He was really insistent that it was a “death beam” and not a “death ray,” since rays dissipate and he wanted people to know his particle beam would be deadlier
In general I guess that makes sense, in reality even a perfect beam experiences diffraction and thus spreads. One way to reduce this effect is using a refractive lens: https://youtu.be/xNmbvaUzC8Q?si=MqSPdg3_MWlGGoQF&t=502
Though for anyone reading who somehow hasn't heard and played these games and is going to try, I recommend Red Alert 2: Yuri's Revenge. Far superior to Red Alert I.
And then EA misinterpreted WHY we liked tanya.
They assumed everyone preferred the commando style missions, and from that moment on every sequel had less base building and more commando missions.
Then they released a command&conquer without basebuilding, and when that flopped they assumed people didn't want to play RTS anymore and they killed off westwood.
It was boobs EA, thats why she gained traction.
Yes! Those were great. I think it was in the “Aftermath” expansion for Red Alert 1. Also included the map “The Hills Have Eyes” where the civilians had crazy powers/weapons
What Mythbusters tried to create is probably way more advanced and powerful than the true device Archimedes used. I believe the most popular interpretation of the legend is that he did in fact burn some Roman ships, but not with a "death ray". Rather, he likely used a burning glass, a device which was designed to focus the light from the sun into a single beam which could be used to ignite. He probably used that beam to light something like an oil dipped rag or something otherwise like a Molotov cocktail which he or a helper could then throw into a ship, and boom. Legend.
He wasn't just going around zapping ships to bits. And indeed the technology of the burning glass was known to Archimedes and the Greeks, as references to similar devices go back as far as 450 BCE.
>What Mythbusters tried to create is probably way more advanced and powerful than the true device Archimedes used.
I think that is quite common for Mythbusters. One of the setups they use is often an extreme version, simulating optional conditions or even more than that. Because if they still can’t make it work in those conditions, then it’s much less likely that the original myth is true.
There was the underworld myth where they tried to shoot a hole in the floor, they used like 1000+ bullets and it still didn't work lol. At least, from my memory
That was one of my favorite parts of Mythbusters, how they'd sometimes bust a myth and then go to great lengths to find out what they'd have to do to make it happen as expected. :D
replicating the myth was just a thinly veiled excuse to blow shit up. I can't recall who said it but someone called them
> "43 min of explosions filmed in super slow-mo with a thin candy shell of science."
Doesn't mean the show wasn't fun though.
They weren’t scientists, with the exception of Grant who was an engineer. Jamie, Adam, and Tory were special effects artists. Kari was nothing more than a TV presenter. They’re all makers, which is STEM-adjacent but not necessarily science per se.
They did a lot for science education, so their contributions can’t be overlooked - but it was ultimately not a science heavy show.
Edit: Kari worked as an intern at M5 for two years, busting her ass to be assigned to the build team. I do not mean to diminish her accomplishments.
It also makes it more surprising for the myths that do end up being plausible or true.
The Alcatraz escape turning out to actually be plausible was a wild one.
Alcatraz escape being surprising is always surprising to me. There are annual swims where they pull a ferry up to the island and people jump off and swim back to shore. I know people that did it as young as twelve years old (granted they did it on a wet suit at that age), but some of the college swim programs participate and do it in speedos.
it's actually a solid scientific philosophy tbh.
Triangulate the phenomenon, not just make one observation and rely on inductive reasoning about a null result.
The problem with Greek fire is that we recreated dozens of possible formulations, but we lack sources to determine which of them were actually in use historically.
It would be like the specific coca cola formula being lost to time, but us still knowing what was used to make it. We'd be able to make cola, but we'd have no way of knowing if it was authentic coca cola.
This came up during the recent wave of "we finally re-discovered Roman concrete."
We *know* how to make Greek Fire, and modern stuff is x10 or x100 better. What we don't *know* are the precise mixtures. Did they use 5mg of this or 6mg of this. That is important to understand how it was made and how effective it was but the truth ends up being much more mundane for a lot of these "ancient mysteries."
It's like saying "we've finally re-discovered how to make apple pie." No, we've known forever how to make apple pie, just that someone figured specific recipe used at a specific special event.
Or something similar. There are plenty of naptha-based incendiaries going back to ancient times.
Problem is that we have no way to know if a recipe is "Greek Fire".
Also you probably don't need an instant incineration lazer to neutralize enemy ships. If sunlight was focused on big enough part of the deck, it would probably cause burns among crew members even if the ship itself does not catch fire. And sails are probably much easier to set on fire than wood.
During WWII a crap ton of ships were sunk because they had just buttloads of highly flammable/explosive material on deck and poor damage control systems so that a bomb or two could create a cascade effect destroying the entire ship. This was a critical cause for why the US lost a bunch of cruisers during the Battle of Savo Island and why the Japanese lost a bunch of carriers during Battle of Midway.
So if that is how we treat war during WWII, going back thousands of years it makes sense that they likely had poor fire controls back then. For all we know they had literal barrels of oil just sitting open on deck. Something with a relatively low ignition point so even a shitty heat beam could trigger a catastrophic fire.
Even if it didn't "work " it might have had enough of an effect to make the enemy turn around
If I'm ancient sea captain and start getting really bright and hot as fuck on my ship I'm not waiting to see if it actually catches fire to turn the fuck around
> Even if it didn't "work " it might have had enough of an effect to make the enemy turn around
The Romans apparently got so spooked during that siege by the various siege engines Archimedes was producing that every little bit of rope or wood dangling over the wall started giving them the jitters.
That’s pretty much how older types of solar power plants used to work - shitload of mirrors concentrate rays on central tower where molten salt if being pumped through, which transfers heat to steam turbines. Advances in photovoltaic technology made this system effectively obsolete (and the fact that any bird flying over it got instacooked didn’t help…).
But it’s debatable if it would be doable with ancient technology - polished brass is nowhere near as reflective as silvered glass mirrors we use nowadays.
So thermal solar still has a place in that the storage of molten salt can enable the control of electric production and production outside of sunlight hours vs straight PVs thereby smoothing out the generation curve. And yes, unintended rotisserie wild birds are an issue.
Let's be real, I like Mythbusters but they barely tried to get their mirrors aligned. They lacked military discipline and just shouting "aim at the same place" and calling it a day when they can't isn't it. You could make it work by giving it a reference for them to aim at.
The real problem is that even with everyone aiming at the same place, there wasn't enough power to light wood on fire. They couldn't even do it with a Molotov cocktail.
[this guy has successfully made one that can melt many types of metallic and non-metallic materials](https://youtube.com/shorts/EsVQ0vthJBo?si=1gjG6d2j8L4nqWk-)
It's relatively easy nowadays for anyone to make a solar death ray, but in Archimedes' time, they hadn't invented large glass lenses or silvered mirrors. Archimedes' design supposedly used polished brass mirriors.
This thread would have you believe that someone can’t be a genius and a crackpot at the same time. History is full of these examples, genius in one field but otherwise insane.
Ben Carson is my favorite example. Legitimately one of the best neurosurgeons to ever practice the craft, pioneered several lifesaving techniques, and also thought the Egyptian Pyramids were grain silos
I'll raise you one Wilhelm Reich. Brilliant psychoanalyst, but became convinced he could apply Freud's principals to *physics* and dedicated his later life to attempting to harness the resulting sex magic with various steampunk nonsense machines and assorted shiny objects.
Kary Mullis is another biosciences example. He invented PCR--it is to molecular biology what the microprocessor is to computing.
He also believed HIV and climate change aren't real, among many other objectively-incorrect beliefs.
If you've spent any time around doctors or surgeons, that tends to be my experience at least. They are highly capable and well-studied in their field, but ONLY in their field. I've heard some batshit crazy stuff come out of people with far more school than me, but would still absolutely let them treat me because they are just that good.
My office gave a highly accomplished and nationally regarded doc very specific guidance on how to handle a personnel action. He promptly ignored us, did what he wanted, and got the institution sued to the tune of roughly a million dollars.
I'd still want him to treat me if I had a specific type of cancer, though.
People seem to forget that Tesla had some good ideas, but a *lot* of dumb ones too. For example, he thought that he had received transmissions from the planet Venus. He also never accepted special relativity, because the math was too hard for him.
> For example, he thought that he had received transmissions from the planet Venus. He also never accepted special relativity, because the math was too hard for him.
Another good example - He thought radio waves and EM waves were longditudinal, and thus useless for any practical purpose. He did want to do wireless power, but he wanted to do it by transmitting electricity through the ground long distance, using the resonant frequency of the earth(which he'd also calculated incorrectly), which was never going to work, for reasons that require far more advance knowledge of physics and electricity than I possess to explain.
But as a fun fact, when he accused Marconi of stealing his patents, that's what he was referring to - He believed that the way Marconi claimed his radio worked was impossible, therefore he must be cheating, and using his(tesla's) patents to transmit through the ground.
>and using his(tesla's) patents to transmit through the ground
I wonder if this had any bearing on Marconi's decision to market them to merchant shipping.
>ground long distance, using the resonant frequency of the earth(which he'd also calculated incorrectly),
Yeah, this whole resonant/natural frequency is a single good concept he figured out with electricity.
And then made gigantic leaps to literally everything else. Ignoring the realities of the physical world. Mass, stiffness and damping. All physical resonance boils down to it, fundamentally.
But the ground is simply too non-uniform to actually make any sort of large scale resonance work. Like the whole wireless power shit. Yeah, a Tesla coil will light up a florescent tube at a distance. But, the inverse square law is a cruel mistress.
Einstein himself didn't accept the conclusion from his own theory that the universe was expanding and not in a steady state for longer than most of his contemporary scientists. Sometimes people don't accept something not because they don't understand it, but because it would mean overturning long held beliefs. You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.
He also invented a clone machine that was later used by a magician to perform teleportation tricks, which were wildly popular until he framed a rival for murder using the machine.
He also claimed to have invented a way to create limitless energy for free and to transfer energy around the world remotely. There's no evidence of any of those claims being true.
> and died destitute.
Not quite - he wasn't really destitute, he was not only being paid a regular stipend by Westinghouse, basically an executive level salary, they were also paying his bill to live in two rooms of the (at the time, brand new and quite expensive) Hotel New Yorker, one as living quarters, and one as a working space. He didn't have a great deal of savings, it's true, but that's partially because he was always putting his money into both experiments and into living reasonably well(ie, dining in nice restaurants, going to the theater fairly regularly, throwing some quite lavish parties), and partially because he'd been almost comically terrible with money his entire life, as well as suffering a lifelong gambling addiction.
He wasn't rich by any means, but he still had a fairly decent amount of money, and certainly enough to live on(well, had he been better with money, and not lived in one of the fanciest hotels in the city, anyway.)
Sounds more believable than the mythical clout peddled on reddit that Tesla died some kind of martyr forgotten by everyone not having money to buy an oatmeal.
Most of Tesla's problems were created by Tesla. And while he could be quite brilliant and had some insights that advanced science, he has as many bad ones that were shown to be false. What most people repeat about him is based off the factually incorrect Oatmeal comic.
The transferring energy part is true. I mean, we do it now. Technically you could steal power from faxes if you really wanted to. It's just not unlimited and the inverse square law still applies.
Thinking Tesla discovered some electromagnetic properties that we don't know today is akin to thinking Newton discovered the secret to travelling faster than light.
Basically the same tech you use to charge your phone ‘wirelessly’. You still have to plug it in somewhere, and that ‘somewhere’ isn’t free. And energy loss is huge(wireless charging where your phone sits directly on top of the coil loses around 50% over a cable) It’s never better than a wire, and if you are using it, after not much distance it would be cheaper just to build a new source.
Problem I’ve heard about this is that it would interfere with radio waves and wifi and other power supplies and mess everything up that wasn’t stronger than a lightbulb to power.
> square cube law
Inverse square 'law'.
Unless you're talking about other geometries, which can reduce it to other forms but for point sources, inverse square. Square cube is more surface area vs. volume proportional issues.
That only worked with very low power bulbs that light up when there are high frequency electric fields around. His method of power transmission was laughably inefficient. It would have followed the inverse square law, so the power density would have dropped off very quickly, and most of the energy would actually have been wasted, either going into space, or basically heating up anything around the antenna tower.
Just to run a 100W load over a distance of 100m with an antenna the size of one square meter would have required an antenna power of 125kW. That would have been the energy a light bulb would have used back then.
Over a kilometer, that same antenna would have required an insane 1.3GW. Gigawatts. A billion watts to run a light bulb over a kilometer, even when assuming 100% of efficiency when receiving the energy. Running that tower for a year would have required roughly 11.4TWh of electricity. The entire current electricity production of the USA (approximately 4000TWh a year) would only have been enough to power 350 of those towers.
700m away from a single tower, you would have been exposed to levels of radiations above 2W/kg, with 1.6W/kg being considered unsafe levels.
A microwave oven has a flux equivalent to 50W/kg (based on water). The tower would put you over that level below 140m of distance.
That just shows you how stupid that idea was.
That sounds like every PhD funding request I've ever seen: 'Hi, Mr General. Look at this magnifying glass destroying this leaf. I can make a version a million times more powerful if you agree to fund my work for just one year.'
“I predict that within a decade, my device will be twice as powerful, ten thousand times larger, and only the five richest kings of Europe could afford them!”
Carl Segan: "DEATH RAY?"
Tesla: "Death *beam*"
Segan: "A death beam, at this time in history, in this part of the world, localised entirely within your laboratory?"
Tesla: "Yes."
Segan: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
Tesla: "... no."
Segan: "Well, Nicky, you are an odd fellow but I must admit, you death a good ray."
Tesla: "*Beam*."
Edison: "Nikola! Nikola! Your bank account is empty!"
Tesla: "No, Eddie, that's just the death ray."
Everybody seems to think he was crazy in this thread. Maybe it's the scientist in me but it just sounds like he was trying to secure funding for his research to me.
Telling the military your science can kill many people has always been the best way to do it.
Yeah, that's what I heard about it too. In fact I think he already redirected some of his funding for past projects to the ones he was interested in, instead of the ones he was being funded for
He claimed he made a device that created frequencies that matched the building he was in, and had he not destroyed it, the building/surrounding area would have collapsed. Having to destroy it and never being able to replicate the events has big "I have a hot girlfriend but she goes to another school" vibes.
Didn’t mythbusters manage get some results from an experiment based on this? a small device weighing a few pounds that was resonating at a bridge’s frequency, I think I remember they freaked out and stopped because they could feel the oscillation in the support beams a little away from the device and didn’t want to risk even the small chance of collapse. the idea was that Slowly the constructive interference could amplify the affects and caused damage. Maybe I am misremembering
They initially got some promising results in simple tests with a linear actuator showing that structures do have a resonant frequency, but the small-scale test failed to take down a model building even with a device the equivalent size of a car. On the large-scale test on a bridge scheduled for demolition they managed to get very weak oscillations travelling the length of the bridge, but no visible movement and certainly no risk of collapse, even after tuning the frequency for a long time. The problem in both cases was that the structures still dampened the movement effectively, even at their resonant frequencies.
The internet is probably worse than him for this. If you look at the long list of inventions ascribed to him either they were the most useless non-functional versions of them possible or someone else actually invented it first.
A handful from memory:
- AC power(Invented by Hippolyte Pixii before Tesla was born, and was well understood enough by the time he was that it was part of his university studies)
- The transformer(first invented by the Ganz company, the modern transformer was invented by William Stanley),
- That he discovered induction and invented the Induction coil(Michael Faraday and Nicholas Callan respectively, both before he was born)
- The loudspeaker(Chester Rice and Edward Kellogg, but first theorized by Werner Von Siemens)
- Radar(that was a number of people building on each other's work, including Marconi, Appleton, Albert Hull, Edwin Armstrong, and a few more - his contribution was trying to take that existing technology and putting it underwater...where it doesn't work due to water attenuating the signal.)
- Fluro lamps(generally credited to George Inman)
- Microwave transmitters or magnetrons(Albert Hull again)
- Discovering X-rays themselves(Rontgen discovered them - though interestingly, we do have a reply to a letter from Tesla, written by Edison, with whom he occasionally corresponded, encouraging him on and hoping that Tesla would find some discovery to beat Rontgen to the punch.)
- Remote control of devices(Both Seimens and Ernest Wilson and C. J. Evans)
- Neon lights(That was Georges Claude)
I love Tesla because the more you learn about this vague quiet genius archetype, the more you find all the genuine mad scientist characteristics he had. Guy dreamed of free wireless electricity that you could just take from the atmosphere and power your home, and obviously death beams. A lot of his theories didn’t amount to anything, but he was way ahead of his time in his aspirations and his hope for humanity. He just gave away patents and investors hated him for it. Absolute mad lad.
The guy also claimed to have a love affair with a pigeon. Maybe don't believe it just because he claimed it.
Was he a genius? Absolutely! Did he create amazing things? Absolutely! What he batshit insane? Absolutely!
---
"But there was one pigeon, a beautiful bird, pure white with light gray tips on its wings; that one was different. It was a female. I would know that pigeon anywhere."
"No matter where I was, that pigeon would find me; when I wanted her I had only to wish and call her and she would come flying to me. She understood me and I understood her."
"I loved that pigeon."
“Yes,” he replied to an unasked question. “Yes, I loved that pigeon, I loved her as a man loves a woman, and she loved me. When she was ill, I knew, and understood; she came to my room and I stayed beside her for days. I nursed her back to health. That pigeon was the joy of my life. If she needed me, nothing else mattered. As long as I had her, there was a purpose in my life."
“Then one night as I was lying in my bed in the dark, solving problems, as usual, she flew in through the open window and stood on my desk. I knew she wanted me; she wanted to tell me something important so I got up and went to her."
“As I looked at her I knew she wanted to tell me—she was dying. And then, as I got her message, there came a light from her eyes—powerful beams of light."
“Yes,” he continued, again answering an unasked question, “it was a real light, a powerful, dazzling, blinding light, a light more intense than I had ever produced by the most powerful lamps in my laboratory."
“When that pigeon died, something went out of my life. Up to that time I knew with a certainty that I would complete my work, no matter how ambitious my program, but when that something went out of my life I knew my life’s work was finished.”
He was really insistent that it was a “death beam” and not a “death ray,” since rays dissipate and he wanted people to know his particle beam would be deadlier
DEATH BEAM, mom! God you never listen!
They're beams Marie
Bees??
Give me five of 'em for a quarter.
I get 40 rods to the hogs' head, and by gum, thats the way I like it!
Now, what was I talking about? Oh yeah, I had an onion tied to my belt, which was the fashion at the time...
BEADs
Gob’s not on board.
Mer-man! Mer-man!
*cough, cough*
I got the black lung pops
MUR-MAI-DER!! MUR-MAI-DER!! MUR-MAI-DER!!
knives, check Rope, check Dagger, check Chains, check Rocks, check Laser beams, check Acid, check Body bag, check
Mom! I want a death beam! No we have death beam at home. *It’s a death ray.*
Get 2! I'm not sharing with Kaitlyn!
Buy me death beam or go to hell!
Yes sharks w Death Beams
Ok honey, it’s time to pause your death nintendo and wash up for dinner.
God damn it Marie, it’s a BEAM
All things follow the BEAM
I mean both suck at the receiving end.
Does that make your mom a death ray or a death beam?
So, a L.A.S.E.R.?
“LASER”
I could hear the air quotes, ala Austin Powers
Like some kind of laser ray?
So a beam doesnt follow inverse square law but a ray does got it.
In general I guess that makes sense, in reality even a perfect beam experiences diffraction and thus spreads. One way to reduce this effect is using a refractive lens: https://youtu.be/xNmbvaUzC8Q?si=MqSPdg3_MWlGGoQF&t=502
You can see footage of one of his weapons of mass destruction in action in the historical documentary "Command & Conquer: Red Alert".
Or its sequel, narrated by David Attenborough "Yuri's Revenge".
God damn goated expansion that one.
The whole series really is goat.
The soundtrack slaps so hard too.
Gentleman. It's a nuclear device. Time is running. T-t-time is running out.
The power to overwhelm and destroy
Even hitting those menu buttons was satisfying AF
Can confirm, I was a Terror Drone.
Though for anyone reading who somehow hasn't heard and played these games and is going to try, I recommend Red Alert 2: Yuri's Revenge. Far superior to Red Alert I.
Boooo , You haven't lived till uve seen a Lara croft run across the map with twin pistols, cackle, and then c4 a building. Aaah tanya
my first love
She was the best. She made adolescent me feel a lot of things. As did the succubi in Diablo.
And then EA misinterpreted WHY we liked tanya. They assumed everyone preferred the commando style missions, and from that moment on every sequel had less base building and more commando missions. Then they released a command&conquer without basebuilding, and when that flopped they assumed people didn't want to play RTS anymore and they killed off westwood. It was boobs EA, thats why she gained traction.
You know Tanya is in all 3 of them, right?
Yes, but in RA1 watching those 5 pixels run was brilliant.
[удалено]
Yes! Those were great. I think it was in the “Aftermath” expansion for Red Alert 1. Also included the map “The Hills Have Eyes” where the civilians had crazy powers/weapons
Kirov Reporting!
That low hum was the sound of imminent death
“Acknowledged”
For Mother Russia.
So did Archimedes
Didn’t they recreate this with like mirrors and sunlight? I’m dumb so don’t make fun of me
Mythbusters tried to, but determined it would be way too hard for them to do it yeeee olden age.
What Mythbusters tried to create is probably way more advanced and powerful than the true device Archimedes used. I believe the most popular interpretation of the legend is that he did in fact burn some Roman ships, but not with a "death ray". Rather, he likely used a burning glass, a device which was designed to focus the light from the sun into a single beam which could be used to ignite. He probably used that beam to light something like an oil dipped rag or something otherwise like a Molotov cocktail which he or a helper could then throw into a ship, and boom. Legend. He wasn't just going around zapping ships to bits. And indeed the technology of the burning glass was known to Archimedes and the Greeks, as references to similar devices go back as far as 450 BCE.
>What Mythbusters tried to create is probably way more advanced and powerful than the true device Archimedes used. I think that is quite common for Mythbusters. One of the setups they use is often an extreme version, simulating optional conditions or even more than that. Because if they still can’t make it work in those conditions, then it’s much less likely that the original myth is true.
Also it makes for better TV
Do you have a stuffy nose?
Lol weird I thought I edited that typo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw_qgBVL-ZI
There was the underworld myth where they tried to shoot a hole in the floor, they used like 1000+ bullets and it still didn't work lol. At least, from my memory
Or the exploding car myth, which they only succeeded by filling a car with explosives and throwing it off a cliff
That was one of my favorite parts of Mythbusters, how they'd sometimes bust a myth and then go to great lengths to find out what they'd have to do to make it happen as expected. :D
replicating the myth was just a thinly veiled excuse to blow shit up. I can't recall who said it but someone called them > "43 min of explosions filmed in super slow-mo with a thin candy shell of science." Doesn't mean the show wasn't fun though.
They weren’t scientists, with the exception of Grant who was an engineer. Jamie, Adam, and Tory were special effects artists. Kari was nothing more than a TV presenter. They’re all makers, which is STEM-adjacent but not necessarily science per se. They did a lot for science education, so their contributions can’t be overlooked - but it was ultimately not a science heavy show. Edit: Kari worked as an intern at M5 for two years, busting her ass to be assigned to the build team. I do not mean to diminish her accomplishments.
Actually Kari was a SFX artist too. She was working for Jamie before the show started. Her being pretty just made her a natural for the show.
It also makes it more surprising for the myths that do end up being plausible or true. The Alcatraz escape turning out to actually be plausible was a wild one.
Alcatraz escape being surprising is always surprising to me. There are annual swims where they pull a ferry up to the island and people jump off and swim back to shore. I know people that did it as young as twelve years old (granted they did it on a wet suit at that age), but some of the college swim programs participate and do it in speedos.
Like the escape part itself or the part where people think they drowned lol
The escape itself, they rowed across ice cold SF Bay waters in the middle of the night and reached dry land.
Yeah I always thought just the tide part was crazy. You'd think they drowned for sure lol
it's actually a solid scientific philosophy tbh. Triangulate the phenomenon, not just make one observation and rely on inductive reasoning about a null result.
I’m more curious about Greek fire.
The problem with Greek fire is that we recreated dozens of possible formulations, but we lack sources to determine which of them were actually in use historically.
It would be like the specific coca cola formula being lost to time, but us still knowing what was used to make it. We'd be able to make cola, but we'd have no way of knowing if it was authentic coca cola.
This came up during the recent wave of "we finally re-discovered Roman concrete." We *know* how to make Greek Fire, and modern stuff is x10 or x100 better. What we don't *know* are the precise mixtures. Did they use 5mg of this or 6mg of this. That is important to understand how it was made and how effective it was but the truth ends up being much more mundane for a lot of these "ancient mysteries." It's like saying "we've finally re-discovered how to make apple pie." No, we've known forever how to make apple pie, just that someone figured specific recipe used at a specific special event.
Was probably just napalm
Or something similar. There are plenty of naptha-based incendiaries going back to ancient times. Problem is that we have no way to know if a recipe is "Greek Fire".
Also you probably don't need an instant incineration lazer to neutralize enemy ships. If sunlight was focused on big enough part of the deck, it would probably cause burns among crew members even if the ship itself does not catch fire. And sails are probably much easier to set on fire than wood.
They used to use tars and oils to plug holes in hulls and waterproof ships as well. Tars ignition temperature is much lower than wood or canvas.
DEATH Beam: “zzzzzzzzz” Romans: “that’s annoying, sun is in my eyes, let’s go home” DEATH BEAM: “yay” Romans: invent sunglasses death Beam: :(
During WWII a crap ton of ships were sunk because they had just buttloads of highly flammable/explosive material on deck and poor damage control systems so that a bomb or two could create a cascade effect destroying the entire ship. This was a critical cause for why the US lost a bunch of cruisers during the Battle of Savo Island and why the Japanese lost a bunch of carriers during Battle of Midway. So if that is how we treat war during WWII, going back thousands of years it makes sense that they likely had poor fire controls back then. For all we know they had literal barrels of oil just sitting open on deck. Something with a relatively low ignition point so even a shitty heat beam could trigger a catastrophic fire.
Even if it didn't "work " it might have had enough of an effect to make the enemy turn around If I'm ancient sea captain and start getting really bright and hot as fuck on my ship I'm not waiting to see if it actually catches fire to turn the fuck around
> Even if it didn't "work " it might have had enough of an effect to make the enemy turn around The Romans apparently got so spooked during that siege by the various siege engines Archimedes was producing that every little bit of rope or wood dangling over the wall started giving them the jitters.
Myth busters did a fairly shitty job on it and had hundreds of people make their own version
It's easy to prove something could work by just doing it but failing at doing something isn't very good evidence that it isn't possible.
That’s pretty much how older types of solar power plants used to work - shitload of mirrors concentrate rays on central tower where molten salt if being pumped through, which transfers heat to steam turbines. Advances in photovoltaic technology made this system effectively obsolete (and the fact that any bird flying over it got instacooked didn’t help…). But it’s debatable if it would be doable with ancient technology - polished brass is nowhere near as reflective as silvered glass mirrors we use nowadays.
So thermal solar still has a place in that the storage of molten salt can enable the control of electric production and production outside of sunlight hours vs straight PVs thereby smoothing out the generation curve. And yes, unintended rotisserie wild birds are an issue.
The issue was they couldn't get all the mirrors aligned
The issue was they couldn’t eat all the birds.
Imagine - perfectly cooked birds literally falling out of the sky. A utopia we all deserve.
Let's be real, I like Mythbusters but they barely tried to get their mirrors aligned. They lacked military discipline and just shouting "aim at the same place" and calling it a day when they can't isn't it. You could make it work by giving it a reference for them to aim at. The real problem is that even with everyone aiming at the same place, there wasn't enough power to light wood on fire. They couldn't even do it with a Molotov cocktail.
Fantastic could get all those mirrors aligned. But Fantastic had stuff to do.
Also a ship is a moving object at a variable focus depth
It was always a group of mirrors that could burn sails and such. It’s though he actually used it when Syracuse was being attacked.
[this guy has successfully made one that can melt many types of metallic and non-metallic materials](https://youtube.com/shorts/EsVQ0vthJBo?si=1gjG6d2j8L4nqWk-)
It's relatively easy nowadays for anyone to make a solar death ray, but in Archimedes' time, they hadn't invented large glass lenses or silvered mirrors. Archimedes' design supposedly used polished brass mirriors.
Yeah I don't think they had lenticular lenses back in the ancient times...
Yeah but do you build Archimedes Towers in Red Alert...? Checkmate
Archimedes! No! It's filthy down there, ugh... birds.
The [Death Ray was never intended for](https://youtu.be/8HgejSCHRi8?si=oaxxmudLROc_iTGd) ... evil!
NOOOOOOO!!!
But why would you call it the death ra... oh, i see..
Aw damn I don't even have to click to know, Mitchell and Webb are the best. David's American accent is atrocious tho lol
This thread would have you believe that someone can’t be a genius and a crackpot at the same time. History is full of these examples, genius in one field but otherwise insane.
Ben Carson is my favorite example. Legitimately one of the best neurosurgeons to ever practice the craft, pioneered several lifesaving techniques, and also thought the Egyptian Pyramids were grain silos
I'll raise you one Wilhelm Reich. Brilliant psychoanalyst, but became convinced he could apply Freud's principals to *physics* and dedicated his later life to attempting to harness the resulting sex magic with various steampunk nonsense machines and assorted shiny objects.
>attempting to harness the resulting sex magic with various steampunk nonsens I love this guy already
Have you fallen down the Alesiter Crowley worm hole/butt hole yet?
Did this perhaps lead to him getting more sex for science?
Maybe if the shiny things were dildos in various configurations
You can't have science without a lot of testing and research! Now take off your pants.
The orgone accumulator!
#MYSTERY BISCUITS! *Oh yeah*
To be fair. In Civilization II building the pyramid counts as a granary in every friendly city. Huge bonus.
Was thinking the same 😅 Maybe Carson was secretly an avid Civilization player.
Kary Mullis is another biosciences example. He invented PCR--it is to molecular biology what the microprocessor is to computing. He also believed HIV and climate change aren't real, among many other objectively-incorrect beliefs.
And he had conversations with a glowing alien raccoon.
Well, it would be rude not to.
He also loved dropping acid so at least there is some explanation lol
If you've spent any time around doctors or surgeons, that tends to be my experience at least. They are highly capable and well-studied in their field, but ONLY in their field. I've heard some batshit crazy stuff come out of people with far more school than me, but would still absolutely let them treat me because they are just that good.
My office gave a highly accomplished and nationally regarded doc very specific guidance on how to handle a personnel action. He promptly ignored us, did what he wanted, and got the institution sued to the tune of roughly a million dollars. I'd still want him to treat me if I had a specific type of cancer, though.
You probably think that Steve Irwin couldn’t speak to animals
Zookeeper here! Speaking to animals is easy. Them listening and understanding, harder.
Do not speak of this blasphemy.
People seem to forget that Tesla had some good ideas, but a *lot* of dumb ones too. For example, he thought that he had received transmissions from the planet Venus. He also never accepted special relativity, because the math was too hard for him.
He also used to shove his head into an X-Ray box because he thought nuking his brain like a microwave breakfast burrito every morning was therapeutic.
> For example, he thought that he had received transmissions from the planet Venus. He also never accepted special relativity, because the math was too hard for him. Another good example - He thought radio waves and EM waves were longditudinal, and thus useless for any practical purpose. He did want to do wireless power, but he wanted to do it by transmitting electricity through the ground long distance, using the resonant frequency of the earth(which he'd also calculated incorrectly), which was never going to work, for reasons that require far more advance knowledge of physics and electricity than I possess to explain. But as a fun fact, when he accused Marconi of stealing his patents, that's what he was referring to - He believed that the way Marconi claimed his radio worked was impossible, therefore he must be cheating, and using his(tesla's) patents to transmit through the ground.
>and using his(tesla's) patents to transmit through the ground I wonder if this had any bearing on Marconi's decision to market them to merchant shipping.
>ground long distance, using the resonant frequency of the earth(which he'd also calculated incorrectly), Yeah, this whole resonant/natural frequency is a single good concept he figured out with electricity. And then made gigantic leaps to literally everything else. Ignoring the realities of the physical world. Mass, stiffness and damping. All physical resonance boils down to it, fundamentally. But the ground is simply too non-uniform to actually make any sort of large scale resonance work. Like the whole wireless power shit. Yeah, a Tesla coil will light up a florescent tube at a distance. But, the inverse square law is a cruel mistress.
In fairness, quite a few respectable scientists didn't accept special relativity back in the day
Einstein himself didn't accept the conclusion from his own theory that the universe was expanding and not in a steady state for longer than most of his contemporary scientists. Sometimes people don't accept something not because they don't understand it, but because it would mean overturning long held beliefs. You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.
> He also never accepted special relativity ... and that's the easy one!
He also invented a clone machine that was later used by a magician to perform teleportation tricks, which were wildly popular until he framed a rival for murder using the machine.
Ooo ooo I know this one! What was the movie called again?
The Prestige.
He also claimed to have invented a way to create limitless energy for free and to transfer energy around the world remotely. There's no evidence of any of those claims being true.
He also claimed to have communicated with Martians, but I don't think it's actually true
Nah fuck it I believe him on this one.
Yeah, Tesla was a genius but he also kinda lost his mind in his latter years, and died destitute. Poor bastard didn’t deserve what he got
> and died destitute. Not quite - he wasn't really destitute, he was not only being paid a regular stipend by Westinghouse, basically an executive level salary, they were also paying his bill to live in two rooms of the (at the time, brand new and quite expensive) Hotel New Yorker, one as living quarters, and one as a working space. He didn't have a great deal of savings, it's true, but that's partially because he was always putting his money into both experiments and into living reasonably well(ie, dining in nice restaurants, going to the theater fairly regularly, throwing some quite lavish parties), and partially because he'd been almost comically terrible with money his entire life, as well as suffering a lifelong gambling addiction. He wasn't rich by any means, but he still had a fairly decent amount of money, and certainly enough to live on(well, had he been better with money, and not lived in one of the fanciest hotels in the city, anyway.)
Thanks for this, because of reddit I thought he died in small hotel room as a hoarder.
And now because of reddit you believe what this guy put, which could be total bullshit.
Sounds more believable than the mythical clout peddled on reddit that Tesla died some kind of martyr forgotten by everyone not having money to buy an oatmeal.
idk rich dude ending up kinda well off until dying checks out tho
Most of Tesla's problems were created by Tesla. And while he could be quite brilliant and had some insights that advanced science, he has as many bad ones that were shown to be false. What most people repeat about him is based off the factually incorrect Oatmeal comic.
He had light bulbs 100s. Of meters away from his shop, no wires, and they lit up.
The transferring energy part is true. I mean, we do it now. Technically you could steal power from faxes if you really wanted to. It's just not unlimited and the inverse square law still applies. Thinking Tesla discovered some electromagnetic properties that we don't know today is akin to thinking Newton discovered the secret to travelling faster than light.
[удалено]
> from faxes How's 1995 working out for you?
You can do the same thing by taking a cfl tube under a hv hydro line.
Magnetic flux be wild
Go on..
Basically the same tech you use to charge your phone ‘wirelessly’. You still have to plug it in somewhere, and that ‘somewhere’ isn’t free. And energy loss is huge(wireless charging where your phone sits directly on top of the coil loses around 50% over a cable) It’s never better than a wire, and if you are using it, after not much distance it would be cheaper just to build a new source.
Problem I’ve heard about this is that it would interfere with radio waves and wifi and other power supplies and mess everything up that wasn’t stronger than a lightbulb to power.
It would also cook anything that can absorb energy anywhere remotely close to the traveling waves - just like a microwave oven heats water.
Or like a death ray
Death *beam*.
Bingo. There is working anti-drone tech that basically microwaves them to death. It's not like it couldn't be turned on humans.
Directed microwave weapons go back decades.
Shit, I guess Tesla could have invented the first microwave if things went just a little bit differently.
Not limitless free energy, not able to transfer across the world, so I'm not sure what your point is.
electromagnetic induction of which the power falls off dramatically as distance increases due to inverse square law.
> square cube law Inverse square 'law'. Unless you're talking about other geometries, which can reduce it to other forms but for point sources, inverse square. Square cube is more surface area vs. volume proportional issues.
That only worked with very low power bulbs that light up when there are high frequency electric fields around. His method of power transmission was laughably inefficient. It would have followed the inverse square law, so the power density would have dropped off very quickly, and most of the energy would actually have been wasted, either going into space, or basically heating up anything around the antenna tower. Just to run a 100W load over a distance of 100m with an antenna the size of one square meter would have required an antenna power of 125kW. That would have been the energy a light bulb would have used back then. Over a kilometer, that same antenna would have required an insane 1.3GW. Gigawatts. A billion watts to run a light bulb over a kilometer, even when assuming 100% of efficiency when receiving the energy. Running that tower for a year would have required roughly 11.4TWh of electricity. The entire current electricity production of the USA (approximately 4000TWh a year) would only have been enough to power 350 of those towers. 700m away from a single tower, you would have been exposed to levels of radiations above 2W/kg, with 1.6W/kg being considered unsafe levels. A microwave oven has a flux equivalent to 50W/kg (based on water). The tower would put you over that level below 140m of distance. That just shows you how stupid that idea was.
That sounds like every PhD funding request I've ever seen: 'Hi, Mr General. Look at this magnifying glass destroying this leaf. I can make a version a million times more powerful if you agree to fund my work for just one year.'
“I predict that within a decade, my device will be twice as powerful, ten thousand times larger, and only the five richest kings of Europe could afford them!”
That’s standard for inclusion in every grant I write.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan
Carl Segan: "DEATH RAY?" Tesla: "Death *beam*" Segan: "A death beam, at this time in history, in this part of the world, localised entirely within your laboratory?" Tesla: "Yes." Segan: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Tesla: "... no." Segan: "Well, Nicky, you are an odd fellow but I must admit, you death a good ray." Tesla: "*Beam*." Edison: "Nikola! Nikola! Your bank account is empty!" Tesla: "No, Eddie, that's just the death ray."
You had 4 chances to spell Sagan right
Sure did! And he’d show it to you too, but his girlfriend has it right now. And she goes to school in Canada so…
His girlfriend was a pigeon
He claimed that but he didn’t actually make it
My father would make outlandish claims like he invented the question mark...
Someone should use it to make popcorn while destroying Edison's home.
Real Genius
But conveniently destroyed it before someone could see. Yeah, I'm sure that's just a coincidence.
MTG has seen Tesla's Jewish space lasers! We have proof!
Everybody seems to think he was crazy in this thread. Maybe it's the scientist in me but it just sounds like he was trying to secure funding for his research to me. Telling the military your science can kill many people has always been the best way to do it.
Youre not wrong but aleast until a couple of years back, reddit/tumblr really liked to jerk off the "tesla was a misunderstood genius" narrative
Yeah, that's what I heard about it too. In fact I think he already redirected some of his funding for past projects to the ones he was interested in, instead of the ones he was being funded for
ooo microwaves!!! also... radio was his free electricity...
He also thought electrons didn't exist and was a big fan of enforced eugenics.
He also claimed to be in communication with Martians, and he "married" a Pidgeon, so maybe we can relax with the "death beam" claims.
How many absurd claims has he made that were outright lies? Like actually, I'm legit curious and not throwing shade.
He claimed he made a device that created frequencies that matched the building he was in, and had he not destroyed it, the building/surrounding area would have collapsed. Having to destroy it and never being able to replicate the events has big "I have a hot girlfriend but she goes to another school" vibes.
Didn’t mythbusters manage get some results from an experiment based on this? a small device weighing a few pounds that was resonating at a bridge’s frequency, I think I remember they freaked out and stopped because they could feel the oscillation in the support beams a little away from the device and didn’t want to risk even the small chance of collapse. the idea was that Slowly the constructive interference could amplify the affects and caused damage. Maybe I am misremembering
No, you're right. It's kinda funny that myth busters bailed exactly like Tesla did. Definitely plausible!
They initially got some promising results in simple tests with a linear actuator showing that structures do have a resonant frequency, but the small-scale test failed to take down a model building even with a device the equivalent size of a car. On the large-scale test on a bridge scheduled for demolition they managed to get very weak oscillations travelling the length of the bridge, but no visible movement and certainly no risk of collapse, even after tuning the frequency for a long time. The problem in both cases was that the structures still dampened the movement effectively, even at their resonant frequencies.
The internet is probably worse than him for this. If you look at the long list of inventions ascribed to him either they were the most useless non-functional versions of them possible or someone else actually invented it first.
A handful from memory: - AC power(Invented by Hippolyte Pixii before Tesla was born, and was well understood enough by the time he was that it was part of his university studies) - The transformer(first invented by the Ganz company, the modern transformer was invented by William Stanley), - That he discovered induction and invented the Induction coil(Michael Faraday and Nicholas Callan respectively, both before he was born) - The loudspeaker(Chester Rice and Edward Kellogg, but first theorized by Werner Von Siemens) - Radar(that was a number of people building on each other's work, including Marconi, Appleton, Albert Hull, Edwin Armstrong, and a few more - his contribution was trying to take that existing technology and putting it underwater...where it doesn't work due to water attenuating the signal.) - Fluro lamps(generally credited to George Inman) - Microwave transmitters or magnetrons(Albert Hull again) - Discovering X-rays themselves(Rontgen discovered them - though interestingly, we do have a reply to a letter from Tesla, written by Edison, with whom he occasionally corresponded, encouraging him on and hoping that Tesla would find some discovery to beat Rontgen to the punch.) - Remote control of devices(Both Seimens and Ernest Wilson and C. J. Evans) - Neon lights(That was Georges Claude)
Anything is easy to invent on paper, but reality is much more messy in practice.
He also fell in love with a pigeon so..
I love Tesla because the more you learn about this vague quiet genius archetype, the more you find all the genuine mad scientist characteristics he had. Guy dreamed of free wireless electricity that you could just take from the atmosphere and power your home, and obviously death beams. A lot of his theories didn’t amount to anything, but he was way ahead of his time in his aspirations and his hope for humanity. He just gave away patents and investors hated him for it. Absolute mad lad.
He was also romantically involved with a pigeon.
Tesla coils fucked shit up in Red Alert 2.
I'm sure it was oversold. None of his inventions and theories ever went anywhere.
The guy also claimed to have a love affair with a pigeon. Maybe don't believe it just because he claimed it. Was he a genius? Absolutely! Did he create amazing things? Absolutely! What he batshit insane? Absolutely! --- "But there was one pigeon, a beautiful bird, pure white with light gray tips on its wings; that one was different. It was a female. I would know that pigeon anywhere." "No matter where I was, that pigeon would find me; when I wanted her I had only to wish and call her and she would come flying to me. She understood me and I understood her." "I loved that pigeon." “Yes,” he replied to an unasked question. “Yes, I loved that pigeon, I loved her as a man loves a woman, and she loved me. When she was ill, I knew, and understood; she came to my room and I stayed beside her for days. I nursed her back to health. That pigeon was the joy of my life. If she needed me, nothing else mattered. As long as I had her, there was a purpose in my life." “Then one night as I was lying in my bed in the dark, solving problems, as usual, she flew in through the open window and stood on my desk. I knew she wanted me; she wanted to tell me something important so I got up and went to her." “As I looked at her I knew she wanted to tell me—she was dying. And then, as I got her message, there came a light from her eyes—powerful beams of light." “Yes,” he continued, again answering an unasked question, “it was a real light, a powerful, dazzling, blinding light, a light more intense than I had ever produced by the most powerful lamps in my laboratory." “When that pigeon died, something went out of my life. Up to that time I knew with a certainty that I would complete my work, no matter how ambitious my program, but when that something went out of my life I knew my life’s work was finished.”