
Nikola Tesla Wasn't God And Thomas Edison Wasn't The Devil - timf
http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2012/05/18/nikola-tesla-wasnt-god-and-thomas-edison-wasnt-the-devil/
======
redwood
Little story:

So I walk into a bar in Belgrade, Serbia. Turns out to be a private party,
lot's of drinking and merry-ment but my girl and I felt a bit out of place.
Just before we turned for the door a man pulled me by the shoulder to the bar
and started asking what we were doing there, real intimidating-like.

He said we could have drinks on him but I felt a little like we didn't want to
be indebted to this guy. On the other hand I felt I had no choice.

He had asked me what I'd studied and I mentioned physics. He got the bar-
tenders attention, got me a drink, and asked me "so... you say you know
something about physics... tell me: 'what nationality was Nikola Tesla?'"

I responded "Croatian" of course. Suddenly the faces of the man, the
bartender, and (so it seemed) the rest of the bar too went very gloomy, eyes
piercing into me like shots of raiki (the liquor they drink).

I learned that night that the Serbs claim Tesla was a Serbian who lived in
Croatia. The Croatians and Serbs (who hate each other very much) both claim
him as their national heros.

Lessons:

\- if you're in Serbia, Tesla was a Serbian (and a god)

\- if you're in Croatia, Tesla was a Croatian (and a god)

\- if you're anywhere else, well I guess now I know he wasn't god

~~~
alushta
Well, Tesla really was a Serbian - his father was in fact, a Serbian Orthodox
priest, so the documentation on this is clear.

Of course, since he was born into the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and studied in
Graz, we might as well let the Austrians take credit, as the Austrians really
need it (what's Austria's greatest accomplishment? convincing the world that
Mozart is Austrian, and Hitler is German!)

But really, he did his best work as an American, so USA! USA! USA! :)

~~~
JumpCrisscross
Seriously? Economics (von Mises? Morgenstern?), engineering (Ferdinand
Porsche? Valier?) philosophy (Popper?), physics (Boltzman? Doppler? Mach?
Pauli?), mathematics (heard of this guy Gödel?), genetics (Mendel?), etc.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Austrians>

~~~
alushta
von Mises: Galician Jew from Lvov (now a part of the Ukraine)

Oskar Morgenstern: German

Ferdinand Porsche: German

Valier: never heard of this guy until I looked him up just now; a true
Austrian - albeit born in Italy and worked in Germany. Damned shame he died so
young.

Karl Popper: Jew

Ludwig Boltzmann: the second real Austrian on this list.

Christian Doppler: another real Austrian...

Ernst Mach: Volksdeutsche from what is now Czech Republic.

Wolfgang Pauli: Czech-Jew, and related to Mach.

Kurt Gödel: German AMERICAN, F YEAH!! :)

Gregor Mendel: Volksdeutsche, from Silesia (now part of Czech Republic)

So I see only 3 Austrian on this list!

P.S. the Brits/Finns/Ukrainians/Russians always make a good joke at Germans'
expense, but Austria always gets a free pass... I'm trying to right that
wrong! :)

~~~
Drbble
> Karl Popper: Jew

If you are going to assert that Jews cannot be Austrian, you may as well go
all the way and give Hitler credit for being Austrian.

------
kenamarit
I liked the play-by-play refutation of the comic, he really researched the
whole thing (so I didn't have to). I learned some new things!

I enjoyed the tone of the comic, however, even if it was inaccurate or
disputable or at times just plain wrong. For me, Edison is one of those
figures, like Christopher Columbus, or George Washington, that you learn about
every single year growing up, since kindergarten, and whose myth is so grand
and ubiquitous that every teacher I had from elementary school up until junior
year physics said the exact same thing about him. Tesla was just another of a
dozen names in the textbook.

So in a way I understand the sentiment. You grow up being told that this is
guy, Edison, is the most awesome inventor in the history of America. And
because of that I always felt a certain distrust about his accomplishments
(even if I'm wrong), because so much of what my teachers taught me growing up
turned out to be wrong.

~~~
sliverstorm
_You grow up being told that this is guy, Edison, is the most awesome inventor
in the history of America._

Well, consider this. Let's suppose Tesla was actually the most awesome
inventor, and Edison was second. Which do you want to show children? The one
who was a genius, or the one who made no bones about the fact that hard work
was the main ingredient to his success?

In other words, do we teach children that being smart is important, or do we
teach them that hard work is important?

~~~
Drbble
Tesla worked tirelessly as well. Edison's clear superiority over Tesla was in
business financing. I guess that's the lesson children need to learn?

------
dmor
There is a great biography of Edison which was very eye opening to me - I did
not realize how many patents he held or how many other inventions and
innovations on other work he had made beyond the longer burning commercial
lightbulb. <http://refer.ly/a09m>

Just in case you don't read the book, there is a story where they first got
the lightbulb to burn for a long time... I think it was 30-something hours.
And they just stayed awake sitting there in amazement watching it burn until
it burned out. I feel like that awe is so in the spirit of today's modern
startups when we first launch or discover something. When they "launched" the
new lightbulb they strung them up all over the yard of Edison's house, and
people came driving up at night for the event and it was like magic. I would
give anything to have seen that.

I think its really cool that he improved on other people's inventions, helping
make things like the telegraph and typewriter into practical, affordable,
useful tools that lots of people could buy. That might not be as grand as
making brand new things, but it has a huge impact on human life. He also
created the phonograph, the first idea of "records" (wax scrolls) and did a
ton of work on early motion pictures. The list just goes on and on, learn
about him, you'll be surprised to find that what they taught you in school was
just surface-level and there is really so much more there.

------
lordlicorice
> Is it possible – just possible – that Edison honestly believed that AC was
> dangerous and honestly did not think it should be use?

This strikes me as pretty naive. Edison had the patents that effectively
controlled the market for DC electricity. He would have been a Carnegie or a
Rockefeller had DC been adopted. He had such an extreme conflict of interest
that it's unreasonable to assume good faith.

~~~
dimitar
DC power distribution.

In the beginning DC dominated because of technical reasons. Efficient AC
motors and generators were just getting invented eand transformers weren't
that good.

And for various reasons some applications still use DC motors - for example
only in robotics, servomotors; but consider that in the last 20 years do
things like air-conditioners and elevators start to use AC motors (because of
the efficiency made possible with solid-state inverters).

~~~
nextparadigms
It sounds like AC disrupted the DC market. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me
that Edison didn't want to be disrupted and took legal action, not unlike how
it happens today in many industries.

~~~
luriel
Another example of how patents actually hinder and harm innovation. Which is
not surprising when you start to think of them as government granted
monopolies.

------
felipemnoa
>>What’s more, Edison was haunted by Dally’s death to the end of his days. It
agonized him. While Dally was alive and suffering, Edison kept him on the
payroll and took care of all of his expenses until the day he died. In the
early 20th Century, let me assure you that keeping employees on the payroll
who couldn’t work was not a common practice. <<

I read in one of his biographies that in the latter years he kept a lot of
employees, against his son's wishes, who were basically doing nothing for
sentimental reasons because they had been with him in the early days.

~~~
miahi
It's called equity now.

------
madiator
Oatmeal's tactic to go viral was simple: create a good looking comic and
express an extreme view, one that moves you psychologically and you think,
"wow is that true? I didn't know that and I bet none of my friends do". Well
played Oatmeal.

~~~
mcantelon
Oatmeal reminds me of Coding Horror: usually unoriginal, but adept at
packaging content in a way that generates widespread appeal.

------
j45
I can't understand why the writer is reacting so much to the comic. Sure, it
uses blunt language, but is the writer related to Edison distantly or his
childhood hero or something?

Unlimited wireless electricity, among other Tesla's inventions are still mind
boggling 100 years later. He drove a car with an electric engine, powered
wirelessly, over 100 years ago.*

What have we done since?

From a more day to day perspective:

\- Marconi's patents for inventing radio were overturned in Tesla's prior
invention of radio.

\- Inventor of Lasers

\- Remote Control

I think we've gotten over the light bulb. Still, the disposable lightbulb
sells and sells, a testament to Edison's business mind.

Based on the number, and staggering impact of each of Tesla's inventions, I
don't believe Edison could spell Tesla on his best day; especially where it
camee to innovation and creating things that hadn't existed before, let alone
imagined.

The main question about Edison vs Tesla is, why no one knows who Tesla is even
though he was at least an equal to Edison, if not arguably more.

* There's some argument about this occurring but there are also media reports that exist.

~~~
Retric
Tesla did not invent Unlimted wireless electricity. He got low efficiency
wireless power transfer working, but never worked out that inducing a current
acts as a drain on the source aka you can use a high tension power line to
light a few light bulbs just fine but the power company can measure the drain
on the line. IMO, his problem was he was getting such low efficiency transfers
that the drain was not obvious.

PS: If you still think his idea of charging the ionosphere could work, watch
this video. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXhZvyGtMrk> But, you can see
people walking around the field prevents the bulbs from lighting up. Just,
ignore the audio on this as they don't know what their talking about.

~~~
fzzzy
Tesla may have talked about ionizing the atmosphere in his earlier patents
which required raising the termination of the antenna miles into the
atmosphere, but it's clear from his later writings, especially "tesla on his
work with alternating currents", that later iterations called for preventing
the energy from leaking into the atmosphere as much as possible. You can see
from the design of the toroid on top of the final proposed magnifying
transmitter, which is covered with half spheres to increase the surface area,
thus reducing the electrical tension at each point on the surface, reducing
the possibility of breakdown. (ionization)

Lighting flourescent bulbs with high frequency rf energy is nothing special,
and really has nothing to do with serious discussion of tesla. In tesla on his
work with ac this is what he refers to as "parlor tricks" along with the
opposite spectrum of rf energy, the single extremely large capacitive
discharge, which he could vaporize wires and sheets of tinfoil with.

Tesla on his work with ac was not available until the mid 90s, and the
resurgence of interest in tesla in the 80s was not able to benefit from the
information, thus much of the experimentation today hasn't taken into account
what tesla actually said. These "parlor tricks" are what the wireless energy
charger people are pushing today, and it's laughable. It's not at all what
tesla was talking about.

~~~
Retric
Look, he was a pioneer the only thing he could consult with to double check
his ideas was reality. So, he made some bad assumptions and said some things
that where less than accurate. That in no way takes away from what he
accomplished, but just because his comtemeratires had no idea what was going
on does not mean he has a trove of secret knowledge that we still don't
understand.

Study electrical engineering then go back and study the man. It's a more
interesting story, and just because he made some mistakes does not mean you
need to make the same ones.

------
neya
Edison always reminds me of Steve Jobs.

EDIT: 1)Mocking existing/others' technologies/inventions just to claim theirs
is better, even while its not. 2)Marketing skills 3)Focused on sales.

Sorry for upsetting you, fanboys ;)

~~~
eevilspock
No, he's more like Bill Gates.

Tesla/Jobs are driven by a desire to change the world. Edison/Gates by the
desire to own the world. You can see the difference in all the decisions Apple
made in its history, often making choices of design purity over market
dominance. It ultimately dominated by sticking to its design principles,
showing that sometimes the long-view wins.

I think Tesla would have thrived if he could have gone to Jobs instead of
Edison for support.

~~~
neya
First of all, I don't want to land up in a Bill Gates vs Steve Jobs argument.
I strongly believe both have done remarkable things in different ways. Second,
please stop claiming "Jobs has changed/has a desire to change the world". For
America, it maybe true, but not for the rest of 'THE WORLD'.

Nokia/Samsung/etc still lead the sales in Asian countries, for instance.

Third, I 'personally' think its a good thing that Tesla didn't meet Steve J.
Well, look at what XEROX is now. That is all I can say.

~~~
gurkendoktor
> For America, it maybe true, but not for the rest of 'THE WORLD'.

Apple's influence is very noticeable in other developed countries too. Tablets
and app phones (except for Windows Phone) are all heavily inspired by iOS
devices. On the desktop it's similar, but not as visually obvious. Unit sales
are not the way to measure this.

Of course, that still only covers the _developed_ world.

------
ralfd
I long waited for something like that. Good summary in the forbes article and
even better links to other authors.

The hive minds opinions (reddit _cough_ ) regarding Edison/Tesla always
reminded me a bit on the absurd "Moon landing history theme ride" in Futurama
or the UN-Dinosaur-War-against-Nazis in "Idiocracy".

------
kylemaxwell
I'm glad the writer enjoyed taking the piss out of The Oatmeal, but serious
articles responding to a mostly-tongue-in-cheek webcomic seem to have missed
the point.

I wonder if he'll write an article next about how working from home doesn't
actually destroy our abilities of communication and continence.

~~~
ForrestN
Really? I don't quite understand how you're using "tongue-in-cheek" here, but
I didn't take the article to be sarcastic at all. I'm not an avid reader of
the comic, but it reads to me like someone who's a passionate fan of Tesla,
making a sincere argument for Tesla's importance relative to Edison (and
further, making an argument against revering Edison at all), and then going so
far as to thank him.

I don't know enough about it to have a position on who's more correct, but the
fact that it's a webcomic, and therefor somehow "unserious," doesn't imply
that the author doesn't believe what he's saying. If the point is being
missed, if it's not that Tesla is an overlooked genius who deserved, and
deserves, more admiration, what is the point, exactly?

~~~
kylemaxwell
If you take this particular comic in the context of the rest of The Oatmeal,
it seems clear (to me, at least) that the author likes hyperbole for comic
effect. Maybe I'm wrong: maybe this is the one instance where he's totally and
completely sincere in his approach with no exaggeration, but that strikes me
as unlikely.

~~~
ForrestN
This is a bit straw man; no one ever said he wasn't exaggerating. The author
isn't objecting to some precisely calibrated sentiment. He's disputing the
premise: that Tesla is singularly important, and that Edison is vastly
overrated. The author is exaggerating or effect, but the effect sought is to
make a case that isn't sarcastic, but rather quite sincere.

------
tinylittlefish
Interesting, if only because I've always been fascinated by the time period
and events surrounding the adoption of electricity.

A really interesting book about Edison and Tesla is "Empires of Light" by Jill
Jones.

------
eevilspock
Tesla vs Edison is my favorite Drunk History:
[http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/ef668caf14/drunk-history-
vo...](http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/ef668caf14/drunk-history-vol-6-w-john-
c-reilly-crispin-glover)

Duncan Trussell clearly disagrees with the OP. In other words, the OP is anti-
oatmeal and anti-booze. What is wrong with him?

~~~
adviceonly
Edison may not have electrocuted the animals in the video, but he fried an
elephant with AC:
[http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2008/01/dayint...](http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2008/01/dayintech_0104)

------
mcguire
_"This was the fate of a lot of brilliant researchers in the early days of
radiation. Like Marie and Pierre Curie, for example."_

That's funny. I didn't know Pierre had any long-term, serious problems with
radiation. I thought he got run over before the symptoms started showing up.

------
joe_the_user
When I was a lazy, precocious child, I had my mother and experimental
scientist father each repeat Thomas Edison's "My genius is one percent
inspiration and ninety-nine percent perspiration", _over and over again_. If
other geeks are like me, they probably grew up hating Edison's guts. It might
not be true but I can understand the impulse to come to the conclusion that
Edison was evil and the inspired Tesla was good.

Some math geeok have enjoyed calling Évariste Galois a "hero of the
revolution", bringing mathematics to the people. It's a nice myth but like the
myth of Tesla, probably not quite the full story.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89variste_Galois>

~~~
sliverstorm
I always thought the vilification of Edison was pretty ridiculous, myself. For
heaven's sake, if nothing else respect the man for the work he put into giving
us the light bulb.

~~~
Ygg2
It's true he did a great number of things, but let's not forget this guy
wasn't really a saint either:

 _Tesla claimed he could redesign Edison's inefficient motor and generators,
making an improvement in both service and economy. According to Tesla, Edison
remarked "There's fifty thousand dollars in it for you - if you can do
it".[36] This has been noted as an odd statement from an Edison whose company
was stingy with pay and did not have that sort of cash on hand.[37] After
months of work when Tesla finished the task and inquired about payment Edison
claimed he was only joking replying, "Tesla, you don't understand our American
humor".[38][39] Edison offered a $10 a week raise over Tesla's US$18 per week
salary, but Tesla refused it and immediately resigned.[36]_

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla#Working_for_Edison...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla#Working_for_Edison_in_France_and_the_U.S)

So, yeah he does sound like a CEO

------
namank
I'm glad a publication like Forbes is picking up on such internet phenomenon
and setting things straight. We need this more than ever.

This is not much different than Steve Jobs vs. Dennis Ritchie.

~~~
nodemaker
This could not be further from Steve Jobs vs Dennis Ritchie.

In fact there is no Steve Jobs vs Dennis Ritchie.Tesla vs Edison however was
very real.

~~~
namank
There will be in about 25 years.

Beginnings of which have already been pointed out by that Facebook picture
that went viral, the one that tries to contrast their contributions and their
fame.

~~~
unimpressive
This is even more ridiculous than Tesla vs. Edison, because Ritchie and Jobs
had almost nothing to do with each other. Their only real relation is that
they died in the same month.

The viral facebook picture you cite is comparable to one saying that Ritchie
was just stealing the innovations of Turing. Or that Ritchie was just a thief
of the game changing ideas of John Backus.

At least Tesla and Edison were working in the same space at the same time
frame on similar problems.

~~~
namank
1\. They both worked in tech.

2\. Think of the comparison as Engineer vs. Designer/Inventor(because this IS
the legacy of Steve Jobs when looked at as a role model).

3\. If you're REALLY hard pressed for details then...iOS is a descendent of
Unix. Everything Apple runs on C.

I can appreciate why it could be difficult to abstract the two men to the
level at which I make the comparison. But you must ask yourself why did
someone, Forbes in this case, have to make the effort to set straight the
details of Tesla vs. Edison when they are general knowledge to begin with. Why
did that misleading poster promoting Tesla go viral? Its because details
rarely matter. What matters is what Tesla and Edison represent - Edison is
seen as rich and powerful while Tesla is the viewed as lost soul whose sole
vice was science.

Tesla died alone and still in-debt. This fuels our current perception of a
true scientist/engineer/maker, unadulterated by desire except for truth that
is science. He is an inspiration.

Edison's practicality and willingness to use business (as a tool) to promote
his work is not viewed kindly by posterity. Edison was also a great inventor
but falls short, at least in our eyes, when contrasted against Tesla. Where
did his practicality to invent of people rather than science come from? His
first patent, an electronic voting machine, did not sell (because, I THINK,
they could not fudge the numbers with it). So he resolved to only work on
things that people want.

And thats really all there is to it.

It really boils down to one question: why didn't Dennis Ritchie achieve
greater fame and money than earned by Steve Jobs? "Thats the way the world
works" or any variant thereof is not an acceptable answer.

~~~
Drbble
Because Dennis Ritchie didn't have an interest in marketing or starting a
business. That was easy.

~~~
namank
And now you are doing for DR vs. SJ what Forbes did for the other two!

------
joelrunyon
The Oatmeal wrote a response to the Forbes article here -->
<http://theoatmeal.com/blog/tesla_response>

------
JoeCamel
Maybe this awesome illustration by Travis Pitts gives a good picture of how
people see Tesla [http://www.flickr.com/photos/zom-
bot/7227505456/sizes/o/in/p...](http://www.flickr.com/photos/zom-
bot/7227505456/sizes/o/in/photostream/) :)

------
sleighboy
Best Tesla reading I've found is Mark Seifer's book "Wizard, the Life and
Times of Nikola Tesla". The audio book is excellent as well. Gives great
insight into Tesla's personality and many events in history and the people
around him.

------
moylan
if it was just a grudge match between tesla and edison i could respect edison
a little more. it is possible to get so obsessed that he would have a blind
spot and go out of his way to engage a competitor. think steve jobs promising
to go nuclear on android. but edison went out of his way to profit from the
work of Georges Méliès.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Trip_to_the_Moon#Distributio...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Trip_to_the_Moon#Distribution)

------
Foomandoonian
This seemed relevant:
<http://unfunnythings.tumblr.com/post/1312737586/theoatmeal>

------
nikcub
If the common opinion is here:

    
    
        .
    

and you want it to be here:

    
    
                 .
    

sometimes you have to pull this hard:

    
    
                             .

------
MaysonL
And Forbes isn't the Bible, even if they think they are.

------
zotz
Tesla was far smarter than Edison was. Tesla's biggest mistake was allowing
himself to work for JP Morgan. Morgan didn't want that wireless junk ("Where
do you put the meter?") and was happy to let Tesla work himself into obscurity
while the metered, wired system we know today was put into place.

Tesla became aware of the position he had placed himself in and his work
became focused on leaving his research to us, the future. I hope we listen
because he knew what he was doing.

~~~
derleth
> Morgan didn't want that wireless junk

Good for him: It's physically impossible.

~~~
Ygg2
An honest question: Why is wireless broadcast of electricity physically
impossible?

~~~
derleth
Because the power of electromagnetic radiation (energy per unit area
perpendicular to the source) drops off proportional to the inverse square of
the distance. So, at one unit away it's a reference for full power, at two
units it's at one-quarter power, and three units it's at one-ninth power, and
so on. This is the fatal flaw with Tesla's scheme: By simple geometry, you're
pouring power into space and you need massive input to get any output at all
at an appreciable distance.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law>

The WiTricity project you may hear of does things based on a completely
different technical footing, which is more efficient but less broadly useful.
For example, with the WiTricity technology, power receivers can't be any more
than a quarter-wavelength from the transmitter, which means that they can't be
any further away than a few meters. Definitely _not_ what Tesla had in mind.

------
wissler
The author doesn't take the genius and import of the AC motor seriously,
therefore I can't take him seriously. There are relatively few authentic
geniuses in history; people who provide crucial fundamental insight that
others just can't. Issac Newton was one. Euler was one. Tesla was one.

~~~
wissler
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall_poppy_syndrome>

------
xer0x
Won't read. Disagree with title.

------
damm
It sounds like someone should re-read the history books that were not written
by Edison. No Tesla wasn't a god, but the fact that most of Tesla's inventions
still power your life in a lot of aspects should tell you how awesome the man
is.

Judge a man by his work, not by his rhetoric

