Archive: Famous Scientific Illusions - The Fallacy of Franklin's Pointed Lightning Rod – By Nikola Tesla (February 1919)
This page presents a faithful archive of an article written by Nikola Tesla and published in February 1919 in the Electrical Experimenter magazine. In this article, Tesla challenges the effectiveness of the traditional pointed lightning rod introduced by Benjamin Franklin and exposes its fundamental flaws through scientific reasoning and detailed comparisons.
Tesla explains how Franklin’s pointed rods, rather than safely dissipating electrical charges, can actually increase the risk of lightning strikes due to their design. Through experiments and mathematical analysis, he introduces a new approach to lightning protection, emphasizing the importance of terminal shape and surface area in mitigating atmospheric discharges.
This historical document remains a cornerstone in the study of atmospheric electricity and early advancements in lightning protection technology.
Electrical Experimenter
February, 1919
Electrical Experimenter
The Fallacy of Franklin's Pointed Lightning Rod
The display of atmospheric electricity has since ages been one of the most marvelous spectacles afforded to the sight of man. Its grandeur and power filled him with fear and superstition. For centuries he attributed lightning to agents god-like and supernatural and its purpose in the scheme of this universe remained unknown to him.
Now we have learned that the waters of the ocean are raised by the sun and maintained in the atmosphere delicately suspended, that they are wafted to distant regions of the globe where electric forces assert themselves in upsetting the sensitive balance and causing precipitation, thus sustaining all organic life.
There is every reason to hope that man will soon be able to control this life-giving flow of water and thereby solve many pressing problems of his existence.
Atmospheric electricity became of special scientific interest in Franklin’s time. Faraday had not yet announced his epochal discoveries in magnetic induction but static frictional machines were already generally used in physical laboratories. Franklin’s powerful mind at once leaped to the conclusion that frictional and atmospheric electricity were identical.
To our present view this inference appears obvious, but in his time the mere thought of it was little short of blasphemy. He investigated the phenomena and argued that if they were of the same nature then the clouds could be drained of their charge exactly as the ball of a static machine, and in 1749 he indicated in a publisht memoir how this could be done by the use of pointed metal rods.
The earliest trials were made by Dalibrand in France, but Franklin himself was the first to obtain a spark by using a kite, in June, 1752. When these atmospheric discharges manifest themselves today in our wireless station we feel annoyed and wish that they would stop, but to the man who discovered them they brought tears of joy.
The lightning conductor in its classical form was invented by Benjamin Franklin in 1755 and immediately upon its adoption proved a success to a degree. As usual, however, its virtues were often exaggerated.
So, for instance, it was seriously claimed that in the city of Piatermaritzburg (capital of Natal, South Africa) no lightning strokes occurred after the pointed rods were installed, altho the storms were as frequent as before. Experience has shown that just the opposite is true. A modern city like New York, presenting innumerable sharp points and projections in good contact with the earth, is struck much more often than equivalent area of land.
Statistical records, carefully compiled and publisht from time to time, demonstrate that the danger from lightning to property and life has been reduced to a small percentage by Franklin’s invention, but the damage by fire amounts, nevertheless, to several million dollars annually.
It is astonishing that this device, which has been in universal use for more than one century and a half, should be found to involve a gross fallacy in design and construction which impairs its usefulness and may even render its employment hazardous under certain conditions.
For explanation of this curious fact I may first refer to Fig. 3, in which s is a metallic sphere of radius r, such as the capacity terminal of a static machine, provided with a sharply pointed pin of length h, as indicated. It is well known that the latter has the property of quickly dissipating the accumulated charge into the air.
To examine this action in the light of present knowledge we may liken electric potential to temperature. Imagine that sphere s is heated to T degrees and that the pin or metal bar is a perfect conductor of heat so that its extreme end is at the same temperature T.
Then if another sphere of larger radius, v1, is drawn about the first and the temperature along this boundary is T1, it is evident that there will be between the end of the bar and its surrounding a difference of temperature \( T – T1 \) which will determine the outflow of heat.
Obviously, if the adjacent medium was not affected by the hot sphere this temperature difference would be greater and more heat would be given off. Exactly so in the electric system. Let \( q \) be the quantity of the charge, then the sphere — and owing to its great conductivity also the pin — will be at the potential \( \frac{q}{r} \).
The medium around the point of the pin will be at the potential:
and, consequently, the difference:
Suppose now that a sphere S of much larger radius \( R = nr \) is employed containing a charge \( Q \), this difference of potential will be, analogously:
According to elementary principles of electro-statics, the potentials of the two spheres s and S will be equal if \( Q = nq \), in which case:
Thus, the difference of potential between the point of the pin and the medium around the same will be smaller in the ratio:
when the large sphere is used.
In many scientific tests and experiments this important observation has been disregarded with the result of causing serious errors. Its significance is that the behavior of the pointed rod entirely depends on the linear dimensions of the electrified body. Its quality to give off the charge may be entirely lost if the latter is very large. For this reason, all points or projections on the surface of a conductor of such vast dimensions as the earth would be quite ineffective were it not for other influences.
These will be elucidated with reference to Fig. 4, in which our artist of the Impressionist school has emphasized Franklin’s notion that his rod was drawing electricity from the clouds. If the earth were not surrounded by an atmosphere which is generally oppositely charged it would behave, despite all its irregularities of surface, like a polished sphere.
But owing to the electrified masses of air and cloud the distribution is greatly modified. Thus in Fig. 4, the positive charge of the cloud induces in the earth an equivalent opposite charge, the density at the surface of the latter diminishing with the cube of the distance from the static center of the cloud. A brush discharge is then formed at the point of the rod and the action Franklin anticipated takes place.
In addition, the surrounding air is ionized and rendered conducting and, eventually, a bolt may hit the building or some other object in the vicinity. The virtue of the pointed end to dissipate the charge, which was uppermost in Franklin’s mind, is, however, infinitesimal.
Careful measurements show that it would take many years before the electricity stored in a single cloud of moderate size would be drawn off or neutralized through such a lightning conductor. The grounded rod has the quality of rendering harmless most of the strokes it receives, though occasionally the charge is diverted with damaging results.
But, what is very important to note, it invites danger and hazard on account of the fallacy involved in its design. The sharp point, which was thought advantageous and indispensable to its operation, is really a defect detracting considerably from the practical value of the device.
I have produced a much more improved form of lightning protector characterized by the employment of a terminal of considerable area and large radius of curvature which makes impossible undue density of the charge and ionization of the air.* These protectors act as quasi-repellents and so far have never been struck though exposed a long time.
Their safety is experimentally demonstrated to greatly exceed that invented by Franklin. By their use, property worth millions of dollars which is now annually lost, can be saved.
* Refer to the October, 1918, issue of this journal wherein Dr. Tesla’s new form of non-pointed lightning rod was fully described and illustrated. You can read the full article here.
