Category: quantum mechanics

Regular

Nikola Tesla does not believe in the existence of an “electron” as pictured by pop science — or, he maintains, through practical reasoning and experimentation, that if it can exist at all, it does so only in perfect vacuum.

“To account for its apparently small mass, science conceives the electron as a hollow sphere, a sort of bubble. Now, a bubble can exist in such a medium as a gas or liquid because its internal pressure is not altered by deformation. But if, as supposed, the internal pressure of an electron is due to the repulsion of electric masses, the slightest conceivable deformation must result in the destruction of the bubble!

“Just to mention another improbability, the force tending to tear an electron apart is, in pounds per square inch, represented by the staggering figure of 256,899 followed by twenty-one zeros — and this is 513,798,000,000,000,000,000 times greater that the tension that tungsten wire can withstand! And yet it does not burst! Not even when it is hurled against an obstacle with a speed hundreds of thousands times greater than that of a bullet!”

–Nikola Tesla

“A Famous Prophet of Science Looks Into the Future.” Popular Science Monthly, November, 1928.

“Up to 1896, however, I did not succeed in obtaining a positive experimental proof of the existence of such a medium. But in that year I brought out a new form of vacuum tube capable of being charged to any desired potential, and operated it with effective pressures of about 4,000,000 volts. I produced cathodic and other rays of transcending intensity. The effects, according to my view, were due to minute particles of matter carrying enormous electrical charges, which, for want of a better name, I designated as matter not further decomposable. Subsequently those particles were called electrons.”

Nikola Tesla

“Nikola Tesla Tells of New Radio Theories.”New York Herald Tribune, September 22, 1929.

“The idea of the atom being formed of electrons and protons which go whirling round each other like a miniature sun and planets is an invention of the imagination, and has no relation to the real nature of matter.

“Virtually all progress has been achieved by physicists, discoverers and inventors; in short, devotees of the science which Newton and his disciples have been and are propounding.

“Personally, it is only efforts in this direction which have claimed my energies. Similar remarks might be made with respect to other modern developments of thought. Take, for example, the electron theory. Perhaps no other has given rise to so many erroneous ideas and chimerical hopes. Everybody speaks of electrons as something entirely definite and real. Still, the fact is that nobody has isolated it and nobody has measured its charge. Nor does anybody know what it really is.

“In order to explain the observed phenomena, atomic structures have been imagined, none of which can possibly exist.

Nikola Tesla

“Great Scientific Discovery Impends.“ The Sunday Star, Washington D.C., May 17, 1931.

“My ideas regarding the electron are at variance with those generally entertained. I hold that it is a relatively large body carrying a surface charge and not an elementary unit. When such an electron leaves an electrode of extremely high potential and in very high vacuum, it carries an electrostatic charge many times greater than the normal. This may astonish some of those who think that the particle has the same charge in the tube and outside of it in the air. A beautiful and instructive experiment has been contrived by me showing that such is not the case, for as soon as the particle gets out into the atmosphere it becomes a blazing star owing to the escape of the excess charge. The great quantity of electricity stored on the particle is responsible for the difficulties encountered in the operation of certain tubes and the rapid deterioration of the same.”

–Nikola Tesla

“Dynamic Theory Of Gravity.“ July 10, 1937(Prior to interviews with the press on his 81st birthday observance).

“Before the electron theory was advanced, I had established that radio-active rays consisted of particles of primary matter not further decomposable, and the first thing to find out was whether the sun is charged to a sufficiently high potential to produce the effects noted. This called for a prolonged investigation which culminated in my discovery that the sun’s potential was 216,000,000,000 volts and that all such large and hot bodies emit cosmic rays.

“While the origin and character of the rays observed near the earth’s surface had thus been sufficiently well ascertained, the so-called cosmic rays observed at great altitudes presented a riddle for more than twenty-six years, chiefly because it was found they increased with the height at a rapid rate. My investigations brought out the astonishing fact that the effects at high altitude are of an entirely different nature, having no relation whatever to cosmic rays. These are particles from celestial bodies at very high temperatures and charged to enormous electrical potentials.

“The effects at great elevations are due to waves of extremely small lengths produced by the sun in a certain region of the atmosphere. THIS IS THE DISCOVERY I WISH TO MAKE KNOWN. The process involved in the generation of the waves is the following: The sun projects charged particles constituting an electric current which passes through a conducting stratum of the atmosphere approximately ten kilometers (six miles) thick enveloping the earth. This is a transmission of electrical energy exactly as I illustrated in my experimental lecture in which one end of a wire is connected to an electric generator of high potential, its other end being free. In this case the generator is represented by the sun and the wire by the conducting air.”

“The passage of solar current involves the transference of electric charges from particle to particle with the speed of light, resulting in the production of extremely short and penetrating waves. As the air stratum mentioned is the source of the waves it follows that the so-called cosmic rays observed at great altitude must increase as this stratum is approached.”

–Nikola Tesla

“In The Realm Of Science: Tesla, Who Predicted Radio, Now Looks Forward To Sending Waves To The Moon.” New York Herald Tribune, Aug. 22, 1937.

Regular

drnikolatesla:

Nikola Tesla was asked to select his choice of the greatest modern and future wonders, but the electrical wizard refused to accept the popular notion of what is wonderful. His reply led to an onslaught on scientists who have abandoned “cause and effect” and who take the position that there are accidents in nature and that anything might happen.

“To the popular mind, any manifestation resulting from any cause will appear wonderful if there is no perceptible connection between cause and effect. For instance, through the means of wireless telephone speech is carried to opposite points of the globe. To the vast majority this must appear miraculous. To the expert who is familiar with the apparatus and sees it in his mind’s eye the result is obvious. It is exactly as though visible means existed to which the impetus is transmitted.

“As I revolve in my mind the thoughts in answer to your question I find the most wonderful thing is the utter aberration of the scientific mind during the last twenty five years. In that time the relativity theory [Albert Einstein], the electron theory [J. J. Thomson], the quantum theory [Max Planck, Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, Arthur Compton, Paul Dirac, Wolfgang Pauli], the theory of radioactivity [Marie Curie] and others have been worked out and developed to an amazing degree. And yet probably not less than 90 per cent of what is thought today to be demonstrable scientific truth is nothing but unrealizable dreams.

“What is ‘thought’ in relativity, for example, is not science, but some kind of metaphysics based on abstract mathematical principles and conceptions which will be forever incomprehensible to beings like ourselves whose whole knowledge is derived from a three-dimensional world.

“The idea of the atom being formed of electrons and protons which go whirling round each other like a miniature sun and planets is an invention of the imagination, and has no relation to the real nature of matter.

“Virtually all progress has been achieved by physicists, discoverers and inventors; in short, devotees of the science which Newton and his disciples have been and are propounding.

“Personally, it is only efforts in this direction which have claimed my energies. Similar remarks might be made with respect to other modern developments of thought. Take, for example, the electron theory. Perhaps no other has given rise to so many erroneous ideas and chimerical hopes. Everybody speaks of electrons as something entirely definite and real. Still, the fact is that nobody has isolated it and nobody has measured its charge. Nor does anybody know what it really is.

“In order to explain the observed phenomena, atomic structures have been imagined [Quantum Mechanics], none of which can possibly exist. But the worst illusion to which modern thought has led is the idea of ‘indeterminacy’ [ex. Uncertainty Principle: W. Heisenberg, E. Schrödinger]. To make this clear, I may remark that heretofore we have in positive science assumed that every effect is the result of a preceding cause.

“As far as I am concerned, I can say that after years of concentrated thought and investigation there is no truth in nature of which I would be more fully convinced. But the new theories of ‘indeterminacy’ state this is not true, that an effect cannot be predicted in advance.

“If two planets collide at certain time and certain place, this is to the student of positive science an inevitable result of preceding interactions between the bodies; and if our knowledge would be adequate, we would be able to foretell the event accurately.

“But in the spirit of the new theories this would simply be an accident. ‘Indeterminacy’ introduces into the world of inert matter a principle which might virtually be compared with the universal illusion of free will.

“Of course, there is no such thing. In years of experimenting I have found that every thought I conceive, every act I perform, is the result of external impressions on my senses.

“It is only because the vast majority of human being are not observant sufficiently that they live in the illusion of perfect choice and freedom in their thoughts and actions. And if this holds true even in the most complex and involved manifestations of human life, it holds true with the same force in all the world of matter.”

–Nikola Tesla

“Great Scientific Discovery Impends.“ The Sunday Star, Washington D.C., May 17, 1931.

Regular

Nikola Tesla was asked to select his choice of the greatest modern and future wonders, but the electrical wizard refused to accept the popular notion of what is wonderful. His reply led to an onslaught on scientists who have abandoned “cause and effect” and who take the position that there are accidents in nature and that anything might happen.

“To the popular mind, any manifestation resulting from any cause will appear wonderful if there is no perceptible connection between cause and effect. For instance, through the means of wireless telephone speech is carried to opposite points of the globe. To the vast majority this must appear miraculous. To the expert who is familiar with the apparatus and sees it in his mind’s eye the result is obvious. It is exactly as though visible means existed to which the impetus is transmitted.

“As I revolve in my mind the thoughts in answer to your question I find the most wonderful thing is the utter aberration of the scientific mind during the last twenty five years. In that time the relativity theory [Albert Einstein], the electron theory [J. J. Thomson], the quantum theory [Max Planck, Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, Arthur Compton, Paul Dirac, Wolfgang Pauli], the theory of radioactivity [Marie Curie] and others have been worked out and developed to an amazing degree. And yet probably not less than 90 per cent of what is thought today to be demonstrable scientific truth is nothing but unrealizable dreams.

“What is ‘thought’ in relativity, for example, is not science, but some kind of metaphysics based on abstract mathematical principles and conceptions which will be forever incomprehensible to beings like ourselves whose whole knowledge is derived from a three-dimensional world.

“The idea of the atom being formed of electrons and protons which go whirling round each other like a miniature sun and planets is an invention of the imagination, and has no relation to the real nature of matter.

“Virtually all progress has been achieved by physicists, discoverers and inventors; in short, devotees of the science which Newton and his disciples have been and are propounding.

“Personally, it is only efforts in this direction which have claimed my energies. Similar remarks might be made with respect to other modern developments of thought. Take, for example, the electron theory. Perhaps no other has given rise to so many erroneous ideas and chimerical hopes. Everybody speaks of electrons as something entirely definite and real. Still, the fact is that nobody has isolated it and nobody has measured its charge. Nor does anybody know what it really is.

“In order to explain the observed phenomena, atomic structures have been imagined [Quantum Mechanics], none of which can possibly exist. But the worst illusion to which modern thought has led is the idea of ‘indeterminacy’ [ex. Uncertainty Principle: W. Heisenberg, E. Schrödinger]. To make this clear, I may remark that heretofore we have in positive science assumed that every effect is the result of a preceding cause.

“As far as I am concerned, I can say that after years of concentrated thought and investigation there is no truth in nature of which I would be more fully convinced. But the new theories of ‘indeterminacy’ state this is not true, that an effect cannot be predicted in advance.

“If two planets collide at certain time and certain place, this is to the student of positive science an inevitable result of preceding interactions between the bodies; and if our knowledge would be adequate, we would be able to foretell the event accurately.

“But in the spirit of the new theories this would simply be an accident. ‘Indeterminacy’ introduces into the world of inert matter a principle which might virtually be compared with the universal illusion of free will.

“Of course, there is no such thing. In years of experimenting I have found that every thought I conceive, every act I perform, is the result of external impressions on my senses.

“It is only because the vast majority of human being are not observant sufficiently that they live in the illusion of perfect choice and freedom in their thoughts and actions. And if this holds true even in the most complex and involved manifestations of human life, it holds true with the same force in all the world of matter.”

–Nikola Tesla

“Great Scientific Discovery Impends.“ The Sunday Star, Washington D.C., May 17, 1931.

drnikolatesla: Nikola Tesla Describing Quantum…

drnikolatesla:

Nikola Tesla Describing Quantum Entanglement In 1891.

“Nature has stored up in the universe infinite energy. The eternal recipient and transmitter of this infinite energy is the ether. The recognition of the existence of ether, and of the functions it performs, is one of the most important results of modern scientific research. The mere abandoning of the idea of action at a distance, the assumption of a medium pervading all space and connecting all gross matter, has freed the minds of thinkers of an ever present doubt, and, by opening a new horizon—new and unforeseen possibilities—has given fresh interest to phenomena with which we are familiar of old. It has been a great step towards the understanding of the forces of nature and their multifold manifestations to our senses. It has been for the enlightened student of physics what the understanding of the mechanism of the firearm or of the steam engine is for the barbarian.”

–Nikola Tesla

“Experiments With Alternate Currents Of Very High Frequency And Their Application To Methods Of Artificial Illumination.” Lecture delivered before the American Institute of Electrical Engineers, Columbia College, N.Y., May 20, 1891.

🐐

Regular

drnikolatesla:

🔥Nikola Tesla Roasts the Pop Science World

ASKED to select his choice of the greatest modern and future wonders, the electrical wizard refused to accept the popular notion of what is wonderful. His reply led him into onslaught on the scientists who have abandoned “cause and effect” and who take the position that there are accidents in nature and that anything might happen.

“To the popular mind, any manifestation resulting from any cause will appear wonderful if there is no perceptible connection between cause and effect. For instance, through the means of wireless telephone speech is carried to opposite points of the globe. To the vast majority this must appear miraculous. To the expert who is familiar with the apparatus and sees it in his mind’s eye the result is obvious. It is exactly as though visible means existed to which the impetus is transmitted.

“As I revolve in my mind the thoughts in answer to your question I find the most wonderful thing is the utter aberration of the scientific mind during the last twenty five years. In that time the relativity theory [(Albert Einstein)], the electron theory [(J. J. Thomson)], the quantum theory [(Max Planck, Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, Arthur Compton, Paul Dirac, Wolfgang Pauli)], the theory of radioactivity [Marie Curie] and others have been worked out and developed to an amazing degree. And yet probably not less than 90 per cent of what is thought today to be demonstrable scientific truth is nothing but unrealizable dreams.

“What is ‘thought’ in relativity, for example, is not science, but some kind of metaphysics based on abstract mathematical principles and conceptions which will be forever incomprehensible to beings like ourselves whose whole knowledge is derived from a three-dimensional world.

“The idea of the atom being formed of electrons and protons which go whirling round each other like a miniature sun and planets is an invention of the imagination, and has no relation to the real nature of matter.

“Virtually all progress has been achieved by physicists, discoverers and inventors; in short, devotees of the science which [Isaac] Newton and his disciples have been and are propounding.

“Personally, it is only efforts in this direction which have claimed my energies. Similar remarks might be made with respect to other modern developments of thought. Take, for example, the electron theory. Perhaps no other has given rise to so many erroneous ideas and chimerical hopes. Everybody speaks of electrons as something entirely definite and real. Still, the fact is that nobody has isolated it and nobody has measured its charge. Nor does anybody know what it really is.

“In order to explain the observed phenomena, atomic structures have been imagined [(Quantum Mechanics)], none of which can possibly exist. But the worst illusion to which modern thought has led is the idea of ‘indeterminacy’ [(ex. Uncertainty Principle: W. Heisenberg, E. Schrödinger)]. To make this clear, I may remark that heretofore we have in positive science assumed that every effect is the result of a preceding cause.

“As far as I am concerned, I can say that after years of concentrated thought and investigation there is no truth in nature of which I would be more fully convinced. But the new theories of ‘indeterminacy’ state this is not true, that an effect cannot be predicted in advance.

“If two planets collide at certain time and certain place, this is to the student of positive science an inevitable result of preceding interactions between the bodies; and if our knowledge would be adequate, we would be able to foretell the event accurately.

“But in the spirit of the new theories this would simply be an accident. ‘Indeterminacy’ introduces into the world of inert matter a principle which might virtually be compared with the universal illusion of free will.

“Of course, there is no such thing. In years of experimenting I have found that every thought I conceive, every act I perform, is the result of external impressions on my senses.

“It is only because the vast majority of human being are not observant sufficiently that they live in the illusion of perfect choice and freedom in their thoughts and actions. And if this holds true even in the most complex and involved manifestations of human life, it holds true with the same force in all the world of matter.”

–Nikola Tesla

“Great Scientific Discovery Impends.“ The Sunday Star, Washington D.C., May 17, 1931.

This is the final post in a collaborative seri…

This is the final post in a collaborative series with FYP on pilot-wave hydrodynamics. Previous posts: 1) Introduction; 2) Chladni patterns; 3) Faraday instability; 4) Walking droplets; 5) Droplet lattices;

6) Quantum double-slit experiments; 7) Hydro single- and double-slit experiments; 8) Quantum tunneling; 9) Hydrodynamic tunneling; 10) de Broglie’s pilot-wave theor

Thanks for joining us this week as we explored nearly two centuries’ worth of scientific discoveries around vibration, fluid dynamics, and quantum mechanics. For those who’d like to learn more about these and related topics, we’ve compiled some helpful resources below.

Other Videos, Articles, and Resources by Topic

Chladni Patterns

Faraday Instability

Pilot-wave Hydrodynamics

Selected (Academic) Bibliography by Topic

Articles marked with an asterisk (*) are recommended for their approachability and/or broad overview of the subject.

Chladni Patterns

Faraday Instability

Pilot-wave Hydrodynamics

(Image credit: A. Labuda and J. Belina)

This post is part of a collaborative series wi…

This post is part of a collaborative series with FYP on pilot-wave hydrodynamics. Previous posts: 1) Introduction; 2) Chladni patterns; 3) Faraday instability; 4) Walking droplets; 5) Droplet lattices; 6) Quantum double-slit experiments; 7) Hydro single- and double-slit experiments; 8) Quantum tunneling

Quantum tunneling  is a strange subatomic behavior that was first described to explain how alpha particles escape a nucleus during radioactive decay. Classically, a particle trapped in a well can only escape if its energy is sufficiently high, but in quantum mechanics, even a particle with lower-than-necessary energy can occasionally “tunnel” out.

To test whether hydrodynamic walkers can tunnel, researchers built corrals. In the central region, the pool on which the walker moves is relatively deep. Over the walls, the pool is much shallower. In this shallow area, the wave from the droplet’s bouncing decays quickly, creating a partially reflective barrier. For most collisions, the walker reflects off the barrier. Other times, apparently at random, a collision results in the walker crossing the wall and tunneling out of its well.

Over many experiments, researchers were able to construct a probabilistic view of walker tunneling. In quantum mechanics, a particle’s likelihood of tunneling out of a well depends on the particle’s energy and the well’s thickness. The analogs for a walker are velocity and barrier thickness. The thicker the barrier, the harder it is for a walker to tunnel through. Conversely, a faster walker has a higher probability of tunneling through a barrier of a given thickness. As the authors themselves observe:

“Although our experiment is foreign to the quantum world, the similarity of the observed behaviors is intriguing.” #

As we wrap up our series tomorrow, we’ll consider some of those similarities more deeply.

(Image credits: A. Eddi et al., sources)

This post is part of a collaborative series wi…

This post is part of a collaborative series with FYP on pilot-wave hydrodynamics. Previous entries: 1) Introduction; 2) Chladni patterns; 3) Faraday instability; 4) Walking droplets; 5) Droplet lattices; 6) Quantum double-slit experiments

In quantum mechanics, the single and double-slit experiments are foundational. They demonstrate that light and elementary particles like electrons have wave-like and particle-like properties, both of which are necessary to explain the behaviors observed. Similarly, a hydrodynamic walker consists of both a particle and a wave, so, perhaps unsurprisingly, researchers tested them in both single-slit and double-slit experiments.

When a walker passes through a single-slit (top row), it’s deflected in a seemingly random direction due to its waves interacting with the slit. But if you watch enough walkers traverse the slit, you can put together a statistical representation of where the walker will get deflected. Compare that with the results for a series of photons passing through a slit one-at-a-time, and you’ll see a remarkable match-up.

If you test the walker instead with two slits, the droplet can only pass through one slit, but its accompanying wave passes through both (bottom row). Let enough walkers through the system one-by-one, and they, like their photonic cousins, build up interference fringes that match the quantum experiment. Diffraction and interference are only a couple of the walkers’ tricks, however. In the next posts, we’ll take a look at another analog to quantum behavior: tunneling.

(Image and research credits: Couder et al., source, selected papers 1, 2; images courtesy of E. Fort)

This post is a collaborative series with FYP o…

This post is a collaborative series with FYP on pilot-wave hydrodynamics. Previous entries: 1) Introduction; 2) Chladni patterns; 3) Faraday instability

If you place a small droplet atop a vibrating pool, it will happily bounce like a kid on a trampoline. On the surface, this seems quite counterintuitive: why doesn’t the droplet coalesce with the pool? The answer: there’s a thin layer of air trapped between the droplet and the pool. If that air were squeezed out, the droplet would coalesce. But it takes a finite amount of time to drain that air layer away, even with the weight of the droplet bearing down on it. Before that drainage can happen, the vibration of the pool sends the droplet aloft again, refreshing the air layer beneath it. The droplet falls, gets caught on its air cushion, and then sent bouncing again before the air can squeeze out. If nothing disturbs the droplet, it can bounce almost indefinitely.

image

Droplets don’t always bounce in place, though. When forced with the right frequency and acceleration, a bouncing droplet can transition to walking. In this state, the droplet falls and strikes the pool such that it interacts with the ripple from its previous bounce. That sends the droplet aloft again but with a horizontal velocity component in addition to its vertical one. In this state, the droplet can wander about its container in a way that depends on its history or “memory” in the form of waves from its previous bounces. And this is where things start to get a bit weird – as in quantum weirdness – because now our walker consists of both a particle (droplet) and wave (ripples). The similarities between quantum behaviors and the walking droplets, the collective behavior of which is commonly referred to as “pilot-wave hydrodynamics,” are rather remarkable. In the next couple posts, we’ll take a look at some important quantum mechanical experiments and their hydrodynamic counterparts.

(Image credit: D. Harris et al., source)  

Regular

🔥Nikola Tesla Roasts the Pop Science World

ASKED to select his choice of the greatest modern and future wonders, the electrical wizard refused to accept the popular notion of what is wonderful. His reply led him into onslaught on the scientists who have abandoned “cause and effect” and who take the position that there are accidents in nature and that anything might happen.

“To the popular mind, any manifestation resulting from any cause will appear wonderful if there is no perceptible connection between cause and effect. For instance, through the means of wireless telephone speech is carried to opposite points of the globe. To the vast majority this must appear miraculous. To the expert who is familiar with the apparatus and sees it in his mind’s eye the result is obvious. It is exactly as though visible means existed to which the impetus is transmitted.

“As I revolve in my mind the thoughts in answer to your question I find the most wonderful thing is the utter aberration of the scientific mind during the last twenty five years. In that time the relativity theory [Albert Einstein], the electron theory[J. J. Thomson], the quantum theory [Max Planck, Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, Arthur Compton, Paul Dirac, Wolfgang Pauli], the theory of radioactivity [Marie Curie] and others have been worked out and developed to an amazing degree. And yet probably not less than 90 per cent of what is thought today to be demonstrable scientific truth is nothing but unrealizable dreams.

“What is ‘thought’ in relativity, for example, is not science, but some kind of metaphysics based on abstract mathematical principles and conceptions which will be forever incomprehensible to beings like ourselves whose whole knowledge is derived from a three-dimensional world.

“The idea of the atom being formed of electrons and protons which go whirling round each other like a miniature sun and planets is an invention of the imagination, and has no relation to the real nature of matter.

“Virtually all progress has been achieved by physicists, discoverers and inventors; in short, devotees of the science which Newton and his disciples have been and are propounding.

“Personally, it is only efforts in this direction which have claimed my energies. Similar remarks might be made with respect to other modern developments of thought. Take, for example, the electron theory. Perhaps no other has given rise to so many erroneous ideas and chimerical hopes. Everybody speaks of electrons as something entirely definite and real. Still, the fact is that nobody has isolated it and nobody has measured its charge. Nor does anybody know what it really is.

“In order to explain the observed phenomena, atomic structures have been imagined [Quantum Mechanics], none of which can possibly exist. But the worst illusion to which modern thought has led is the idea of ‘indeterminacy’ [ex. Uncertainty Principle: W. Heisenberg, E. Schrödinger]. To make this clear, I may remark that heretofore we have in positive science assumed that every effect is the result of a preceding cause.

“As far as I am concerned, I can say that after years of concentrated thought and investigation there is no truth in nature of which I would be more fully convinced. But the new theories of ‘indeterminacy’ state this is not true, that an effect cannot be predicted in advance.

“If two planets collide at certain time and certain place, this is to the student of positive science an inevitable result of preceding interactions between the bodies; and if our knowledge would be adequate, we would be able to foretell the event accurately.

“But in the spirit of the new theories this would simply be an accident. ‘Indeterminacy’ introduces into the world of inert matter a principle which might virtually be compared with the universal illusion of free will.

“Of course, there is no such thing. In years of experimenting I have found that every thought I conceive, every act I perform, is the result of external impressions on my senses.

"It is only because the vast majority of human being are not observant sufficiently that they live in the illusion of perfect choice and freedom in their thoughts and actions. And if this holds true even in the most complex and involved manifestations of human life, it holds true with the same force in all the world of matter.”

–Nikola Tesla

“Great Scientific Discovery Impends.“ The Sunday Star, Washington D.C., May 17, 1931.