It is largely not known that Nikola Tesla disagreed with the theory of atoms being composed of smaller subatomic particles, stating there was no such thing as an electron creating an electric charge (he believed that if electrons existed at all, they were some fourth state of matter or "sub-atom" that could exist only in an experimental vacuum and that they had nothing to do with electricity).
believed that atoms are immutable—they could not change state or be split in
any way. He was a believer in the 19th century concept of an all-pervasive 'ether' that transmitted electrical energy. Tesla was generally antagonistic towards theories about the conversion of
matter into energy. He was also critical of Einstein's theory of relativity,
I hold that space cannot be curved,
for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said
that God has properties. He has not, but only attributes and these are of our
own making. Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling
the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved is
equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing.
Could Tesla have changed the way we live today? Not likely, since his social imagination was beyond most in the meaning that it did not 'jive' with the wider social imagination of his day. In that respect, he was a kind of Da Vinci.
He did not receive or partake in the common among us agreement reality that was at large. He was in his own and on his own in every sense of the social imagination; limited by his own abilities and social inabilities to accept what he did and could not 'socially' imagine.
In terms of the social quantum analysis, we can recognize his struggle, his vision a creativity of light that simply that flitted by as he was lost in his own argument for being in the social imagination. He insisted being an automaton; yet what is that but a thing that does not do something unless moved. It is in fact a kind of nothing and how could something act upon nothing. How could he be an automaton?
He was thus lost in the explanation of how even a social reality could exist let alone any kind of physical reality of electricity. You see, in the social imagination anything and everything exists and is fully real being fulfilled by and controlled by one and another will that which is the collective will and at the same time, that which is not but a single massive thing; describable as both no thing and yet something specific.
Where did that no thing which is something come from ... not from nothing and so not even no thing could exist let alone nothing exist in the social imagination where everything is information where nothing can exist and does not exist.
Hence, we cannot be automaton (nothing) responding to external stimuli (something) as that begs the question where did the external stimuli (external information) come from and what would make us respond to it anyway.
In the social imagination, we respond to all information contained as it has meaning in the social quantum information bank which is both instantaneously dispersed in non locality and yet controlled within a boundary or field of local imagination; and yet in that non locality all information in its entirety necessarily escapes our bounded social imagination. Perhaps, that is where Tesla was...
Would free electrical power have made us more free or unbounded in our social imagination? No, because in our social imagination exists bounded meaning. The social quantum in its essence means nothing and everything at the same time!