Click HERE to go to home page -- (page 1)

Nikola Tesla--(Page 9)

ANALYSIS OF NATIONAL MUSEUM OF AMERICAN HISTORY HALL OF ELECTRICITY HOME PAGE

 

WHAT IS THE PROBLEM?

As in many institutions, the Smithsonian is not without its problems -- and money is often at the root. Approximately 83% of its operating funds comes from the federal government; the remaining 17% comes from donations and what can be earned from grants from American industries. When an industry gives money to the Smithsonian, the curators feel obliged to favor the history of that industry as much as possible in their displays or publications.

CLASSIC EXAMPLES

Two examples of this assault on history are: (1) The Edison Institute (2) The Orkin Company (you know, the bug killers). In the case of the Edison Institute, they routinely give money to have Smithsonian curators write a story and create a display featuring Edison and his invention of the incandescent lamp. In depicting the history of Edison's incandescent lamp, the curator loses perspective of historical events and omits critical parts in order to show favor to The Edison Institute.

LIGHT IS NOT AS IMPORTANT AS ELECTRIC POWER AND MECHANICAL ENERGY!

The curator hails the invention of the light bulb as being the cause of the Second Industrial Revolution. It was NOT! Nikola Tesla's invention of the rotating magnetic field, (giving the world AC power and the AC motor) was clearly what American industry needed to bring about that revolution; it provided the necessary muscle to do the work. This is not to say that light was not a welcome advancement, but its importance pales in comparison to AC power and AC motor.

THE SMITHSONIAN MADE STORY CHANGES

Earlier I criticized the Smithsonian's flagrant omission of Tesla's work and their deceptive rhetoric. I based my criticism on their web site entitled "Lighting a Revolution." Recently I discovered the Smithsonian's revised web site; it is now called "Lighting a Revolution II." Tesla is now mentioned, but even the casual observer will notice that Edison's name dominates the Smithsonian's many articles.

THE TALL TALE CONTINUES

The curator traces the history of Edison's business enterprise (of building direct current [DC] power stations) to power his incandescent lamp. In doing so he creates the false illusion for a naive citizenry that Edison was the inventor of electricity...when, in fact, he was merely a businessman using a technology others had already developed. Direct current technology was dead from the beginning because DC could be sent only over short distances.

Readers should take a moment to examine the National Museum of American History's "Hall of Electricity" page.

ANALYSIS OF THEIR OWN WORDS:

The following are direct quotations from the "Hall of Electricity" web page: "The displays help illuminate how Thomas Edison's lightbulb and other inventions began to transform our world."

Notice how the curator gives emphasis to Edison's lightbulb, but omits naming the "other inventions." He even uses the word "illuminate" to describe what the displays will do for the observer, further leading the reader to believe that Edison and his lightbulb "transformed the world."

OMISSIONS TELL A STORY TOO

"The rest of the hall is devoted to a separate exhibition, Lighting a Revolution. At the end of the19th century, a new way of transmitting power came to the fore -- electricity. In 1876, at the Philadelphia Centennial Exhibition, a few arc lights were shown. They were very bright, suitable only for large open spaces. Three years later, Thomas Edison announced his invention of the incandescent light bulb, and on New Year's eve in 1879 drew a crowd of 3,000 visitors to his Menlo Park, New Jersey complex to see the buildings and grounds aglow in the softer light of his creation. Lighting a Revolution explains in detail the complex circumstances behind Edison's revolution."

Notice how the curator emphasizes light. Also, he talks of "a new way of transmitting power at the end of the 19th century."  No doubt, the naive or casual reader automatically thinks the curator is referring to AC, and in doing so they identify Edison with AC because many power companies have Edison as their namesake.

THE GUIDING LIGHT

"Edison and his colleagues produced not merely a light bulb but an electrical system, and the next section tells the story of his early power plants, including the first central at Pearl Street in New York City, which began producing power on September 4, 1882."

Again, the curator carefully steers the reader to believe that Edison is responsible for every advancement made in electricity. He also carefully steers the reader to believe that Edison's lamp created the revolution.

EDISON'S FAILURE

"Edison's success drew competitors, some of whom improved on his methods, especially through the introduction of alternating current, which ultimately supplanted his direct-current system. The next section of the exhibition shows the lamps, meters, generators, and other devices of some of these competitors and explains the reasons why alternating current proved superior to direct current."

The curator calls Edison's enterprise a success...when, in fact, it was NOT. Tesla tried to give (yes, give) his AC system to Edison because he realized direct current technology was flawed, but Edison stubbornly refused to acknowledge the superiority of Tesla's AC system. Notice how the curator carefully avoids using Tesla's name and refers to him only as a 'competitor'. It was Tesla who held over 40 U.S. patents on a complete AC system that proved to be the breakthrough discovery the world thought was impossible.  Note also how the curator identifies direct-current as "his" (Edison's) system,  when in fact direct-current technology was already fully established seven years before Edison hired electrical engineers to build his much touted Pearl Street Generating Station using this established DC technology.

THIS IS TOO MUCH!

"An Edison electric motor of about 1890. In 1895 a large remote generating station began producing electricity at Niagara Falls. Less than two decades after Edison's invention, electricity thus was accepted as a principal means of power transmission. A revolution had taken place. Cheap electric power made new industrial processes possible, such as the economical production of aluminum. Eventually this power reached the city and the home, where its influence is made clear in a case filled with early 20th-century appliances such as fans, coffee pots, and vacuum cleaners."

First, the curator shows a picture of an "Edison" electric motor of about 1890, setting the stage for continued glorification of Edison. Tesla created a worldwide revolution in electrical science two years earlier (1888) when he introduced his new AC motor, yet the curator persists in talking about an 1890 old technology motor of which Edison had made no scientific contribution. In the next sentence, after displaying an "Edison" motor, which he did not invent,the curator tells of the Niagara Falls power generating station. The curator fails to explain that the Niagara plant was designed to generate AC power using Tesla's system--Tesla's patents had to be licensed to build it. Then he carefully avoids identifying Tesla as the creator of this project. Instead, the curator states, "less than two decades after Edison's invention, electricity thus was accepted as a principal means of power transmission." The curator, by using deceptive semantics and omissions, leads the reader to believe that two decades after Edison's invention of the "light bulb," Edison introduced electrical power to the world. Then he reinforces his statement by stating that "a revolution had taken place." (implying that Edison had caused that revolution.) The curator is correct in stating that a revolution had taken place, but he failed to credit the person who caused that revolution...Nikola Tesla. In the curator's next statement he tells how "cheap electric power made new industrial processes possible, such as the economical production of aluminum." The above statement is a particularly flagrant deception. The production of aluminum requires an enormous amount of electricity that only AC can provide. The curator, by omitting Tesla's name as the creator of polyphase AC, guides the reader to believe that Edison was responsible for the electricity needed to germinate the aluminum industry. (Of course, the aluminum industry is what spawned the aircraft industry...all made possible by Tesla's AC power.) The curator continues to describe how electricity (presumably from Edison) brought numerous consumer items to market...citing fans and coffee pots. He carefully neglects to mention that most all small appliances use Tesla's AC motor. This curator, in his zeal to highlight Edison, creates the false illusion that Edison was the inventor of our entire electrical world.

WHAT EDISON ACTUALLY DID

Edison's greatest creation was his invention factory at Menlo Park, NJ. From that factory came many wonderful and practical inventions, but electrical power was NOT one of them. The curator is dead wrong in claiming there was creativity in Edison's power enterprise. There was creativity from the Menlo Park group for the invention of the incandescent lamp, the phonograph, the moving picture machine, and other popular devices, but not electric power! Edison merely expanded upon a known technology (DC) and was too stubborn (or ignorant) to recognize its limitations. Power companies that use Edison as their namesake are only perpetuating a myth; it is a pathetic joke and they need to get their history straight.

A BUG KILLER MADE IT TO THE SMITHSONIAN

In the case of the Orkin Company, they donated a half million dollars in 1992 to the National Museum of Natural History. In exchange, the Smithsonian agreed to create a permanent display honoring Otto Orkin, founder of the Orkin Company--another example of our prestigious Smithsonian catering to corporate commercialism.

___________________________________________________________________________________

Click HERE to continue.

Click HERE to go back one page.

Click HERE to send me a message.