Nikola Tesla on his machine to end all war

Andrew

Matt 18:15
Joined
Aug 25, 2017
Messages
6,645
Age
40
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Interesting theory, would it have worked?

"Today the most civilized countries of the world spend a maximum of their income on war and a minimum on education. The twenty-first century will reverse this order. It will be more glorious to fight against ignorance than to die on the field of battle. The discovery of a new scientific truth will be more important than the squabbles of diplomats. Even the newspapers of our own day are beginning to treat scientific discoveries and the creation of fresh philosophical concepts as news. The newspapers of the twenty-first century will give a mere “stick” in the back pages to accounts of crime or political controversies, but will headline on the front pages the proclamation of a new scientific hypothesis.

Progress along such lines will be impossible while nations persist in the savage practice of killing each other off. I inherited from my father, an erudite man who labored hard for peace, an ineradicable hatred of war. Like other inventors, I believed at one time that war could he stopped by making it more destructive. But I found that I was mistaken. I underestimated man’s combative instinct, which it will take more than a century to breed out. We cannot abolish war by outlawing it. We cannot end it by disarming the strong. War can be stopped, not by making the strong weak but by making every nation, weak or strong, able to defend itself.

Hitherto all devices that could be used for defense could also be utilized to serve for aggression. This nullified the value of the improvement for purposes of peace. But I was fortunate enough to evolve a new idea and to perfect means which can be used chiefly for defense. If it is adopted, it will revolutionize the relations between nations. It will make any country, large or small, impregnable against armies, airplanes, and other means for attack. My invention requires a large plant, but once it is established it will he possible to destroy anything, men or machines, approaching within a radius of 200 miles. It will, so to speak, provide a wall of power offering an insuperable obstacle against any effective aggression.

If no country can be attacked successfully, there can be no purpose in war. My discovery ends the menace of airplanes or submarines, but it insures the supremacy of the battleship, because battleships may be provided with some of the required equipment. There might still be war at sea, but no warship could successfully attack the shore line, as the coast equipment will be superior to the armament of any battleship.

I want to state explicitly that this invention of mine does not contemplate the use of any so-called “death rays.” Rays are not applicable because they cannot be produced in requisite quantities and diminish rapidly in intensity with distance. All the energy of New York City (approximately two million horsepower) transformed into rays and projected twenty miles, could not kill a human being, because, according to a well known law of physics, it would disperse to such an extent as to be ineffectual.

My apparatus projects particles which may be relatively large or of microscopic dimensions, enabling us to convey to a small area at a great distance trillions of times more energy than is possible with rays of any kind. Many thousands of horsepower can thus be transmitted by a stream thinner than a hair, so that nothing can resist. This wonderful feature will make it possible, among other things, to achieve undreamed-of results in television, for there will be almost no limit to the intensity of illumination, the size of the picture, or distance of projection.

I do not say that there may not be several destructive wars before the world accepts my gift. I may not live to see its acceptance. But I am convinced that a century from now every nation will render itself immune from attack by my device or by a device based upon a similar principle"
 

hedrick

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
683
Age
75
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
It’s unclear what exactly he means, but it’s hard to see any ray that couldn’t just as well be used offensively. More interesting would be a personal or maybe community protective force field.
 

Joshua1Eight

Well-known member
Joined
May 21, 2021
Messages
155
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I wish I could afford a Tesla. There is also a company named Rivian that is soon to produce an electric truck and SUV.
If only I had the money…
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Tesla was a fascinating man! Brilliant and weird (it's not an unusual combo, it seems, LOL).

On THIS point, I think Tesla is mistaken.... war is not a technological problem but a moral and emotional/psychological one. While lots of Science Fiction has ran with this idea, a device that makes war impossible, I think this impossible. We're smart.... we can turn pretty much anything good into something bad, we can use and misuse what we learn.

Sadly,there will always be pride and hate. There will always be crazy leaders. Even smart and good people can be lead to do bad things (Germany in the 1930's, China in the 1960's). The essential problem is not technology but sin. Testa's hope that SCIENCE can create peace flows from an egoism about science that is far from unique with Testa, it was a common religion in the early to mid 20th Century.


THAT said, I'm not a total pessimist. History shows there HAVE been times of peace (although rarely for long). Sometimes it's because there is a superpower no one is stupid enough to challenge (the Pax Romana that latest for some 200 years)... perhaps this has been partly true for the last 75 years as even the Soviet Union realized a war with the US would be one to loose. During the Cold War, "Mutually Assured Destruction" held the day... what what a DANGEROUS way to have peace! While the presence of a superpower or super weapon CAN bring some level of peace, it sure is a dubious and dangerous (and likely unjust) way to do it. My Dad's generation thought that love could conquer war... that we could just DECIDE to end war... we look back at that as praiseworthy naivete. Can we have peace without Testa's device? Without mutually assured destruction? Without a superpower? While my strong embrace of original sin makes we wonder, I think we CAN do better than we have....


A blessed Pentecost season to you and yours!


- Josiah




.
 
Top Bottom