Talk:Nikola Tesla

Wardenclyffe Tower

Why do we have so much detail on Wardenclyffe Tower here when the article on the tower says no one knows how it was supposed to work? From PBS story on Tesla it appears that he was trying to transmit power through the ground not the air. But they claim no one knows as does the Wardenclyffe article. Rmhermen 15:52, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Inventions

It'd really be nice to have a section that lists just his inventions. It'd make this article a lot more useful. :-) —Frecklefoot 14:54, 7 Aug 2003 (UTC)

There's page on Tesla patents, perhaps it could be linked from here more visibly. Nikola 16:51, 7 Aug 2003 (UTC)

1912 Nobel Prize

Reddi: are you sure about the 1912 Nobel Prize? I cannot find supporting evidence for it. The official Nobel prize site [ http://www.nobel.se/physics/laureates/1912/] just talks about Nils Gustaf Dalen, no one else

Some sites ...

http://webusers.physics.umn.edu/~selina/famous_story.html

http://www.genordell.com/stores/maison/Tesla.htm

"An announcement came from Sweden, in 1912, that Nikola Tesla and Thomas A. Edison had been chosen to share the 1912 award in physics. The awards, however, were never made; and the prize went instead to Gustav Dalen, a Swedish scientist. [ ... ] Tesla was the Wrst, and probably the only, scientist to refuse this famous prize." - http://www.uncletaz.com/library/scimath/tesla/prodigal3.html [this is from the prodigal genius book]

I just convey the info ... not make it up ... reddi 15:29, 10 Aug 2003 (UTC)

You know, I'm starting to think this is an urban (scientific?) legend. Neither web site that you cite are very authoritative. I think I know the source of the legend, however. Check out Eric Weisstein's biography of Tesla at [1]. There, he cites Hunt and Draper (who are well-known biographers of Tesla). Weisstein states

There may have been some unusual maneuvering in the awarding of the 1912 or 1915 Nobel Prize. Biographer disagree on the dates, but report that Tesla was confidentially informed that he was to share the physics award with Edison, and was then surprised to see it go to a scientist (Hunt and Draper 1991, pp. 166-171).

This is different that "turning it down" and more consistent with the Nobel process. You see, recipients don't have an opportunity to "turn it down". You're just awarded it. I suppose you could refuse to go to Sweden to meet with the King, but you still have the award. However, backroom secret politics could have leaked out to Tesla, and that's what was recorded in his biography, and eventually turned into this possible urban legend. I don't have access to the Hunt and Draper book to double check.

May I suggest weakening the statement in the article, to make it NPOV? Something like, "Some people believe that Tesla and Edison were to share ..." -- hike395

I hope the present form is better ...

There is accounts of a New York Times article that may conflict with the "privately" part though. [ see the reference at http://www.teslasociety.com/biography.htm and in the prvious links (the 2nd one IIRC)] I'll see if i can find a newspaper ref for the article.

BTW, what is authoritative? Prodigal Genius [the book] is commonly accepted as a authoritative source of much information on Mr. Tesla ....

more later ... reddi 16:35, 10 Aug 2003 (UTC)

It's better, thanks. I didn't realize that the quote (and third link, which I overlooked somehow) was from O'Neill's book, which seems authoritative (i.e., a researched biography of Tesla, rather than a web page full of anecdotes). Thanks again! -- hike395

Six or seven languages?

Fluent in seven languages (English, French, German, Italian, Serbo-Croatian, Hungarian)

Ok, seven languages then, but unless you indicate this orthographically, casual users like me will regularly make this "correction." since the hyphen indicates a single entity, ie one language. Why not Serbo, Croatian, ... -- Viajero 12:30, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Tesla was born in Serb populated area to Serb parents. His mother's tongue was Serbian. He was never learning nor he lived in Croatian populated area of Croatia. To sum it up: If Serbo-Croatian is one language, Tesla was speaking six languages. If Serbo-Croatian is two languages, Tesla speaked only Serbian and no more Croatian then anyone who speaks Serbian. Do you people honestly believe that I am fluent speaker of four languages (English, Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian) and that, if Montenegro proclaims its own language I will suddenly become, without any personal action, speaker of five languages (English, Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian and Montenegrin)? Nikola 19:52, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Ok, this is my mistake. period. I tried to figure out the languages ... and as I put specific items into this [and I'm not as versed in the minutia of languages in the ex-yugoslavian area] ... SO ... I took the references to him speaking both Serbian and Croatian as to mean Serbo-Croatian. Now, it is widely accepted that he spoke seven languages (let's not take away a talent of his ... page after page say this ... [the only other amount I saw was 5, but the vast amount of 7 is numbing]) ... so I will edit the list to include Serbian and Crotian language. [BTW, he was born and raised early on in Serbia ... but went to school in Croatia]

No. Both the city where he was born and the city where he was raised are today in Croatia but at the time they were populated by Serbs. And about the talent... it does not require any special talent to speak both Croatian and Serbian :) Or I will ask you to bow to speaker of four languages when talking to me ;) Nikola 06:40, 12 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Not that it matters much, really, but I feel I need to point out that Tesla's birthplace and towns in which he was schooled were part of the Military Frontier, and were returned to the civilian administration of Croatia between 1871 and 1873, at the time Nikola Tesla was studying in Karlovac. I suppose that there's a possibility that Tesla really never came in contact with the Croatian language, but really... --Shallot 21:37, 29 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Also .... while the subject is brought up, I'd like to discuss the others, as to not be in error (as I apearantly was here) ... English - he spoke this surely (worked n lived in america many years), French - worked n lived in france a few years (and there were a few references to him speaking this), German - a page said that he spoke this, Italian - a page said that he spoke this, Hungarian - he went to school in the austria area (and there was a page that said he spoke this) ....

Perhaps there's another you haven't traced. I can't find any information :( Nikola 06:40, 12 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Yes there is another language, Romanian. In the 14th century, probably because of the expanding Turkish Empire, around 900 families of Wallachians left current Romania to settle in Croatia, most of them in Serbian villages (probably because of the common religion). Speaking of religion, Serbian and Greek orthodoxy is the same thing. Nikola was born in one of these Serbian-Romanian villages, where, AFAIK, there are still living Romanians. Bogdan 18:48, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Bogdan, there are no Romanian-speakers in Like, where Tesla was born. Where do you get this claim about 900 Romanian families?

Igor 4:55, 11 Sep 2003 (UTC)

now ... 2 possiblities (as I see it atlease) ... one : take out german and italian and go with five [and go against the vast majority of references to the 7 figure; including many books that comment on this from what i can tell] ... OR ... two: seperate the serbian and croatian languages ... and go with the 7 ... ... [NOTE: I already edited the page to reflect the seven number (as that was the original figure)] ...

Wikipedia is to be more accurate source then any other, no? If everyone is wrong, why should we also be wrong :) Nikola 06:40, 12 Aug 2003 (UTC)

any and all flames, comments, and responses would be welcome ... reddi

The real issue here isn't whether Serbian and Croatian are two languages or one. The thing is that in the context of polyglottism it doesn't make sense to say a person speaks Serbian and Croatian since this "feat" is easily achieved by virtually every Croat and Serb. On Croatian TV Serbian movies are shown without synchronization or subtitles (ditto for Croatian movies in Serbia), because it would be absolutely pointless. Tesla effectively spoke six languages, and I suggest that "Serbian, Croatian" be changed to "Serbian/Croatian". If anyone reads this and agrees -- go ahead and do it...

No, the language is Serbo-Croatian. RickK 21:16, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)

If this is done, please note a possiblity "unknown" language (possiblely, Romanian [see above]) ... OR @least make it obvious that he spoke 7 (as that is what the vast majority of authoratative sources say). Thnks, reddi

Street Gang?

What's a street gang, and can someone expand on that (intriguing) sentence? Graft 02:24, 12 Aug 2003 (UTC)

A street gang is a term for a type of laborer job he held (I believe he was diggin' ditches or some meanial task). He did this shortly after leaving Edison's employment IIRC ... there a few references to him doing this ... he did this to acquire capital to begin his next experiments [again IIRC]

Middle Name?

On a COMPELETELY different topic ... doew anyone know Tesla's middle name? I have search a long time for it (since a year ago, when it started to bother me) .... but to no success (doesn't everyone have a middle name?) ... his museum has his birth certificate, but I cannot read it (i only read / write english and bad english) ... if anyone can, please tell me and I'll find the link to it [or goto the meuseum site and look around) reddi 02:38, 12 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Serbs don't have middle names :)) In fact, I think that most people on Earth don't have middle names. Nikola 06:40, 12 Aug 2003 (UTC)

oh ... ok ... but could you check the record? [ala. can you read serbian? (or whatever lang it is in?)] ... never know, might have something on it reddi 06:43, 12 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Of course I can, but where could I find his birth certificate? What museum it is in? Nikola 08:25, 13 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Museum in Belgrade. OK, I'll try to go there in the following days and look up the certificate. Tesla might have middle name if Austrian jurisdiction of the time required it, but I doubt that. Nikola 08:27, 13 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Or if you have a scan of it you could send it to me, that'll be faster. Nikola 08:33, 13 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Here's the birth certificate link: http://www.yurope.com/org/tesla/pic/rodimage.gif ... a translation of any applicable information would be great. reddi 04:41, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)

First, the certificate is in Old Church Slavonic. There is no middle name. But I found you something interesting:

File:Teslaname.png

Tesla was baptised in Old Church Slavonic rite and got Old Church Slavonic name Николай; that is, Nikolai, same as Nikolai_Gogol for example. Check for yourself in Cyrillic alphabet if you don't believe :) Now, it doesn't mean that we are calling him wrongly, at that time names were being translated and Tesla's name in Serbian language is indeed Nikola.

Tesla' date of birth is:

File:Tesladate.png

month of June, day 28th, year 1856. Now, that is in Julian calendar. Could you look up why there are two possible Tesla's birthdays? Perhaps we could sort this out. Nikola 08:23, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I'm editing Tesla's mother's entry right now. On this page they refer to it ... "Nikola, was born on June 28, according to the Julian calendar, or July 10, according to the modern calendar." ... it must be a transitional thing between the different calendars. more later ...

Past Tense, Please

Please use past tense to discuss historical facts. Alternating back and forth between past and present tense is rather disconcerting for the poor reader.

Alternatively, if you insist on writing in present tense, the for God's sake be so good as to do it consistently throughout the article. I mean really:

First Tesla is born... then The midwife commented,...then Tesla moves to the United States of America...

Mkweise 02:47, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I agree. I found the switch from present to past tense jarring. I think we may have a non-native speaker as the main contributor to this article, so we really can't fault him for it. But at the very least, the same tense should be used throughout the section. But for historical subjects, past is preferable. If no one else does it, I'll try to get around the changing it. It's pretty darn lengthy, though, so we may have to settle for one section at a time. —Frecklefoot 14:52, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

As to history and the tense it is written in ... a course I took in college "Writing on History" (or something similar to that) taught me to write to history in the present tense. It's commonly accepted by historians when writing on history that you write in the present tense (unless something has changed in the last decade since I left school). IIRC, It may be that it helps the readibility of the timeline (atleast from historians' view). Changes between tenses are mostly a preference (pending the exact phrase under consideration), but, primarily, historical writings should be written in the present tense. I'll try to keep it active, and not stale [as past tense is the latter and the present tense is the prior]. reddi 15:07, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I disagree with the use of present tense in historical subjects. I don't have any evidence to back me up as to the "proper" tense to use, but it just seems common sense that when speaking about something that has already happened, put it in the past tense. We are writing for the public at large, not historians specifically. If there were a WikiHisty, perhaps we'd write in present tense for it. Also, I've read plenty of history books that always used the past tense. Just MHO, but I think others might back me up on this.

As to past tense being stale, this doesn't have to be the case and rarely is. Any tense can be passive or active. I've read plenty of novels written in the past tense that kept me riveted and were very active:

"Jake thrust the jagged knife into Jim's abdomen."
"Sheila ripped off Tim's shirt."
"Lisa smashed her fist into the wall."

So, my opinion is to write history in the past tense and in the active voice as much as possible. :-) —Frecklefoot 15:39, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

It may seem common sense that when speaking about something that has already happened, put it in the past tense ... thought it's better form to write in the present tense. This is for historical accounts in general (not just for historians, as you imply).

As to past tense being stale ... i'll example this ....

"On monday, Sheila ripped off Tim's shirt." [passive; stale]

or

"On monday, Sheila rips off Tim's shirt." [active; alive]

As can be seen, the latter is abit more active and alive than the prior ... other examples can be done ...

I'll See if i can dig up my old book on this (from the class... I have it probably packed up) to give you a citation of th title of it .... reddi 16:18, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Well, it would be acceptable style to use present tense, if it were done consistently. But this random mix of past and present tense is ugly - we have to agree on one or the other, and most historical articles on Wikipedia do seem to be written in past tense. Mkweise 16:38, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I agree that either tense would be preferable to the current jumble. But I did find this doc from Brown University (How to Write History) that states that history should be written in the past tense to avoid confusing the reader. Which was my point in the first place. :-) —Frecklefoot 17:10, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

In the hopes of settling this (good natured) dispute, the table below has a short section of the biography written in the current present tense and the past tense. Which is more readable?

In 1884, leaving the warfare of his birthplace behind, Tesla moves to the United States of America to accept a job with the Edison Company in New York City. He arrives in America with 4 cents to his name, a book of poetry, and a letter of recommendation (from Charles Batchelor, his manager in his previous job). Tesla supports his brother-in-law's church in Gospic while in America.

In 1884, leaving the warfare of his birthplace behind, Tesla moved to the United States of America to accept a job with the Edison Company in New York City. He arrived in America with 4 cents to his name, a book of poetry, and a letter of recommendation (from Charles Batchelor, his manager in his previous job). Tesla supported his brother-in-law's church in Gospic while in America.

—Frecklefoot 19:31, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

OK, this is beyond silly. History is almost always written in the past tense because it happended, in well, the past. Why the heck do you think there is a past tense at all? The only exception is the day and year pages because there is an immediacy to them. And Wikipedia general practice has been overwhelmingly to write history in the past tense. --mav 19:38, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Thank you! My feelings exactly. I just couldn't seem to get anyone to agree with me (up until now). Thanks again, Mav. —Frecklefoot 19:55, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I don't think this is "beyond silly", but my preference would be for past tense, because:

Our articles may mix "history" sections with other perspectives on a subject, so the clarity of past tense=past is useful.
Our articles are aimed at and written by non-experts, and amongst non-experts history is normally in the past tense.

Of course, people should write in whatever tense they feel comfortable with - copyediting wikipedians can change articles to be in an appropriate tense. Has anyone mentioned this discussion on wikipedia talk:Manual of Style? Martin 21:25, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Is this a joke??? You NEVER write professional history articles in the present tense, not for history books aimed at anyone over the age of 6!!! Never ever ever. Lightweight 'cartoon' coverage of history may do it, usually with pictures you colour in with crayons on the side. But no serious textbook, let alone an encyclopædia, does it. If they did they would make themselves an international laughing stock. As someone said above, it is "beyond silly". It is absurd in the extreme. Is this idea some sort of belate April Fools' day joke??? It is so nonsensical an idea as to be sidesplittingly funny. Why next? Writing every thing article in capitals? Bold every second word? Write backwards? FearÉIREANN 21:13, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I've asked a colleague on the phone and (once he had stopped laughing) he explained that writing in the present tense was a rather naff fad a few people on the fringes of historical researches tried, and like all naff fads (roller discos, leg warmers, 1970s architecture, perms, writing 'hir', the Bay City Rollers, Fame, electing Jimmy Carter) is looked back upon with embarrassment, usually of the sort of 'what the hell were we smoking/taking/thinking of at the time?' :-) FearÉIREANN 21:25, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)

from village pump

Over at Talk:Nikola Tesla, a disagreement over whether history should be written in the past or present tense has resulted in an article that alternates between past and present tense in a very ugly fashion. I've started a discussion at Talk:Nikola Tesla; if there is an authoritative answer, please post there. Mkweise 16:45, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I posted a link to How to Write History from Brown University, which I assume is authoritative enough. I couldn't find any arguments stating that history should be written in the present tense except from Reddi. I'd appreciate any further input, either for or against present tense (with evidence for stance). Reddi's objection to past tense is that it is "passive." I countered that both present and past tense can be passive, and he countered again. I still hold that history should be written in the past tense, but as Mkweise notes, the discussion should be furthered on the Talk:Nikola Tesla page. —Frecklefoot 17:20, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

My wife, who was a History major, says that it can be either past or present tense (but obviously it shouldn't be both in the same article); apparently there is no standard among historical writers about which is better. I personally find it strange to read about past events in the present tense, but it can be pulled off convincingly by skillful writers. My preference is past tense for historical subjects; the only potential problem with it is how to transition from events of the past to events of the present; it is probably for this reason that the policy for adding to the Current events is to use present tense. Anyhow, I would find any arguments regarding the passivity of either tense to be specious; it's very much possible to use an active voice while using past tense (consider how you would write a resume!). Anyhow, I have no solid evidence for either, but I strongly oppose the intermixture of the two. We should pick one and stick with it. -- Wapcaplet 19:43, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

A lot of the problem is that people are switching back and forth between tenses in the same article. I've also run across the future tense -- "He would go on to ..." form. I change those to "He went on to ..." whenever I see those. RickK 02:12, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Since it's clearly the consensus, I suggest we make it official Wikipedia style that historical articles be written in the past tense. While we're at it, how do you all feel about past vs. present tense when describing legendary and mythological events? I personally tend towards describing legends and mythology in the present tense. Mkweise 23:39, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Is there a Wikipedia:WikiProject History or Wikipedia:WikiProject Mythology we could move this to? Martin 22:29, 23 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Past Tense In Progress

I've started converting the bio to past tense and have done some rearranging and rewording in the process. As of this writing, I've reached "Laboratory Construction." If you see any grammar errors or instances of present tense that I've missed, please go ahead and fix them. Changing passive voice to active would also be appreciated (<-- note: that sentence is passive-voice) :-) —Frecklefoot 14:50, 20 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Okay, I've finished the conversion. It wasn't really all that bad, but I encountered some awkward wording in some places that others may want to revise. This doesn't really belong in the article, but my father-in-law has a personal anecdote involving Tesla. I'll post it here for your reading pleasure. :-)

My father-in-law is a physicist and reviewed some data regarding an electrical device a fellow scientist was going to build. He asked the scientist, who was quite a bit older than he, if he was going to base it on AC or DC. He replied, "Alternating current." My father-in-law nodded and then asked, "Why?" The scientist replied, "Well, I knew Tesla, and he was a real nice guy. I also met Edison, and he was a real son-of-a-bitch." :-) —Frecklefoot 16:52, 20 Aug 2003 (UTC)

some rather dubious material...

some of this article comes across as rather credulous, repeating the conspiratorial Tesla stuff one comes across on the Internet but which is never properly sourced and is clearly dubious at best.

some of this article comes across as rather credulous? which part? anything inparticular? please read the several biographies out there 1st too ...

Conspiratorial stuff? Conspiracies are prefectly acceptible to mention ... most are not this also (look @ the links) ... clearly dubious? YMMV on that ...

For example, most people consider Tesla's obsession with wireless power transmission to have been quixotic; the practical inefficiencies doomed it to failure on anything but a very small scale. Similarly his "death ray" (if it existed) was most likely a focussed microwave beam, which would happily fry a bunny at two feet but would have had no practical combat use.

"most people" consider Tesla's obsession with wireless power transmission to have been quixotic? The IEEE doesn't ....

The practical inefficiencies doomed it to failure? ummm no ....

His "death ray" (if it existed) was most likely a focussed microwave beam? and that's doesn't make it any less of a "telkeforce" device ...

No practical combat use? YMMV on that ...

Would be great if someone with knowledge of the relevant history and electrical engineering could update the article to show the borderlines between Tesla the scientist, Tesla the obsessive, and Tesla the part-fictional construct of latter-day conspiracy theorists.

knowledge of the relevant history and electrical engineering? The IEEE and several other knowledgeable and reliable sources state these commonly known FACTs regularly ... sorry you don't believe them ...

update the article? it's uptodate ...

Tesla the scientist? he was that all his life ... Tesla the obsessive? that is clearly covered in the present article .... and Tesla the part-fictional construct? I believe that is covered too ...

sincerely reddi 02:04, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)

I second the above motion that this article is unduly credulous about several of Tesla's ventures, and this leads me to think that there should be a section in the article about Teslaphiles. You know who I mean. For some reason there seems to be a Tesla fan club that attributes the man with visionary powers beyond all ken. It may have to do with sympathizing with the "crackpot genius vs. the uncaring bureaucracy" mentality. I propose this section not to discredit Tesla or make fun of his defenders, but because it seems to be an actual phenomenon. Tesla fans are about 1000 times more passionate about the subject than Edison fans. Incidentally, see Cecil Adams for a (rather undetailed and summary-like) dismissal of Tesla's broadcast power. Tempshill 22:40, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Tesla's ventures? Most of these are covered (not sure if there are any other ones out there? but there could be) ...

"crackpot genius vs. the uncaring bureaucracy" mentality? hmmm ... mabey ...

Teslaphile ... actual phenomenon? yes ... there are followings of him [not to mention some fringe religions that incorporate him] ... also, there is a band named after him ...

Tesla fans vs Edison fans? vs. Marconi fans? vs Hertz fans? hmmm ... mabey seperate articles? =-]

Cecil Adams on Tesla's broadcast power could be put into a crtics section? (or critical links) .. though I'd like to say that Mr. Adams had not experienced anything like the magnifying transformer [which is a modification and improvement on the original tesla coil] (of which Adams bases his judgement too from what I can tell) nor does he mention his radient energy work. If you read the Tesla patents, you know that he does lie down the many fundementals of broadcasting (among other things).

Sincerely, JDR

And if you are going to bring IEEE into it you had better note that they state "he became oracular in his later years and, for example, offered no proof of the potent "death-ray" that he announced in 1934, on his seventy-eighth birthday" and "he began work on a worldwide communications system, and a 200-foot transmission tower was constructed at Shoreham" (not as the article claims a power transmission plant) and again " It was at his Colorado laboratory, too, that Tesla, who had become increasingly withdrawn and eccentric ever since the death of his mother in 1892, announced that he had received signals from foreign planets"! And in contradiction to our article which claims Wardenclyffe was a radio wave generator "Engrossed as he was with the transmission of substantial amounts of power, however, he almost perversely rejected the notion of transmission by Hertzian waves, which he considered to be wasteful of energy. He thus proposed wireless communication by actual conduction of electricity through natural media," All from the biography at IEEE [2] Rmhermen 15:17, Dec 12, 2003 (UTC)

IEEE is pretty good site for some things ... though history sections are brief articles mostly ...

"[Tesla] became oracular in his later years" ... "offered no proof of the potent "death-ray"" of 1934? If you read the article by Joseph W. Alsop ("Beam to Kill Army at 200 Miles Tesla's Claim on 78th Birthday", New York Herald Tribune. July 11, 1934.) you'll see that the force cited is produced by the system using the same basic principles for a death-ray and wireless transmission ... so, it's probably an improvement and slightly different implementation of previous works (may be in the missing patents or papers? mabey not ...) there was also no working model of it though (and wouldn't o' past the patent ofice at the time) ;-] ... more later on this hopefully, though ....

"worldwide communications system at Shoreham? See the Wardencylff article for possible uses of that facility.

Colorado laboratory? It's a neat facility ... the pictures are neat, atleast ...

received signals from foreign planets? Yep ... amazing ... though he misinterperted the data ... he thought that they were messages ... but it was really radio astronomy (electromagnetic signatures of the planets) ... wouldn't be till another few decades that the scientific community would acknowledge them as a real science (IIRC, Geber (sp?) is credited as the father of that science) ...

claims Wardenclyffe was a radio wave generator? Tesla was able to transcieve substantial amounts of power ... Hertzian waves are one type ( Tesla also refers to longitudal waves [which are not akin to hertzian lateral waves, as he puts it] ... lateral waves may be wasteful of energy, longitudal waves may not be (though the info on it is scare). Remember, too, that much of his terminology is different to that of modern tech, as he was on the "edge" ... robots are an example, he called them teleautomatons (or something like that (I could look it up to be more precise)).

"wireless communication by actual conduction of electricity through natural media"? That is a possibility ... see the ultilization of radiant energy patents (2 or 3 o' em, I forget at this monent) ... or any of the radiant energy patents ...

Sincerely, JDR