X-NEWS: camins.camosun.bc.ca alt.sci.physics.new-theories: 871
Xref: suncad alt.sci.physics.new-theories:871 sci.electronics:11864 sci.energy:3602 sci.engr:2067 sci.environment:4355 sci.physics.fusion:2107 sci.physics:11245 sci.skeptic:11050
Newsgroups: alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.electronics,sci.energy,sci.engr,sci.environment,sci.physics.fusion,sci.physics,sci.skeptic
Path: suncad!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!gatech!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!noring
From: noring@netcom.com (Jon Noring)
Subject: Tapping the Vacuum Energy -- An Important Paper from Bearden [LONG]
Message-ID: <noringCM0GnI.FuE@netcom.com>
Followup-To: alt.sci.physics.new-theories
Summary: Description of Patent Application.  Bearden may finally have it.
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 1994 00:14:06 GMT
Lines: 890


Hello,

I am posting, with Tom Bearden's permission, a new paper (ASCII-text) to
the newsgroups listed above.  Followup discussion, if any, has been set to
alt.sci.physics.new-theories.  A nicer-looking Word for Windows (2.0 and 6.0
versions), and possibly even a Windows 3.1 Help file, both of which would
include the illustrations, will be made available via anonymous ftp in a few
days.  Look for it at netcom.com /pub/noring/bearden .

[Sorry, I will NOT mail out any uuencoded files, nor will I snail-mail
anything.  If you don't have anonymous ftp access, ask a friend to help out
or sign up with one of the many new inexpensive services such as Netcom (for
information on Netcom, telnet there and login as 'guest').  Please DO upload
this file to your local BBS so as to make it more available to our friends
who don't yet have direct Internet access.]


In the past I've posted Tom's work to the Usenet because I find his ideas
and ways of looking at things to be fascinating even if what he says is
shown to be totally out to lunch.  Even Dr. Puthoff, who has published
several provocative papers on aspects of the vacuum energy in respected
physics journals, enjoys reading Bearden's work because it helps him to break
out of the "orthodox" mold of viewing things and gets the creative juices
moving;  of course Dr. Puthoff does not necessarily accept what Bearden has
to say, but he does take the time to hear him out.  I encourage every
scientist and engineer who reads this to temporarily put aside any prejudices
and to see if Tom's quite different view of the universe can help "break out"
of any bottleneck's of thinking arising from blindly accepting orthodox views
of "the way things are".

By the way, Dr. Puthoff recently published an interesting paper pointing out,
according to Bearden (I have not seen the paper yet but am in the process of
obtaining a copy), that it may be possible to extract useful work from the
so-called vacuum energy of space which quantum theory says must exist and
recent experiments confirm does exist.  The reference is:

Daniel C. Cole and Harold E. Puthoff, "Extracting Energy and Heat from the
Vacuum," _Physical Review E_, 48(2), pp. 1562-1565 (1993).

Some have argued that this vacuum energy, also called a "zero-point-energy",
cannot be tapped because it is at the "lowest energy", that is, there is no
potential to it.  However, this argument is not [yet] valid since we really
don't understand the "cause" and "nature" of the vacuum energy.  For example,
in prior work, Puthoff has theorized that the source of the vacuum energy is
due to the radiation of the motion of all the charge carriers of the universe.
If this is true, then we can consider using the vacuum energy to extract the
energy of the organized motion of these charge carriers, and NOT to tap the
vacuum energy itself.  This is *roughly* analogous to solar energy, which is
essentially a conduit by which we tap the nuclear reactions taking place in
the sun.  Thus, until we fully know the nature and source of the vacuum
energy of space, we cannot assume that it is unusable for useful energy
production.

Bearden believes that he's placed enough information into this paper by which
an electrical engineer can go out and try to duplicate the effort, and he does
want others to independently verify or falsify his claims (the Notes and
References section is quite good and contains the "meat" of his theories).
Tom is very serious, and *apparently* has demonstrated in the laboratory that
he can "freely" charge a capacitor using a displacement current from a dipolar
"antenna" which supposedly is tapping into the vacuum energy.  He's now
working on an efficient means of switching this charged capacitor to the load,
which he says is not trivial.

As mentioned below, he and his co-workers (one of which is apparently a
director of a large high-tech electronics company) have filed a patent with
the U.S. Patent Office.  They do expect to have the patent application
rejected by the USPO and in order to get it patented they will have to
deliver an actual working model that has been independently verified.  They
are not seeking any investors, nor do they have any, so as to not "taint"
their effort in the eyes of the technological community.  They have enough
going against them without charges that they're doing this to fleece some
unsuspecting investors.

History will be the final arbiter whether this paper will pass the way of
"poly-water" and possibly of "cold-fusion" (this is cross-posted there since
some have theorized that the anomalies seen in cold-fusion are due to vacuum
energy interactions and not to nuclear reactions), or that this will be the
start of a new era in technology and physics research.

Jon Noring


[p.s., truly my "crackpot index (CI)" has reached phenomenally high levels,
thus proving Noring's Second Theorem that:

As t --> infinity,  CI(JN) --> infinity

where t is time, and JN is yours truly.  :^)   ]



*******************Start of Paper********************


Additional Information On "THE FINAL SECRET OF FREE ENERGY"

Update 15 February 1994

(C) Copyright 1994 by T.E. Bearden


INTRODUCTION

My associates and I have filed the first patent application on two electrical
overunity processes and devices;  one similar to what is outlined in "The
Final Secret of Free Energy"[1] and an additional variation utilizing, as
collectors, standard step-charged capacitors rather than degenerate
semiconductor materials.  In 60 to 90 days we will have a very enlightening
paper (more likely a book) ready on that.  We also plan to file several more
extremely fundamental overunity patent applications from additional phenomena
and mechanisms that we have uncovered.

In this paper it is assumed that the reader is familiar with the content of
"The Final Secret of Free Energy."  Figure 1 shows the invention
schematically, and we briefly summarize it as follows:


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

A method and apparatus for extracting bidirectional EM wave energy from the
vacuum through the scalar potential gradient across the terminals of an
electrical source, collecting the excess energy in a collector without
entropy, then separately discharging the collected energy through a load to
perform work, without sending the load current back through the primary
source against its potential gradient;  i.e., against its back emf.  Removing
the load current from the source thereby substantially reduces the production
of work inside the source to dissipate its bipolarity;  said internal
dissipative work being well-known to be the cause of exhaustion of the
source's ability to continue to furnish emf to the external circuit.  By
reduction of its internal dissipation, the source is enabled to furnish more
energy for dissipation in the external load than is utilized to dissipate the
source internally.  Hence the source is enabled to operate with an overunity
operational efficiency.  The system permissibly operates as an "open" system,
and extracts and utilizes excess EM energy from a free-flowing external
source (the flux exchange between the surrounding vacuum and the bipolarity
of the source), hence it can operate at an efficiency greater than unity
without violation of the laws of physics, in a manner analogous to but
entirely different from a heat pump.  In this invention, it is not the
purpose of the primary source to furnish current and dissipative power to the
external circuit.  The bipolarity of the source is utilized primarily as a
dipole antenna to receive the bidirectional EM wave energy flow from the
vacuum, and direct it without entropy through a switching unit to the
collector.  Conduction electrons in the collector are temporarily restrained
while being overpotentialized by the excess energy being collected upon them.
The collector and its overpotentialized electrons are then switched away from
the primary source, and connected across the load as a separate circuit and
closed current loop.  The electrons in the collector and their excess energy
are then automatically released to flow as current discharge through the
load, releasing their excess energy to perform useful work in the load.  The
collector is then switched away from the load and back across the primary
source, and another collection cycle is initiated.  Iteration of the
collection and discharge cycles provides power to the load.  Additional
collection and smoothing capacitances for smoothing the iterations and
furnishing steady power to the load may be added as desired.  The invention
violates the closed circuit practice of powering loads, but does not violate
the conservation of energy law, the second law of thermodynamics, or any of
the other known laws of physics.


[Figure 1a.  Type circuit utilized for ramp-up charging of a capacitor without
work, and separate discharge of the collected energy in the load without
substantial depletion of the primary source.]


[Figure 1b.  Type circuit for single pulse charging of a degenerative
semiconductor collector without appreciable work, and separate discharge of
the collected energy in the load without substantial depletion of the
primary source.]


USE OF STEP-CHARGED CAPACITOR AS THE COLLECTOR

Fulfilling our search for a special material with the extended electron gas
relaxation time for the collector, a material alloy composed of 98% aluminum
and 2% iron is tentatively suggested.  However, production of this alloy is
particularly difficult, so we are still researching for a solution that is
more easily manufactured.

Meanwhile, the necessity for using a special material for the collector has
been bypassed by another procedure we have utilized.  Rigorously one can use
a normal capacitor as the collector, if one step-charges it in several
hundred small incremental rectangular voltage steps (stair-step-charging).
The proof that this can freely charge a capacitor with energy, without having
to do appreciable work, is already known in the literature.  You can charge
the capacitor without entropy and essentially without drawing electron mass
current.[2, 3, 4, 5]

Actually we consider the capacitor to be charged by massless displacement
current flow, which for circuitry purposes we consider to be d{phi}/dl -- a
flow of pure potential (trapped EM energy) along a conductor or through the
vacuum;  i.e., under conditions where mass displacement current flow does not
exist.[6, 7]


MASSLESS DISPLACEMENT CURRENT IS FREELY AVAILABLE FROM ANY SOURCE

The principle embodied in the invention is that one can extract all the free
EM energy one wishes, from any electrical power source, as long as it is
extracted via massless displacement current and not by electron mass flow
current.[8]  And one can freely collect this extracted energy from a source
into an ordinary capacitor if one does it correctly, because one can charge
the capacitor via massless displacement current without expending any
appreciable work inside the source to dissipate its dipolar separation of
charges.


EVERY ELECTRICAL SOURCE OF POTENTIAL IS ALREADY	A FREE ENERGY SOURCE

We thus advance a revolutionary concept:  All present power systems already
utilize free energy source-antennas.  However, the standard two-wire closed
circuitry diabolically utilizes one-half the total free energy extracted by
the source-antenna from the vacuum, to perform work inside the source-antenna
to dissipate its dipolarity and hence to dissipate the source-antenna (i.e.,
the receiver) itself.

The source already acts as a "dipolar antenna" to continually receive "scalar
potential" current d{phi}/dl (massless displacement current) from the
vacuum.[9]  Previously scientists and engineers have simply ignored this
special massless EM energy influx.  For load-free (i.e., mass-current-free)
conditions, (d{phi}/dl) is continually received from the vacuum by any dipole
(i.e., by any dipolar source-as-an-antenna), and the flowing energy is
continually exchanged back and forth between the vacuum and the dipole.

This free energy exchange with the vacuum is also true of any two points in
our circuit that possess an open-circuit voltage or potential difference
between them.  Two such points act as a dipole.  Free energy dipolar antenna
sources are everywhere;  we just have to learn how to break the symmetry in
their energy flux exchange with the vacuum, collect some of the freely
flowing influx, and distribute that collected excess energy to an isolated
load to separately power it.

In other words, we simply have to implement circuitry that operates analogous
to the standard heat pump cycle.


[Figure 2.  Why present electrical power systems have underunity operational
efficiency.]


CONVENTIONAL 2-WIRE CLOSED CIRCUIT OPERATION

In the conventional 2-wire system a load is added to the source-antenna,
allowing circulation of electron current in a closed circuit through the load
and then through the ground return line back to and through the dipolar
source-antenna.  The only useful reasons for this "closed circulation" of the
electrons are (1) it is simple, easy, habitual, and accepted, (2) all our
components, instruments, and methodologies are developed in accordance with
this usage, (3) one uses the electrons as a working material fluid to
receive, transport, and discharge excess EM energy, and (4) forcing the
electrons back through the back emf reloads the spent electrons again with
excess EM energy in the form of little {del-phi}'s (excess trapped energy
density) upon each recycled electron.

Some of the excess {del-phi} collected upon the electrons is expended in the
load as useful work, but one half of the total is expended in driving the
spent (without excess {del-phi}) electrons through the ground return line
back up through the source's back emf.  This "forcing" of the electrons back
up through the back emf performs precisely as much work upon the internal
separation of charges in the source as is subsequently performed upon all the
external losses and loads.  The conventional hookup therefore utilizes
exactly one half its collected free energy to dissipate the separation of
charges inside the source and thereby dissipate the energy-receiving antenna
itself.

Consequently all conventional 2-wire circuits, which return all external
electron-flow current loops back through the source, are always underunity
devices, as is shown in Figure 2.  Eerily these conventional sources are
already free energy devices, which are unwittingly attached to circuitry
specifically designed to utilize part of their freely received energy to
deplete or destroy themselves, i.e., they are already open systems receiving
free energy from the vacuum, but they are hooked up and designed in a
suicidal manner so as to use at least half of that freely extracted energy to
re-close the system and shut off the influx of free energy.  Since at least
some of the remaining half of the energy is lost in inefficiencies,
frictional losses, etc., less than half the total free energy goes to the
load.  So there is always less useful work being done in the load than the
destructive work being done inside the free-energy source-antenna to destroy
it.


OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY

We define operational efficiency {alpha} as the average power expended in the
load to power it, divided by the average power expended inside the source to
dissipate its dipolarity.  If {alpha} < 1, one has to externally furnish
energy to do restorative work upon the source to replace or offset that
amount of destruction being done inside the source, if one wishes the source
to continue to operate as an energy-receiving antenna.  If {alpha} > 1, then
if the additional losses are minimal, the device can conceivably run itself
while furnishing some energy to a load to produce useful work.


WE MUST EXCISE THE SUICIDAL CLOSED CIRCUIT TO ACHIEVE OVERUNITY

There is no mysticism in the overunity electrical device.  The device is an
open system that extracts excess energy from the vacuum, collects it, and
transports it to the load to separately power the load.  It is simply
analogous to the standard heat pump cycle.  It is also directly analogous to
presently operating overunity systems such as windmills, waterwheels, solar
cell arrays, and hydraulic turbines in a dam installation.  All that we have
done is to eliminate or dramatically reduce the standard cancerous mistake in
conventional electrical power systems wherein much of the excess energy
freely extracted from the vacuum by the already-overunity electrical source,
is then utilized to destroy the source's energy reception ability!

As we stated, in the conventional electrical device and circuitry, more
destructive work is always done inside the source than is done usefully in
the external load.  Hence the conventional operational efficiency is always
underunity.


LEGITIMATE OVERUNITY SYSTEMS COMPLY WITH WELL-KNOWN REQUIREMENTS

There are many alternative and well-known permissible free energy systems
that operate at overunity operational efficiency:  solar cells, windmills,
hydraulic turbines, heat pumps, and water wheels, to name a few.  All of
these are open systems, receiving an influx of free energy from a natural
energy flow, and collecting and gating some of that energy to be dissipated
in a load to do useful work.  All of them are permissible overunity devices,
since (1) they are open systems, (2) they constantly receive a free energy
influx from an external source, (3) they extract and collect some of this
energy without dissipation, (4) they dissipate this collected energy in a
load, and (5) the discharge process is totally separated and isolated from
the "collection-from-the-source" process.


NO LEGITIMATE OVERUNITY SYSTEM IS INTENTIONALLY MADE SELF-DESTRUCTIVE

Not a single one of these open overunity systems foolishly uses part of its
freely extracted and collected energy to re-close the system and shut off its
influx of free energy flow!  What engineer would build a solar array such
that, the moment the current started to flow, it powered a shutter
arrangement to gradually close and shield off the solar array from the sun?
Who would build a windmill so that, whenever the angled-blade assembly
rotated in the wind to furnish power, a gearing feedback assembly also slowly
caused the individual blades to rotate into a position parallel to the wind,
thus stopping the windmill?

Yet this is precisely what the conventional electrical power system does with
its external circuit.  It deliberately utilizes half of the freely extracted
energy to re-close the system and shut off the free energy flow between the
vacuum and the source-antenna, by destroying the receiver-antenna!

However, this "suicide circuit" practice is guaranteed to keep the power
meter on your home or business, and to keep the meter on the gas pump for
fueling your automobile.  Perhaps one may be forgiven for suspecting that, at
the deepest levels of financial control, this may be the real purpose in
seeing that the existing interpretation of classical EM stays "as is."


ALL ELECTRICAL POWER SOURCES ARE ALREADY FREE ENERGY RECEIVING ANTENNAS

All conventional electrical power systems already contain fully functional
free energy systems in their source component.  Each conventionally designed
system is, however, deliberately suicidal, since part of the system's own
energy is utilized to work against itself and destroy itself.  This is
primarily due to the preoccupation of engineers with power and work.  They do
not consider the source as an energy source, but as a power source.  Power
being the time-rate of performing work, and work being the dissipation of
energy, they are thus naturally conditioned to think of the "dissipation of
the source" as its natural functioning.

In fact, hardly a single one of them is aware that EM energy itself is a
free-flowing process.  Only a finite collector possesses a finite collection
of EM energy.  In nature, the potential gradients of all dipoles are already
rivers of free-flowing EM energy exchange with those dipoles, where the
energy density is freely furnished and is essentially free for the taking.
It is mind-boggling that we have all been conditioned to extract this free
energy furnished by nature and the creator, but to always utilize half of the
extracted energy to destroy the receiver-antenna and thus strangle the flow!

In our work, we simply have excised this "self-destructive" cancer and
reworked the circuitry so that only a minimal amount of the freely extracted
energy is utilized for internal destruction of the source-antenna.


THERMODYNAMICS AND OPEN OVERUNITY SYSTEMS NOT IN EQUILIBRIUM

In our approach we have an open system during every collection cycle, with an
external source of energy and a continual energy influx.  We have
deliberately broken the local symmetry of the system's energy exchange with
the vacuum, by spatially and temporally separating the energy collection and
energy discharge phases.  Overunity operational efficiency is permissible for
such a system without violation of any of the laws of nature.  Some of the
influx of excess energy from the vacuum into the dipolar source antenna is
transported without loss to the collector and collected.  The collected
energy in the collector is then separately discharged through the load,
without any of it being discharged back inside the source-antenna.  Note that
we have broken local energy flow equilibrium but not global energy flow
equilibrium.

The second law of thermodynamics, e.g., does not even apply to such an open
system not in equilibrium.  Classical thermodynamics cannot even compute the
entropy of an open system not in thermodynamic equilibrium, as is well-known
to thermodynamicists.[10]

What classical thermodynamics does have to say, is that such an open system
must contain excess energy when compared to the closed system in equilibrium,
because the closed system in equilibrium is in the maximum entropy
condition.[11]  Global conservation of energy is not violated, just as it is
not violated in a windmill or in a heat pump, which are similar open systems.
Local conservation of energy (which applies only to a closed system or to a
system in total equilibrium) does not apply because the system is open and
not in equilibrium.


PERMISSIBLE ELECTRICAL OVERUNITY IS NOT PERPETUAL MOTION

An open system out of equilibrium need not conform to (1) the local (closed
system, equilibrium conditions) conservation of energy nor to (2) the second
law of thermodynamics (which assumes equilibrium conditions).  It must and
does conform to the global conservation of energy, just as does a waterwheel
or windmill.  We strongly stress that the overunity electrical device is not
a "perpetuum mobile."[12]  The electrical operations and systems we propose
are perfectly permissible by the known laws of physics and do not violate any
of them.  We propose a permissible series of overunity electrical systems.


THE HEAT PUMP ANALOGY

In one way of viewing it, all we have done is utilize the potential as a more
modern type of quantum mechanical fluid having hidden bidirectional flowing
EM energy.[13-16]  QM already certifies that the potentials, not the force
fields, are the primary causes of all EM phenomena.  Contrary to classical EM
theory, the force fields are effects in, on, and of the charged particles
themselves.  Consequently, if the potentials are the primary causes of all EM
phenomena, then for free energy to perform work (free causes to collect and
generate desired effects) we must turn to the potentials.

We have utilized a hookup and switching arrangement so that energy-free
collection is totally separated from collected energy discharge in the load.
In short, we have done what a normal heat pump does, when it uses the air
with its thermal energy as a working energy-containing fluid.  Consequently,
overunity operational efficiency of analogous electrical devices is perfectly
permissible, and not prohibited by the known laws of physics.


AN ELECTRICAL POWER SOURCE IS A DIPOLAR ANTENNA FOR FREE RECEPTION OF ENERGY

An electrical power source is in fact only a dipolar antenna for reception of
potential (hidden bidirectional Whittaker/Ziolkowski waves).  All the current
you run back through the back emf of the source, to perform dissipative work
inside it, is something you yourself are doing to the source.  It is not a
priori a characteristic of the source!

If no work is done inside the source's internal bipolar separation of charges
(i.e., if no electron or ion current is forced back up from the ground return
line against the source-antenna's potential and therefore against its back
emf), then the dipolar source-antenna will last essentially forever, or until
something corrodes or breaks mechanically.

The flow exchange of energy between the vacuum and the dipolar source-antenna
is freely driven by all the charges of the universe, in accordance with
Puthoff's cosmological feedback loop.[17]


MASSLESS DISPLACEMENT CURRENT

Technically one is using massless displacement current to charge the
capacitor, rather than electron mass flow current.  It is real energy flow
nonetheless;  just in work-free, dissipation-free form.  As is well-known,
one plate of a capacitor already charges the other plate by just this very
massless displacement current, transporting real EM energy across the gap
between the plates in the process.  The electrons themselves do not cross the
gap.

Displacement current is already well-known to be "free" energy transport
without any dissipation as power and work.  By drawing massless displacement
current only from the source-antenna instead of electron flow current, you
can draw work-free, dissipation-free energy as long as you wish, as often as
you wish, and as much as you wish, without ever dissipating the source-
antenna.  You just have to collect it onto some trapped electrons or other
charges, such as in a capacitor's plates, then switch the collected energy
(charged capacitor) separately across a load, in a separate discharge
circuit, to discharge through the load as work.

The real trick is to prevent the electrons in the circuit from moving and
providing mass "energy dissipation" current inside the source during the
collection process.  In the original paper, we explained that this could be
done by using as a collector a degenerate semiconductor material, with
extended electron gas relaxation time.  In this paper we have explained how
this can be done by step-charging an ordinary capacitor as a collector.  We
have also included specific references proving (both experimentally and
theoretically) that this is correct.  With the requirement for special
materials removed, there is no reason that a competent researcher cannot
develop a step-charged capacitor device to prove it experimentally for
himself or herself.


REQUIREMENT:  PROOF OF PRINCIPLE AND INDEPENDENT TEST AND CERTIFICATION

My associates and I are proceeding as rapidly as possible toward full-up
"proof-of-principle" circuits for open release and certification or
falsification by the scientific community and engineers at large.  Soon we
also expect to release to other researchers information on the kinds of new
electrical phenomenology one meets in true overunity electrical devices.
These are not in the textbook, at least with respect to electrical power
systems.  We give some indication of these phenomena below:


NEW CIRCUIT PHENOMENA MUST BE MASTERED

One meets unusual electrical phenomena in attempting to perform overunity
electrical operations.  For overunity, a priori one must "slip excess
potential" through the circuit essentially without losses.  That is, one must
deliberately pass massless displacement currents through the circuit and at
least through some of its components.

Solid-state switching components in particular exhibit unusual phenomena, to
say the least, when excess potential is introduced into and through all their
internal components inside modern semiconductors.  An ordinary MOSFET, e.g.,
may have 25,000 separate internal components.  It is as if someone crammed
the entire electronic parts store inside it.  Simple switches these
semiconductors are not, when exposed to appreciable massless displacement
current.

When one "slips in" some pure potential, by SWZ decomposition one has also
slipped in some bidirectional EM pump waves.  The nonlinear semiconductor
materials will function as phase conjugate mirrors when suitably pumped,
including at non-optical frequencies.  Consequently pumped phase conjugate
replicas, self-targeting, formation of quantum potentials, and modular
variable effects sometimes begin to evidence.  We will address and explain
some of these effects in a future paper.  For now, we simply state that they
occur, and there is a host of extra phenomenology the experimenter may
encounter.

However, an iron rule for the experimenter is that, for odd circuit behavior,
first exhaust all "normal" causes before turning to the extraordinary causes.
One will save oneself a great deal of grief by applying this Occam's razor.

Also in deliberately utilizing displacement current, one is actually
employing an expanded, higher topology EM with additional degrees of freedom,
similar to that pointed out by Barrett.[18]  Consequently one encounters a
host of additional higher topology EM phenomenology.  In particular one
encounters nonlinear optical (NLO) functioning of the semiconductors at any
and all frequencies, not just in optical bands.


OVERUNITY ELECTRICAL DEVICES ARE PERMISSIBLE BY THE LAWS OF PHYSICS 

The overunity electrical energy system is permissible by the laws of physics
and is not in any manner perpetual motion.  It simply extracts excess EM
energy from an ubiquitous source, through a dipole as a receiver, and
collects that excess energy, conducts it to the load, and separately
dissipates it in the load to power the load, without using any of the
collected energy to perform work inside the source to dissipate the source-
antenna.  It is directly analogous to a heat pump, which is well-known to
perform at overunity operational efficiency under nominal conditions.


IN CONCLUSION

Primarily my associates and I believe we have corrected an ubiquitous error
made in present power systems that prevents these systems from realizing
their already-inherent overunity operational efficiency.  We also firmly
believe that the permissible electrical overunity device is an idea whose
time has finally come.


NOTES AND REFERENCES

[1]  T. E. Bearden, "The Final Secret of Free Energy," distributed over the
Internet (1993).  The paper was also published in _Magnets_, 7(5), pp. 4-26
(1993);  in _Explore!_, 4 (3/4), pp. 112-126 (1993), and in several other
media.

[2]  For proof that you can charge an ordinary capacitor almost without
entropy, see I. Fundaun, C. Reese, and H. H. Soonpaa, "Charging a Capacitor,"
_American Journal of Physics_, 60(11), pp. 1047-1048 (1992).  A capacitor can
be step-charged in small steps to dramatically reduce the entropy required to
charge it.  In the limit, a theoretically perfect capacitor can be fully
charged without any electrical current or work at all, i.e., you can simply
transport the excess energy density (the potential gradient) of the open
circuit voltage of the source to the collector, and couple that {del-phi} to
the electrons trapped in the capacitor plates, without electric current from
or through the source.

[3]  M. G. Calkin and D. Kiang, "Entropy Change and Reversibility," _American
Journal of Physics_, 51(1), pp. 78-79 (1983).

[4]  F. Heinrich, "Entropy Change When Charging a Capacitor:  A Demonstration
Experiment," _American Journal of Physics_, 54(8), pp. 742-744 (1986).

[5]  V. K. Gupta, Gauri Shanker, and N.K. Sharma, "Reversibility and Step
Processes:  An Experiment for the Undergraduate Laboratory," _American
Journal of Physics_, 52(10), pp. 945-947 (1984).

[6]  In most texts the treatment of displacement current is far from
adequate.  A better treatment than most is given by John D. Krauss,
_Electromagnetics_, Fourth Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 437-439,
547-549 (1992).  Additional useful insight can be gained from David J.
Griffiths, _Introduction To Electrodynamics_, Second Edition, Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, pp. 304-308 (1989).  Problem 7.51 on p. 335 is
also of direct interest, as is particularly the comment by Griffiths below
the problem.  Additional insight can be gained from David Halliday and Robert
Resnick, with assistance by John Merrill, _Fundamentals of Physics_, Extended
Third Edition (1988), John Wiley & Sons, New York, vol. 2, Article 37-4:
"Displacement Current," pp. 836-837, 839-841.  The standard notion is to (1)
retain the continuity of current, thus modifying and salvaging Ampere's law,
(2) the displacement current is nonphysical, i.e., it does not involve the
transfer of charged mass, (3) focus primarily upon magnetostatics as to the
results achievable by the displacement current, (4) retain the notion of
{del-phi} as E, a force field, thereby focusing the notion of displacement
current upon the change of the E field without the flow of charged mass, and
(5) retain the confusion between electrical charge and charged mass that is
inherent in the terms "charge", "current,", etc.  On p. 836 Halliday and
Resnick point out that the displacement current is not derived per se, but is
a "fit" based upon symmetry arguments, and it must stand or fall simply on
whether or not its predictions agree with experiment.  On the same page the
displacement current is taken to be a linear function of d{phi}/dt.  For flow
along a circuit where there is no electron mass current, it seems appropriate
to replace d{phi}/dt by d{phi}/dl.  It is also strongly indicated that one
should clearly distinguish between charged mass current flow and the flow of
massless charge, which is the approach we have taken.

A final indication of the way conventional scientists tend to regard
displacement current is given by Martin A. Plonus, _Applied
Electromagnetics_, McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 446-448 (1978).  Here Plonus
uses the prevailing notion of the E field being altered by the flow of
massless displacement current.  As can be seen, the displacement current is
relegated almost to a curiosity of capacitors, and not really too essential
except just to "balance the books" and retain Ampere's current continuity.

We now wish to point out something very subtle but very rigorous.  CEM
erroneously uses E = -{del-phi} to equate a mass-free potential gradient with
a mass-containing force field.  This "E-field" only exists at a point when
there is a point-coulomb of electrical charged mass at the point.  The real
version of this equation should be E = [-{del-phi}dot{q}/|q|, where {del-phi}
is the potential gradient coupled directly to the charged point-mass at the
point, q is the number of coulombs of charged mass at the point, q/|q| is one
coulomb of charged mass, and E now is properly the force on and of each
coulomb of the collected charged mass at the point.

Viewed in this manner, one can now see that the E field may be altered by
flow of additional charged mass q, or by flow of massless additional
{del-phi}, or both.  This is now in agreement with the manner in which it is
approached in CEM, but more rigorous.  Essentially it states we may increase
the total "charge" (potential) at a point by either (1) moving in additional
charged masses by use of a conventional current, or (2) moving in additional
massless charge (potential) without any additional change in mass, or (3) a
combination of the above.

However, let us apply this to a single charged particle or to a fixed number
of them.  No one seems to have noticed that the notion of altering the
E-field of the collected point-charges at a point via method #2 , i.e. by a
flow of massless displacement current onto the fundamental charged particles
themselves, a priori requires the electrical charge of each fundamental
particle to change.  Hence it falsifies the notion of quantization of charge.

Also, no one seems to have noticed the electric power implications:  If it is
known that one can charge a capacitor purely by displacement current, then
one can charge up the capacitor with energy, without any dissipation of the
source, because only charged mass current through the back emf of the source
does that.  So one can then disconnect the charged capacitor and separately
connect it in a closed circuit with a load, to discharge through the load and
furnish free work in the load (free in the sense than no dissipation of the
primary source occurred in either the collection of the energy or in
discharge of the collected energy through the load as useful work).  Free
energy, overunity electrical devices, etc. should then be readily apparent
and permissible, from the known nature of displacement current and capacitors
alone.

[7]  Maxwell assumed a material ether, which was assumed to be a thin
material fluid filling all space.  Hence force (which must have mass as a
component due to its definition F = d(mv)/dt ) could be modeled as existing in
the Maxwellian ether, for there was already thin matter present everywhere.
Hence in Maxwell's EM the incorrect notion resulted that force fields existed
in the vacuum.  Oliver Heaviside continued this erroneous assumption, since
in fact he hated the potentials, regarded them as mystical, and stated that
they should be "...murdered from the theory."  Also, electricity was thought
to be a similar thin material fluid.  So the material electric fluid could
and did flow through the fluid vacuum also, giving the notion of the material
electric flux density for D.  Consequently, the units of D are coulombs
(charged mass rate of flow) per square meter.  Rigorously, that material D
flux exists only on and of charged mass that moves;  it cannot and does not
exist in vacuum.  Only potentials and potential gradients exist in vacuum.
However, after Maxwell's formation of his theory, the Michelson-Morley
experiment destroyed the material ether (not the ether per se, but its
material nature).  So electricians then simply proclaimed that they were no
longer using the material ether, and that such did not exist!  Not a single
Maxwell/Heaviside equation was changed.  The material ether is still very
much assumed in classical EM (CEM) theory, and so the theory is accordingly
very seriously flawed.  Since CEM also has no adequate definition for either
electric charge or the scalar potential, the problem is confounded.

To clarify this problem, one must separate the notion of electric charge from
the notion of mass.  The electrical charge of a charged mass is the virtual
photon flux exchange between the surrounding vacuum and that mass.  Since a
virtual photon flux is just a scalar potential, the electron's massless
electrical charge is simply its scalar potential.  It can now be seen that,
if we forcibly remove the notion of "mass" from D in the vacuum, or in a
charged material medium where the charged masses cannot move, then the
"material electric flux concept" portion of D turns into d{phi}/dt, a change
in the nonmaterial electric flux.  However, D is a vector and hence has a
"net flux" spatial directional aspect which d{phi}/dt alone does not possess.
It follows that the value of d{phi}/dt at a spatial point actually represents
the result of change of the value of {phi} at that point, as a function of
time.  Thus a directional operator must first be invoked upon {phi} at the
point, to provide a direction for the spatial {phi}-current after the d/dt
operator is invoked.  The appropriate operator to give directionality to
{phi} is {del}, so that D in vacuum or in an electron-current-free charged
medium becomes a function of d/dt (-{del-phi}).  Conventionally, the use in
the literature of E = -{del-phi} immediately provides that d/dt (-{del-phi})
at a point results in dE/dt, or the time rate of change of the E-field at
that point.  If no distinction is made between charged mass current flow and
massless charge current flow, this would be true in either vacuum or material
media.  However, we wish to specifically distinguish between massive
displacement current and massless displacement current.  So we point out that
the increase dE/dt in the magnitude of the E-field at, on, and of a charged
particle at a point, can be due to either (1) the flow of mass current to
build up the number of point coulombs at that given point, where each coulomb
has a fixed massless charge (potential), or (2) the flow of massless current
d/dt (-{del-phi}) so as to alter the value of {phi} at that point, evidenced
by a fixed number of coulombs of charged particles, each of which has altered
its individual potential and therefore its individual massless electrical
charge.

So what "flows" when the charged masses are frozen or absent is simply a
current of scalar potential, resulting in a change of the potential upon
fixed point charges of d{phi}/dt.  This is what crosses between the plates of
a capacitor, e.g., which is where the notion of "displacement current"
originated in the first place.  (See, e.g., Halliday and Resnick, 1988,
ibid., p. 836, Sample Problem 1, for expression of the displacement current
as d{phi}/dt, neglecting constants of proportionality).  This is also what
flows when one connects multiple open circuit pairs of conductors to a source.

It remains to examine Maxwell's equation {del} dot {D} = {rho sub v}.  If
mass displacement current cannot flow, then there exists no divergence of the
mass current portion of D.  However, massless displacement current can still
flow, and there can exist divergence of that component.  There are now three
aspects to that equation:  (1) the case in the vacuum, where there exists no
physical {rho} and hence no {rho sub v} as such because of the absence of
mass, (2) the case in a material medium, which is the normal case already
treated in the standard equation and need not be further addressed, and (3)
the case in a material medium where, nonetheless, physical charged masses
such as electrons cannot move, but massless charge currents may still move.
Only cases 1 and 3 need to be addressed, and they have the same treatment.

We address the one dimensional case, which is sufficient for circuit current
flow considerations.  First we replace D with ({D sub phi} + {D sub rho}),
where the first term is the massless displacement current and the second term
is the massive displacement current.  In other words, we account separately
for charged mass flow and for massless charge flow.  Similarly, we express
{rho sub v} as two components, one massive and one massless, so that
{rho sub v} = d/dl({phi} + {m sub v}).  For case 1 and case 3 we make
{m sub v} = 0 and {D sub rho} = 0.  For those cases, we have {del} dot {D} =
{del} dot {D sub phi} = d{phi}/dl (since current along a wire is a one-
dimensional flow.).  We specifically note that {phi}, {D sub phi}, D,
{del} dot {D sub phi} and d{phi}/dl are not necessarily conserved quantities,
since {phi} is mathematically decomposed into bidirectional EM waves, and is
hence a freely flowing process.  When symmetry is broken so that equilibrium
conditions no longer exist, one or more of these quantities will not be
locally conserved.

What has actually been done here is to open the classical EM model to the
free exchange of massless EM energy that is always ongoing between any
charged particle's mass and the vacuum.  We then account separately for the
flow of the energy exchange (of the massless charge flow) and the flow of the
physical receiver/transmitters (i.e., for charged mass flow).  Our switching
arrangement to separate the collection and discharge cycles constitutes a
permissible "Maxwell's Demon" which breaks symmetry, hence breaks equilibrium
and opens the system as required.  Since such a system can continually
receive a free influx of energy from its external source, such a system can
permissibly exhibit overunity operational efficiency without violating the
laws of physics.

[8]  Displacement current is already known to be lossless transport of energy
without entropy, i.e., without work.  For a typical confirmation see Jed Z.
Buchwald, _From Maxwell to Microphysics_, University of Chicago Press,
Chicago and London, p. 44 (1985).  Quoting:  "...no energy transformation
into heat occurs for displacement currents."

[9]  We strongly stress again that the scalar potential may be mathematically
decomposed into a harmonic series of hidden bidirectional EM wave pairs.
Each wave pair consists of an ordinary EM wave together with its superposed
phase conjugate replica wave.  Thus internally the scalar potential gradient
across a source represents a bidirectional exchange of EM wave energy with
the surrounding vacuum.  See notes 13, 14, 15, and 16 below for references
confirming the decomposition of the "fixed" potential into a dynamic flow
process and energy exchange process.

[10]  For confirmation see Robert Bruce Lindsay and Henry Margenau,
_Foundations of Physics_, Dover Publications, New York, pp. 283-287 (1963).
See particularly p. 283, which emphasizes that a "field of force" at any
point is actually defined only for the case when a unit mass is present at
that point.  See p. 17 on the limitations of a "natural law";  p. 213 and 215
for limitation of thermodynamic analysis to equilibrium states;  and see
p. 216 for definition of entropy.  See p. 217 for the fact that the entropy
for non-equilibrium conditions cannot be computed, and the entropy of a
system not in equilibrium must be less than the entropy of the system in
equilibrium, i.e., for a system to depart from equilibrium conditions, its
entropy must decrease.  Therefore its energy must increase.  Thus the energy
of an open system not in equilibrium must always be greater than the energy
of the same system when it is closed and in equilibrium, since the
equilibrium state is the state of maximum entropy.

[11]  Lindsay and Margenau, ibid., p. 217.

[12]  The basic notion in the perpetual motion conundrum is that somehow a
closed system in thermodynamic equilibrium could perpetually provide external
energy to a load outside the system.  Such a notion is an oxymoron;  if the
system is closed, no energy can escape or enter, hence the system could not
furnish energy externally to power a load or even just to radiate away.  My
associates and I have not in any manner proposed such a system or entertained
the notion that such might exist.  But it is well-known that open systems not
in thermodynamic equilibrium can freely extract energy from their environment
and furnish energy to power a load, and that is precisely what we have
proposed.

[13]  G. J. Stoney, "XLVIII.  On a Supposed Proof of a Theorem in
Wave-motion, To the Editors of the Philosophical Magazine,"  _Philosophical
Magazine_, 5(43), pp. 368-373 (1897).

[14]  E. T. Whittaker, "On the Partial Differential Equations of Mathematical
Physics," _Mathematische Annalen_, vol. 57, pp. 333-355 (1903).  Whittaker
mathematically decomposes the scalar potential into a bidirectional series of
EM wave pairs in a harmonic sequence.  Each wave pair consists of the wave
and its phase conjugate.  (We have pointed out elsewhere that such a wave
pair is a standing electrogravitational wave and a standing wave in the
curvature of local space-time).  To see that all classical EM can be replaced
by interference of two such scalar potentials (i.e., by the interference of
their hidden multi-wave sets), see E. T. Whittaker, "On an Expression of the
Electromagnetic Field Due to Electrons by Means of Two Scalar Potential
Functions," _Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society_, Series 2,
vol. 1, pp. 367-372 (1904).

[15]  Richard W. Ziolkowski, "Localized Transmission of Electromagnetic
Energy," _Physical Review A_, 39, p. 2005 (1989).  For related material, see
Richard W. Ziolkowski, "Exact Solutions of the Wave Equation With Complex
Source Locations," _Journal of Mathematical Physics_, 26, pp. 861-863 (1985).
See also Michael K. Tippett and Richard Ziolkowski, "A Bidirectional Wave
Transformation of the Cold Plasma Equations," _Journal of Mathematical
Physics_, 32(2), pp. 488-492 (1991).

[16]  C. W. Hsue, "A DC Voltage is Equivalent to Two Traveling Waves on a
Lossless, Nonuniform Transmission Line," _IEEE Microwave and Guided Wave
Letters_, 3, pp. 82-84 (1993).

[17]  H. E. Puthoff, "Source of Vacuum Electromagnetic Zero-point Energy,"
_Physical Review A_, 40(9), pp. 4857-4862 (1989).  Presents Puthoff's self-
regenerating cosmological feedback cycle for the source of the vacuum EM
zero-point energy.

Our comment:  Over any macroscopic range, the vacuum fluctuations
({del-phi}'s) of the ZPE sum to a vector zero translational resultant.  The
individual ZPE components ({del-phi}'s), however, are still present and
active, and their energies are present as well.  That vector zero can thus be
considered to be a gradient-free potential, or the vacuum potential, since it
contains enormously dense, trapped EM energy.  So the vacuum potential --
pure space-time (ST) itself -- contains enormously dense EM energy.

One can then apply the Stoney/Whittaker/Ziolkowski (SWZ) methodology to
decompose this powerful vacuum potential, i.e., the vacuum, and in fact
space-time (ST) itself, into an incredibly dense flux of EM energy.  Space-
time is revealed to be an incredibly powerful electrostatic scalar potential.
The electrical charge (potential) of a charged particle is a small potential
gradient in the ST potential, i.e., it is a slight alteration of the local ST
potential.  Via Puthoff's self-regenerative feedback cycle, the energy
flowing in this potential is being exchanged between the local source and all
the charges everywhere in the universe.  This "potential gradient" or
electrical charge itself can be decomposed via the SWZ approach, and becomes
a bidirectional EM wave pair exchange of excess EM energy between the
vacuum/ST and the charged particle's mass.  The potential gradient between
the ends of a dipole have similar decompositions, with the additional
characteristic that the negatively charged end of the dipole receives the
forward-time waves from the SWZ wave pairs, and the positively charged end
receives the time-reversed waves.

Our final comment is that Cole and Puthoff have rigorously shown that, in
theory, the vacuum EM energy can indeed be extracted.  See Daniel C. Cole,
and Harold E. Puthoff, "Extracting Energy and Heat from the Vacuum,"
_Physical Review E_, 48(2), pp. 1562-1565 (1993).

[18]  T. W. Barrett, "Tesla's Nonlinear Oscillator-Shuttle-Circuit (OSC)
Theory," _Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie_, 16(1), pp. 23-41 (1991).
Barrett shows that a higher topology EM model (e.g., EM expressed in
quaternions) allows shuttling and storage of potentials in circuits, and also
allows additional EM functioning of a circuit that a conventional EM analysis
cannot reveal.  As an example, one may meet optical functioning without the
presence of optical materials.

*******************End of Paper********************


-- 

If you are an INFJ, then join the INFJ mailing list - ask me for more details.
If you don't know what INFJ means, ask me, and I'll send more info (46Kb file).
=============================================================================
| Jon Noring          | noring@netcom.com        | "Fanny Hill" and other   |
| JKN International   | IP    : 192.100.81.100   | famous literary works in |
| 1312 Carlton Place  | Phone : (510) 294-8153   | Windows 3.1 Help format  |
| Livermore, CA 94550 | V-Mail: (510) 417-4101   | are available!  Ask me!  |
=============================================================================
       Read alt.psychology.personality!  That's where the action is.
       Did you know there's a mailing list for 78 RPM record collectors?