences are valid for a particular length of time. This protects the licensor should the value of the licence increase, or market conditions change. It also preserves enforceability by ensuring that no licence extends beyond the term of IP ownership.
> >
> > Territory: a licence may stipulate what territory the rights pertain to. For example, a licence with a territory limited to "North America" (United States/Canada) would not permit a licensee any protection from actions for use in Japan.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/License
> >
> >
> >
> > with broadcast power licence you would probably pass certain laws to limit its use, special exemptions to other licences, special conditions to conform to safety standards and government guidelines, setting up an authority to enforce regulations and so forth. equals lots of money
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: vonu
> > To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 6:42 PM
> > Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
> >
> >
> >
> > In conformance with the legal jurisdiction of the appropriate statutory authority if deriving a profit therefrom. There is no license required to possess or use a device of your own manufacture as long as you don't attempt to transfer it, because no one will know you have it. If you choose to expose your creation, you have no one but yourself to blame for the results.
> > I'm talking about licenses. You are talking about licences, which I know nothing of.
> >
> > --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@> wrote:
> > >
> > > The licence would be for using the device or being in possession of it.
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: vonu
> > > To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 5:53 PM
> > > Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > A license is a legal authorization to do legally what would be illegal without the license. The Communications Act of 1934 establishes the universal right to receive any form of electromagnetic emanation without a license, requiring only the license to re-disseminate same.
> > > If one receives an electromagnetic signal and doesn't retransmit it, no license is required.
> > > Do you have a permit to absorb the electromagnetic output of the sun?
> > >
> > > --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > operating outside the licence would be illegal same as operating outside any other licence, and you would be prosecuted by the full force of the law
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: vonu
> > > > To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 5:28 PM
> > > > Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > How are you going to collect from those who build their own, as John Galt would have?
> > > >
> > > > --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The funding was withdrawn as soon as J. P. discovered the inability to derive a profit from a power system that couldn't be metered and sold.
> > > > >
> > > > > --- which is a silly excuse; because after selling the receiver-device you could then sell renewal licence to use it
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---- Original Message -----
> > > > >
> > > > > From: vonu
> > > > > To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 4:38 PM
> > > > > Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The funding was withdrawn as soon as J. P. discovered the inability to derive a profit from a power system that couldn't be metered and sold.
> > > > > Tesla's power transmission system would have operated like a NPR radio station, many of those who benefit wouldn't pay in, and there isn't room for more than one in most markets.
> > > > > The economics of the commons is the one part of the free market premise that bedevils the most accomplished capitalists.
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, dave pierson <dave_p@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > ... "Wardenclif"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Wardenclyffe
> > > > > >
> > > > > > seems to be the usual...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >never ran,
> > > > > > One gets into semantics of 'ran', and 'completed'.
> > > > > > Power plant, 'Tesla Coil', tower, etc were completed
> > > > > > enough that they were powered up, some initial
> > > > > > testing done. 'Ongoing Development' never went on.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > having run out of funding before the laboratory was
> > > > > > > completed.
> > > > > > More or less concur. One could argue that funding
> > > > > > was withdrawn: funding was for 'a communication
> > > > > > system'. Once research did not deliver one...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > best
> > > > > >
> > > > > > New dwp: dave_p@
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

There is no way to make energy free by transmitting it, only by receiving it
from a source that doesn't charge.

--- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@...> wrote:
>
> according to that site JP Morgan owned 51 per cent of the company, so he could
have done whatever he liked with it. He could have slowly have downsized his
other operations and built up the power broadcast company at whatever pace
suited him.
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Rick
>   To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 5:20 PM
>   Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe -- The Myth of "Free" Energy
>
>
>
>
>   . . . Enter another player, Bernard Baruch, then a bright young stockbroker.
According to Andrija Puharich it was this man who planted in J.P. Morgan's ear
the misconceptions that have persisted to this day. Baruch told the financier
that Tesla was crazy, that he was offering this broadcast energy for "free" and
that investors would go broke supporting him. (Ref. 5)
>
>   Baruch's source for this notion may in turn have been an article in an 1896
Sunday magazine section of the World, which announced Tesla's wireless broadcast
of a song. With a view to protecting his secrets, Tesla had confused the
reporter by not explaining that the energy for this musical transmission had
come from one of his oscillators on the other side of Pike's Peak, four miles
away. Thus this article planted the erroneous idea that Tesla's wireless
transmission had been possible because the earth was filled with unlimited
"free" energy. (Ref. 6)
>
>   A canny but cautions investor, Morgan had got rich by thinking ahead. To
protect his other corporate structures, including the banking and mining aspects
that would be greatly enriched by the building of networks of wires, he
sabotaged the Tesla business he controlled. The concepts of a wayward inventor,
however brilliant, would have required him to gamble too much on a single throw.
. . .
>
>   Source: http://pesn.com/2006/08/03/9500295_wireless_transmission/
>
>
>   --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "vonu" <vanvonu@> wrote:
>   >
>   > The funding was withdrawn as soon as J. P. discovered the inability to
derive a profit from a power system that couldn't be metered and sold.
>   >
>   > Tesla's power transmission system would have operated like a NPR radio
station, many of those who benefit wouldn't pay in, and there isn't room for
more than one in most markets.
>   >
>   > The economics of the commons is the one part of the free market premise
that bedevils the most accomplished capitalists.
>   >
>   > --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, dave pierson dave_p@ wrote:
>   > >
>   > > > ... "Wardenclif"
>   > >
>   > > Wardenclyffe
>   > >
>   > > seems to be the usual...
>   > >
>   > > >never ran,
>   > >
>   > > One gets into semantics of 'ran', and 'completed'.
>   > > Power plant, 'Tesla Coil', tower, etc were completed
>   > > enough that they were powered up, some initial
>   > > testing done. 'Ongoing Development' never went on.
>   > >
>   > > > having run out of funding before the laboratory was
>   > > > completed.
>   > >
>   > > More or less concur. One could argue that funding
>   > > was withdrawn: funding was for 'a communication
>   > > system'. Once research did not deliver one...
>   > >
>   > > best
>   > >
>   > > New dwp: dave_p@
>   > >
>   >
>

Correct.  That was an odd citation.  Tesla first began to comprehend the nature
of wireless power transmission during his 1895 experiments, i believe at the
Houston St. lab in NYC, but there is no record at all of his having worked in
Colorado Springs before 1899.  He may have gone there on a preparatory trip
before that time, but would not have stayed more than a few days at most.  Have
not seen this name "Baruch' before in connection with Tesla.

-----Original Message-----

From: dave pierson

Sent: May 30, 2010 2:55 PM

To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com

Subject: historicity.....Re: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe -- The Myth of "Free"
Energy


> Baruch's source for this notion may in turn have

> been an article in an 1896



1896?????  cf below....



Hmmmmmmm.

     Tesla's lab in Colorado Springs was in use

     1899-1900.  A previous visit in 1896 would

     be 'interesting'.



best

     New dwp:     dave_p@...


-- Michael Riversong
Tesla Academy
Cheyenne, Wyoming
www.teslaacademy.info
rivedu@...

JP Morgan died in 1914, but his heirs pretty much kept all of his programs
intact and moved them forward, including legalization of the Federal Reserve and
the Internal Revenue Service.  This meant that Morgan's alleged orders to banks
not to fund Tesla and to textbook companies to eliminate his name stood.  Which,
of course, is evident from the results.  Tesla never again had specific funding
for his own lab, although he was apparently employed as a consultant for many
companies after 1916.

The bankruptcy hearings were well documented in Seifert's "Wizard" book.  He
used letters directly from Tesla to various people for much of his source
material.  A lot of what happened in those hearings was petty and almost seemed
vindictive.

Meanwhile, the tower at Wardenclyffe was destroyed in 1917, the year the USA
entered World War I.  It was deemed a hazard because U-boats would have been
able to use it for navigation and thus mount accurate, direct attacks in the New
York City area.  Demolition was done by a contractor, i think employed by the US
Navy.  As was the custom at the time, any usable scrap was salvaged.

-----Original Message-----

From: dave pierson

Sent: May 30, 2010 3:21 PM

To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com

Subject: Re: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe



     The tower stood until mid WWI (would need to check

     exact date.).  The lab stands to this day, tho

     other industries have used it.



> and maybe even his workshop.  Maybe JP would not back

> Tesla, but Tesla already had the tower, so maybe Tesla

> tried to go ahead with the project anyway,

     The steam power plant, elaborate lab and tower

     were completed, used in test.  All this is

     documented various places, including court records.



> JP had his tower blown up?

     Probably not.  He was aging out.



> The story says it was blow up for scrap parts or something

> I think.

     I've seen that, likely the scrap was salvaged.

     Someplace that struck meas reliable (be nice to

     run down...) had, roughly:

      By mid WWI 'a couple of' towers existed on

      Long Island, one owned by Telefunken (German

      Co.)  While US was nominally neutral, the

      Telefunken tower was used for nominally

      commercial messaging.  It was ALSO used

      to transmit to U Boats: when THAT was

      figured out it was seized, and destroyed.

      WHOMever then noticed the Tesla facility,

      with tower, standing idle/derelict and at

      risk of being used for 'similar purposes',

      (Towers were needed, at the time, for that

      class of work.)  So the Tesla Tower came down.

      I DO NOT have a good cite for this, as i say,

      It would be interesting to run down.

       Tesla Bankruptcy Hearing?

      NO idea when the power plant/technofittings

      were removed?  Same Hearings?



best

      New dwp:     dave_p@...


-- Michael Riversong
Tesla Academy
Cheyenne, Wyoming
www.teslaacademy.info
rivedu@...

Having met Puharich on several occasions and worked with some of his associates
it became clear that he could not be considered a reliable source.  Sorry.

---- Original Message ----
From: "Roger Anderton" <R.J.Anderton@...>
Reply-To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
Date: 05/30/10 11:09 AM
To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
Cc:
Sub: Re: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe -- The Myth of "Free" Energy
add on-

"According to Andrija Puharich ............."

How reliable is Puharich? He made some pretty strange claims as I recall,
probably connected to the Philadelphia experiment (myth or reality?)






   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Roger Anderton
   To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 7:03 PM
   Subject: Re: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe -- The Myth of "Free" Energy




   according to that site JP Morgan owned 51 per cent of the company, so he could
have done whatever he liked with it. He could have slowly have downsized his
other operations and built up the power broadcast company at whatever pace
suited him.

     ----- Original Message -----
     From: Rick
     To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
     Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 5:20 PM
     Subject: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe -- The Myth of "Free" Energy




     . . . Enter another player, Bernard Baruch, then a bright young stockbroker.
According to Andrija Puharich it was this man who planted in J.P. Morgan's ear
the misconceptions that have persisted to this day. Baruch told the financier
that Tesla was crazy, that he was offering this broadcast energy for "free" and
that investors would go broke supporting him. (Ref. 5)

     Baruch's source for this notion may in turn have been an article in an 1896
Sunday magazine section of the World, which announced Tesla's wireless broadcast
of a song. With a view to protecting his secrets, Tesla had confused the
reporter by not explaining that the energy for this musical transmission had
come from one of his oscillators on the other side of Pike's Peak, four miles
away. Thus this article planted the erroneous idea that Tesla's wireless
transmission had been possible because the earth was filled with unlimited
"free" energy. (Ref. 6)

     A canny but cautions investor, Morgan had got rich by thinking ahead. To
protect his other corporate structures, including the banking and mining aspects
that would be greatly enriched by the building of networks of wires, he
sabotaged the Tesla business he controlled. The concepts of a wayward inventor,
however brilliant, would have required him to gamble too much on a single throw.
. . .

     Source: http://pesn.com/2006/08/03/9500295_wireless_transmission/


     --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, "vonu" <vanvonu@...> wrote:
     >
     > The funding was withdrawn as soon as J. P. discovered the inability to
derive a profit from a power system that couldn't be metered and sold.
     >
     > Tesla's power transmission system would have operated like a NPR radio
station, many of those who benefit wouldn't pay in, and there isn't room for
more than one in most markets.
     >
     > The economics of the commons is the one part of the free market premise
that bedevils the most accomplished capitalists.
     >
     > --- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, dave pierson dave_p@ wrote:
     > >
     > > > ... "Wardenclif"
     > >
     > > Wardenclyffe
     > >
     > > seems to be the usual...
     > >
     > > >never ran,
     > >
     > > One gets into semantics of 'ran', and 'completed'.
     > > Power plant, 'Tesla Coil', tower, etc were completed
     > > enough that they were powered up, some initial
     > > testing done. 'Ongoing Development' never went on.
     > >
     > > > having run out of funding before the laboratory was
     > > > completed.
     > >
     > > More or less concur. One could argue that funding
     > > was withdrawn: funding was for 'a communication
     > > system'. Once research did not deliver one...
     > >
     > > best
     > >
     > > New dwp: dave_p@
     > >
     >





---- End Original Message ----

Dave Pierson doth schreibble :
>
>      I've seen that, likely the scrap was salvaged.
>      Someplace that struck me as reliable (be nice
>      to run down...) had, roughly:
>       By mid WWI 'a couple of' towers existed on
>       Long Island, one owned by Telefunken (German
>       Co.)  While US was nominally neutral, the
>       Telefunken tower was used for nominally
>       commercial messaging.  It was ALSO used
>       to transmit to U Boats: when THAT was
>       figured out it was seized, and destroyed.
>       WHOMever then noticed the Tesla facility,
>       with tower, standing idle/derelict and at
>       risk of being used for 'similar purposes',
>       (Towers were needed, at the time, for that
>       class of work.)  So the Tesla Tower came down.
>       I DO NOT have a good cite for this, as i say,
>       It would be interesting to run down.
>        Tesla Bankruptcy Hearing?
>       NO idea when the power plant/technofittings
>       were removed?  Same Hearings?

" After Wardenclyffe, Tesla built the Telefunken
Wireless on the South Shore of Long Island. "

Wardenclyffe Tower:
Telefunken Station
@Wikipedia
http://tinyurl.com/25j6alp

" In September 1917 during World War I, the tower
was blown up with dynamite on orders of the United
States Government which feared German spies were
using it and that it could be used as a landmark
for German submarines. "

~ from :

Wardenclyffe Tower:
Post-Tesla-Era
@Wikipedia
http://tinyurl.com/2e5anq8

" SUSPECTING that German spies were using
the big wireless tower erected at Shoreham,
L. I., about twenty years ago by Nikola Tesla,
the Federal Government ordered the tower
destroyed and it was recently demolished with
dynamite.

During the past month several strangers had
been seen lurking about the place. "

~ from :

U.S. Blows Up Tesla Radio Tower:
The Electrical Experimenter,
September, 1917, page 293.
@EarlyRadioHistory.us
http://tinyurl.com/mhdktf

1922 Wardenclyffe Foreclosure Appeal Proceedings
@TFCBooks.com
http://tinyurl.com/3xnytww

Cors in Manu Domine,


~ Khem Caigan
<Khem@...>

" Ships and sails proper for the heavenly air
should be fashioned. Then there will also be
people, who do not shrink from the vastness
of space. "

~ Johannes Kepler, letter to Galileo Galilei,
1609.

 

Dave Pierson doth schreibble :
>
> I've seen that, likely the scrap was salvaged.
> Someplace that struck me as reliable (be nice
> to run down...) had, roughly:
> By mid WWI 'a couple of' towers existed on
> Long Island, one owned by Telefunken (German
> Co.) While US was nominally neutral, the
> Telefunken tower was used for nominally
> commercial messaging. It was ALSO used
> to transmit to U Boats: when THAT was
> figured out it was seized, and destroyed.
> WHOMever then noticed the Tesla facility,
> with tower, standing idle/derelict and at
> risk of being used for 'similar purposes',
> (Towers were needed, at the time, for that
> class of work.) So the Tesla Tower came down.
> I DO NOT have a good cite for this, as i say,
> It would be interesting to run down.
> Tesla Bankruptcy Hearing?
> NO idea when the power plant/technofittings
> were removed? Same Hearings?

" After Wardenclyffe, Tesla built the Telefunken
Wireless on the South Shore of Long Island. "

Wardenclyffe Tower:
Telefunken Station
@Wikipedia
http://tinyurl.com/25j6alp

" In September 1917 during World War I, the tower
was blown up with dynamite on orders of the United
States Government which feared German spies were
using it and that it could be used as a landmark
for German submarines. "

~ from :

Wardenclyffe Tower:
Post-Tesla-Era
@Wikipedia
http://tinyurl.com/2e5anq8

" SUSPECTING that German spies were using
the big wireless tower erected at Shoreham,
L. I., about twenty years ago by Nikola Tesla,
the Federal Government ordered the tower
destroyed and it was recently demolished with
dynamite.

During the past month several strangers had
been seen lurking about the place. "

~ from :

U.S. Blows Up Tesla Radio Tower:
The Electrical Experimenter,
September, 1917, page 293.
@EarlyRadioHistory.us
http://tinyurl.com/mhdktf

1922 Wardenclyffe Foreclosure Appeal Proceedings
@TFCBooks.com
http://tinyurl.com/3xnytww

Cors in Manu Domine,

~ Khem Caigan
<Khem@...>

" Ships and sails proper for the heavenly air
should be fashioned. Then there will also be
people, who do not shrink from the vastness
of space. "

~ Johannes Kepler, letter to Galileo Galilei,
1609.

Lots of misinformation in the link, such as the claim that Tesla
invented 'the binary code'.  Not clear what this was supposed to mean
but binary numbers had been around for centuries.

     As for 'the letter seen and read  at the Smithsonian' [Ref. 4] which
stated that Tesla had said he transmitred power to Los Angeles with only
a 2% loss,  a claim is a claim but  I suspect the reference is bogus..
Maybe Tesla did make such a claim but certainly he never transmitted any
power to Los Angeles or anywhere else at such a high efficiency.

     Tesla nonsense abounds.

Ed

A canny but cautions investor, Morgan had got rich by thinking ahead. To
protect his other corporate structures, including the banking and mining
aspects that would be greatly enriched by the building of networks of
wires, he sabotaged the Tesla business he controlled. The concepts of a
wayward inventor, however brilliant, would have required him to gamble
too much on a single throw. . . .

Source: http://pesn.com/2006/08/03/9500295_wireless_transmission/

EVP doth schreibble :
>
>
> Pure fiction and not a word of truth [that Tesla built the 'Telefunken
> towers' or had anything to do with them]. Just because you found a web
> page with that silly story doesn't in any way whatever make it true.

The situation is much worse than that, Ed.

The claim that Mr. Tesla was responsible for
the Sayville Telefunken installation is found
/all across the internet/, and not merely *one*
site - see, for example, this page on the Science
Channel portion of the *Discovery Channel* website:

" Tesla built the Telefunken Wireless Station in
Sayville, Long Island, which accomplished some of
the aims of the Wardenclyffe Tower project, but the
Marines seized and tore down the Telefunken Wireless
in 1917, out of fears that it could somehow be used
by German spies. "

~ from :

Remote Possibilities:
Science Channel
@Discovery Channel.com
http://tinyurl.com/3yvdyy6

And by clicking on the link below, you will find
/several pages of links/, all claiming that Tesla
" built the Telefunken Wireless Station in Sayville,
Long Island. "

"Telefunken Wireless Station" Tesla Sayville
@Googlesearch
http://tinyurl.com/25rfhrr

If you have any citations *whatsoever* to back up
your assertion, speak now or forever hold your
chowder.

Cors in Manu Domine,


~ Khem Caigan
<Khem@...>

" All that is necessary for <ignorance> to triumph
in this world is for <the informed> to do nothing. "

Or something like that ;)

> Pure fiction and not a word of truth [that Tesla built the 'Telefunken
> towers' or had anything to do with them]. Just because you found a web
> page with that silly story doesn't in any way whatever make it true.
     Good eye.
     I had not writ, nor did the original story as i heard it,
     Associate _Tesla_ with the _Telefunken_ installation.

     IF what i have seen is correct, the _Telefunken_ installation
     was DOCUMENTED as used for espionage/U Boot comms.  In the
     aftermath/side effect of the authorities dealing with the
     _Telefunken_ installation the (then derelict) _Tesla_
     tower was demolished.

     As I said: it would be nice to have this version documented
     better, or, as may be, disproven.

best
  New dwp:     dave_p@...

[second thoughts...]

> Pure fiction and not a word of truth [that Tesla built the 'Telefunken
> towers' or had anything to do with them]. Just because you found a web
> page with that silly story doesn't in any way whatever make it true.

   It may be worth noting that there are three references, last
   to Electrical Experimenter (Publication of the time...)

> " SUSPECTING that German spies were using
> the big wireless tower erected at Shoreham,
> L. I., about twenty years ago by Nikola Tesla,
> the Federal Government ordered the tower
> destroyed and it was recently demolished with
> dynamite.
>
> During the past month several strangers had
> been seen lurking about the place. "
>
> ~ from :
>
> U.S. Blows Up Tesla Radio Tower:
> The Electrical Experimenter,
> September, 1917, page 293.
> @EarlyRadioHistory.us
> http://tinyurl.com/mhdktf

     Which would seem to document, from the time, a portion
     of the story i recall.  Whether it all holds up is,
     another matter.

New dwp:     dave_p@...

 

EVP doth schreibble :
>
>
> Pure fiction and not a word of truth [that Tesla built the 'Telefunken
> towers' or had anything to do with them]. Just because you found a web
> page with that silly story doesn't in any way whatever make it true.

The situation is much worse than that, Ed.

The claim that Mr. Tesla was responsible for
the Sayville Telefunken installation is found
/all across the internet/, and not merely *one*
site - see, for example, this page on the Science
Channel portion of the *Discovery Channel* website:

" Tesla built the Telefunken Wireless Station in
Sayville, Long Island, which accomplished some of
the aims of the Wardenclyffe Tower project, but the
Marines seized and tore down the Telefunken Wireless
in 1917, out of fears that it could somehow be used
by German spies. "

~ from :

Remote Possibilities:
Science Channel
@Discovery Channel.com
http://tinyurl.com/3yvdyy6

And by clicking on the link below, you will find
/several pages of links/, all claiming that Tesla
" built the Telefunken Wireless Station in Sayville,
Long Island. "

"Telefunken Wireless Station" Tesla Sayville
@Googlesearch
http://tinyurl.com/25rfhrr

If you have any citations *whatsoever* to back up
your assertion, speak now or forever hold your
chowder.

Cors in Manu Domine,

~ Khem Caigan
<Khem@...>

" All that is necessary for <ignorance> to triumph
in this world is for <the informed> to do nothing. "

Or something like that ;)

 

> Pure fiction and not a word of truth [that Tesla built the 'Telefunken
> towers' or had anything to do with them]. Just because you found a web
> page with that silly story doesn't in any way whatever make it true.
Good eye.
I had not writ, nor did the original story as i heard it,
Associate _Tesla_ with the _Telefunken_ installation.

IF what i have seen is correct, the _Telefunken_ installation
was DOCUMENTED as used for espionage/U Boot comms. In the
aftermath/side effect of the authorities dealing with the
_Telefunken_ installation the (then derelict) _Tesla_
tower was demolished.

As I said: it would be nice to have this version documented
better, or, as may be, disproven.

best
New dwp: dave_p@...

>> Source: http://pesn.com/2006/08/03/9500295_wireless_transmission/

> Lots of misinformation in the link, such as the claim that Tesla
> invented 'the binary code'. Not clear what this was supposed to mean
> but binary numbers had been around for centuries.
     Hmmmmmmm.
     There is a report, with cites I have not got, that Tesla (patent
     not specified) was cited as 'prior art' in DENYING patent to
     one of the early IC (1960ish?) patents.  Closest I've gotten
     is someone else's theory of one of Tesla's RC Boat patents.  Looked
     a crosseyed, this might be warped to 'invented binary _transmission_.

     Be fun for an interested party to track down the 1960ish denial (if
     it exists...) and see which Tesla patent (or whatever) (if any)
     waaas cited...

> Tesla nonsense abounds.
     Concur...

best

New dwp:     dave_p@...

It is perhaps interesting to note that finding 'something'
on the web proves, ONLY, that someone, somewhere, has a
keyboard, and the necessary skills to post a web page.  If the
web info leads to a repeatable test, or, for historical
references, to a reliable historical document, then the
web ref may be of interest.

(A tricky bit, unfortunately, is that historical documents
were, on occaision, fudged at the time.  They are all
there is to go on, in many cases...)

In the Telefunken/Tesla case, there is a good deal of contemporary(old)
documentation that Tesla did not work for/with Telefunken.  This
aspect gets ignored by many webspinners...
(And this applies to many aspects of Tesla 'history' and non Tesla
'history'.)

best
New dwp:     dave_p@...

 

[second thoughts...]

> Pure fiction and not a word of truth [that Tesla built the 'Telefunken
> towers' or had anything to do with them]. Just because you found a web
> page with that silly story doesn't in any way whatever make it true.

It may be worth noting that there are three references, last
to Electrical Experimenter (Publication of the time...)

> " SUSPECTING that German spies were using
> the big wireless tower erected at Shoreham,
> L. I., about twenty years ago by Nikola Tesla,
> the Federal Government ordered the tower
> destroyed and it was recently demolished with
> dynamite.
>
> During the past month several strangers had
> been seen lurking about the place. "
>
> ~ from :
>
> U.S. Blows Up Tesla Radio Tower:
> The Electrical Experimenter,
> September, 1917, page 293.
> @EarlyRadioHistory.us
> http://tinyurl.com/mhdktf

Which would seem to document, from the time, a portion
of the story i recall. Whether it all holds up is,
another matter.

Both the Fed and the IRS are unconstitutional. How could they ever be legalized?
What does that have to do with Tesla?

--- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, Michael  Riversong Education <rivedu@...>
wrote:
>
> JP Morgan died in 1914, but his heirs pretty much kept all of his programs
intact and moved them forward, including legalization of the Federal Reserve and
the Internal Revenue Service.  This meant that Morgan's alleged orders to banks
not to fund Tesla and to textbook companies to eliminate his name stood.  Which,
of course, is evident from the results.  Tesla never again had specific funding
for his own lab, although he was apparently employed as a consultant for many
companies after 1916.
>
> The bankruptcy hearings were well documented in Seifert's "Wizard" book.  He
used letters directly from Tesla to various people for much of his source
material.  A lot of what happened in those hearings was petty and almost seemed
vindictive.
>
> Meanwhile, the tower at Wardenclyffe was destroyed in 1917, the year the USA
entered World War I.  It was deemed a hazard because U-boats would have been
able to use it for navigation and thus mount accurate, direct attacks in the New
York City area.  Demolition was done by a contractor, i think employed by the US
Navy.  As was the custom at the time, any usable scrap was salvaged.
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: dave pierson
>
> Sent: May 30, 2010 3:21 PM
>
> To: usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com
>
> Subject: Re: [usa-tesla] Re: Wardenclyffe
>
>
>
>     The tower stood until mid WWI (would need to check
>
>     exact date.).  The lab stands to this day, tho
>
>     other industries have used it.
>
>
>
> > and maybe even his workshop.  Maybe JP would not back
>
> > Tesla, but Tesla already had the tower, so maybe Tesla
>
> > tried to go ahead with the project anyway,
>
>     The steam power plant, elaborate lab and tower
>
>     were completed, used in test.  All this is
>
>     documented various places, including court records.
>
>
>
> > JP had his tower blown up?
>
>     Probably not.  He was aging out.
>
>
>
> > The story says it was blow up for scrap parts or something
>
> > I think.
>
>     I've seen that, likely the scrap was salvaged.
>
>     Someplace that struck meas reliable (be nice to
>
>     run down...) had, roughly:
>
>      By mid WWI 'a couple of' towers existed on
>
>      Long Island, one owned by Telefunken (German
>
>      Co.)  While US was nominally neutral, the
>
>      Telefunken tower was used for nominally
>
>      commercial messaging.  It was ALSO used
>
>      to transmit to U Boats: when THAT was
>
>      figured out it was seized, and destroyed.
>
>      WHOMever then noticed the Tesla facility,
>
>      with tower, standing idle/derelict and at
>
>      risk of being used for 'similar purposes',
>
>      (Towers were needed, at the time, for that
>
>      class of work.)  So the Tesla Tower came down.
>
>      I DO NOT have a good cite for this, as i say,
>
>      It would be interesting to run down.
>
>       Tesla Bankruptcy Hearing?
>
>      NO idea when the power plant/technofittings
>
>      were removed?  Same Hearings?
>
>
>
> best
>
>      New dwp:     dave_p@...
>
>
> -- Michael Riversong
> Tesla Academy
> Cheyenne, Wyoming
> www.teslaacademy.info
> rivedu@...
>

Nikola Tesla invented the fundamental electronic AND logic-gate circuit.

In New York City in the mid 1890s Tesla's work was focused on the development of an independent remotely-controlled device--the "telautomaton."  These efforts led him to devise methods for selectively activating any of several wireless receivers (he called this "the art of individualization") that involved multiple transmissions on separate frequencies.  At the receiving end, each one of the individual frequency components had to be tuned in, in order for the receiver to respond--the AND logic function.  In June of 1899 Tesla established an experimental station at Colorado Springs where he continued his studies.  Realizing the importance of his ground-breaking techniques he gave instructions upon his return to New York that patent applications be prepared and submitted.  During the review period, the Patent Office told Tesla that another patent application for a similar concept had been received from Reginald Fessenden, and in 1902 a U.S. Patent Interference investigation was conducted concerning Tesla's wireless communications system.  In the end, Tesla's claims were supported and he was granted protection under the "System of Signaling" and "Method of Signaling" patents--both describing the fundamental electronic AND-gate logic circuit.  After World War II when computer hardware manufacturers attempted to patent digital logic gates the U.S. Patent Office asserted Tesla's turn-of-the-century priority in their electrical implementation.  These same patents also describe essential features of the spread-spectrum wireless communications techniques known as frequency-hopping and frequency-division multiplexing.

Source: http://www.tfcbooks.com/teslafaq/q&a_024.htm 

--- In usa-tesla@yahoogroups.com, dave pierson <dave_p@...> wrote:
>
> >> Source: http://pesn.com/2006/08/03/9500295_wireless_transmission/
>
> > Lots of misinformation in the link, such as the claim that Tesla
> > invented 'the binary code'. Not clear what this was supposed to mean
> > but binary numbers had been around for centuries.
>
> Hmmmmmmm.
> There is a report, with cites I have not got, that Tesla (patent
> not specified) was cited as 'prior art' in DENYING patent to
> one of the early IC (1960ish?) patents. Closest I've gotten
> is someone else's theory of one of Tesla's RC Boat patents. Looked
> a crosseyed, this might be warped to 'invented binary _transmission_.
>
> Be fun for an interested party to track down the 1960ish denial (if
> it exists...) and see which Tesla patent (or whatever) (if any)
> waaas cited...
>
> > Tesla nonsense abounds.
> 
> Concur...
>
> best
>
> New dwp: dave_p@...
>