You are here: PureEnergySystems.com
> News > March 7,
Bearden writes to New Scientist about fundamental flaws in EE model
Tom Bearden urges the scientific community to reexamine their core
electrical models to account for asymmetric systems that physics acknowledges,
thus providing explanation and support for the many inventors discovering
overunity electromagnetic effects.
Pure Energy Systems News
Copyright © 2010
"Electrical Engineering was put together before modern
physics came along. It would be nice if they would overhaul
electrical engineering based on modern physics." -- Tom
The other day, I had the privilege of hooking up a conference call between the
legendary Tom Bearden and Tim Wheeler of
Technologies, a company with a technology that has some very very unusual electrical characteristics. Wheeler had listened to one of Bearden's
from the Vacuum DVD presentations, and was astonished at how much sense it made to him in explaining what is going on in his motors.
As I listened in to their conversation, I wished I had a tape recorder going to log what Bearden was saying, as it seemed to make so much sense and seemed of huge significance in explaining the new science that so many inventors are delving into with their claims of getting more electricity out of a system than what they put into it.
I don't grasp the concepts well enough to be able to distill them or regurgitate them, but they did resonate with me as very important as I listened to him explain them to Wheeler.
Since then, I see that Bearden's recent correspondence to the
New Scientist, which is posted on his website, contains these same principles that he was expounding to Wheeler the other day.
Near the end of his correspondence, he concludes:
So I would strongly challenge and urge New Scientist that what is
urgently needed is the following:
(1) Realization that the world energy crisis is directly due to the terrible
deficiencies in the standard EE model.
(2) Therefore, the SOLUTION is a PHYSICS problem, requiring the use of much
better and more complete electrodynamics (such as quaternion electrodynamics,
very close to Maxwell's original theory), and requiring the development and
usage of ASYMMETRIC Maxwellian/Tesla power systems.
(3) If we wish to be honest and scientific, then we MUST CHANGE that horribly
mutilated and crippled old Heaviside-Lorentz EE model, and recover those Tesla
ASYMMETRIC systems that were casually eliminated by eliciting Lorentz to do the
(4) Revise all electrical engineering texts, labs, and practices to incorporate
the new higher group symmetry EM model to be used.
(5) Get some bright new youngsters and grad students trained and graduated with
Doctorates in a NEW and MODERN electrical engineering that incorporates both (1)
SYMMETRIC old standard self-destructive electrical power systems and (2)
ASYMMETRIC new Maxwellian power systems that then can and will rapidly be built.
I would suggest that any of you who are playing with overunity electromagnetic and magnet motor technologies pay close attention to what Bearden explains in that letter. It's not that long, and could greatly help you in appreciating why you are achieving what you are achieving in your devices. And with that understanding, hopefully you will be able to improve the output and refine your designs to work even better than they do now.
Though Bearden has a pretty good grasp of this science, in our conversation the
other day, he suggested that what is needed to really understand this would be
the establishment of some kind of academic interdisciplinary collaboration
involving specialists from Quantum Mechanics, Quantum Electrodynamics, Quantum
Field Theory, Group Theory, Gauge Field Theory, and a couple of other
fields. Then we would have a solid scientific model that describes this
new science, why it works, and how best to optimize it.
In a phone conversation with me just now, he said:
"Electrical Engineering was put together before modern physics came
along. It would be nice if they would overhaul electrical engineering
based on modern physics."
While I'm mentioning TWM Technologies, I should also note that the key inventor in that group is allegedly a nephew of Nikola Tesla, so that is a technology that would be good to keep an eye on, and help out with if you are so inclined.
There are a lot of other groups also getting great results, listed in the "Best Exotic Free Energy
Technologies" page at PESWiki.
# # #
- Feel free to leave your comments down below.
On March 07, 2010 8:57 PM, Tom Bearden wrote:
It's very nice of you to put that information on your website, and particularly to call attention to some of the more comprehensive physics that came along well after the formation and "freezing" of the standard old electrical engineering model (i.e., of the Heaviside-Lorentz symmetrized model) way back in 1892.
In addition to the specialty areas I mentioned, there are several other specialty regions or "branches" of modern physics that do (or can) get involved: Typical of these other branches are (1) string theory, (2) quantum chromodynamics, (3) Hawking radiation theory, (4) particle physics per se, etc.
As an example, there is a newly emerging area of physics that is or will be extremely important, and that is being called "teleportation of energy" etc. As a result of quantum entanglement and other effects, this teleportation of energy arises as a result of certain novel quantum effects. The exact "entanglement pattern" at one point can be instantly transferred or reproduced at another distant point. In this process, energy itself can be "teleported", as it were, from one point at one location directly to another point at a very distant location, and this has now been rigorously proven experimentally on the lab bench.
As an aside, this new teleportation work is slowly validating the very novel work and long-suppressed invention of William "Bill" Fogal, who invented a new kind of semiconductor using such effects in a very practical manner. In short, Fogal demonstrated the direct (and instant) simultaneous communication between a given point in the lab (in the semiconductor) and other very distant points in the universe. One way to think of his patented semiconductor's operation is to visualize "multiply-connected space", where two or more widely separated (in normal space) points actually are superposed, so to speak, directly upon one another without any distance in between. In this way, one has "instant communication" of energy (information) between widely separated points, without the information having to travel through the "normal" intervening space. It simply enters one of the superposed points "here", and instantly emerges from the distant superposed points "there".
Note also that, in simple terms, if such "teleportation of energy" from multiple distant points is linked to a laboratory point inside the input section of an energy device, that device can now produce more energy output than what the operator himself inputs and pays for. That's because the unit is freely receiving EXTRA energy inputs from its "teleportation environment". Fogal demonstrated such effects many times and in several laboratories, to no avail. He and his invention have been ruthlessly suppressed for something like two decades now, and he has been totally unable to get his semiconductor into production and onto the world market.
Also, it has now been rigorously proven that real physical systems can be built which do indeed extract excess usable EM energy directly from the seething virtual state vacuum, and
this has been validated by two of our great national laboratories: (1) Los Alamos National Laboratory and (2) the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Klimov et al. simply made extraordinarily tiny solar cells from nanocrystalline material. The Klimov microscopic solar cell, when struck by a photon, first emits an electron (like any other solar cell), but -- due to the cell's extreme smallness -- the emitted electron immediately dives into the seething virtual state and takes on lots of excess energy, then breaks out of the virtual state and back to the observable state with its freely-acquired very high excess excitation energy. The super-excited emitted electron then splits into from two to seven electrons, so that the overall COP = 2.0 to 7.0. Klimov uses percentage instead of decimals, so it produces COP = 200% to 700%.
This is now rigorously validated independently by those two great national laboratories, and it is
published and approved in leading physics journals and leading nanocrystalline journals. With independent replication, rigorously, the scientific method has now firmly established COP>1.0 systems as absolutely being possible and rigorously demonstrated.
Physics also recognizes mass as just a special form of energy, so it is conceivable (and physicists are experimenting with it right now, to try to get it working also) that one may be able to instantly "transmit" (i.e., teleport) a solid particle from one point to another very distant point, with "no travel in between". The cautious physicists are still using the quantum entanglement approach to explain such effects, hence they do not say that the actual energy is "instantly jumped from one point to a very distant point". Instead, they speak of a "directly corresponding energy entity" (as, e.g., an electron in question) to arise at the distant point essentially due to quantum entanglement forming the "new" and identical electron at the distant point.
So as this "teleportation" area continues to develop and expand, then quantum entanglement is likely to emerge as a separate and much more inclusive phenomenology and physics area. Until then, we are probably just stuck with the name "teleportation via quantum entanglement", or some such. But indeed the basic teleportation itself has now been rigorously produced and demonstrated in the lab, published in the hard physics literature, and accepted by the physics community.
Summing up the above: Since independent overunity inventors have been unwittingly tapping into excess energy inputs from the virtual state vacuum environment, by a whole entourage of presently unrecognized principles and methods, then to have (1) a set of valid models describing this overunity phenomenology, and (2) to have these models fitted to numerous laboratory experiments, one needs a team of at least 8 to 10 "specialist mathematics physicists", an exceptional physics laboratory and team to do the experiments for theoretical fitting and model adjustments, a proper administrative staff and facilities, and continuing contact with a variety of painfully successful experimenters. Only when we have a viable set of fitted models of such nature -- that allow direct design and building "from scratch" from first principles -- will we have achieved a viable and
usable free energy system technology.
Sadly, that describes something like a $150 million program and three to five years of very hard work.
Hopefully in the future very large organizations and several nations will finally recognize the problem, the proof that such systems are real and possible, and then fund such comprehensive projects. Only then will we finally have viable, economical, and easily achievable overunity power systems, solving the world energy crisis permanently and cleanly.
Also, something not commonly known at all to engineers is the fact that the conservation of energy and conservation of momentum laws can easily and readily be
violated. Those laws ASSUME a single fixed frame -- in short, a special relativistic situation, which normal electrical engineering also always assumes and requires. But if one deliberately and properly invokes a GENERAL relativity situation in the input section of an EM system, so that a mix of frames are rotating and properly synchronized therein, then the input section itself can output more energy to the system than the operator inputs in his single fixed lab frame.
To see a discussion of the permissible violation of conservation of energy and conservation of momentum, and of some of the real complexities of modern physics, here are examples:
The fact that general relativity easily violates conservation of energy and momentum was very quickly seen by leading scientists such as the great mathematician Hilbert. Quoting:
"I assert... that for the general theory of relativity, i.e., in the case of general invariance of the Hamiltonian function, energy equations... corresponding to the energy equations in orthogonally invariant theories do not exist at all. I could even take this circumstance as the characteristic feature of the general theory of relativity." [D. Hilbert,
Gottingen Nachrichten, Vol. 4, 1917, p. 21.].
Logunov and Loskutov. Quoting later discussion of the same thing:
"In formulating the equivalence principle, Einstein actually abandoned the idea of the gravitational field as a Faraday-Maxwell field, and this is reflected in the pseudotensorial characterization of the gravitational field that he introduced. Hilbert was the first to draw attention to the consequences of this.
Hilbert was evidently not understood by his contemporaries, since neither Einstein himself nor other physicists recognized the fact that in general relativity conservation laws for energy, momentum, and angular momentum are in principle impossible." [A. A. Logunov and Yu. M. Loskutov, "Nonuniqueness of the predictions of the general theory of relativity,"
Sov. J. Part. Nucl., 18(3), May-June 1987, p. 179].
Quoting the eminent scientist Sir Roger Penrose:
We seem to have lost those most crucial conservation laws of physics, the laws of conservation of energy and momentum! [Penrose then adds the Killing symmetry arbitrarily, to get conservation again, when the Killing vector applies and gravity is separated.]. These conservation laws hold only in a spacetime for which there is the appropriate symmetry, given by the Killing vector ĸ
. [These considerations] do not really help us in understanding what the fate of the conservation laws will be when gravity itself becomes an active player. We still have not regained our missing conservation laws of energy and momentum, when gravity enters the picture. ... This awkward-seeming fact has, since the early days of general relativity, evoked some of the strongest objections to that theory, and reasons for unease with it, as expressed by numerous physicists over the years.
in fact Einsteins theory takes account of energy-momentum conservation in a rather sophisticated way at least in those circumstances where such a conservation law is most needed.
Whatever energy there is in the gravitational field itself is to be excluded from having any representation
The Road to Reality, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 2005, p. 457-458.]
Comment: This solution accepted by many general relativists is to just arbitrarily toss out the gravity and gravitational energy density of spacetime in a given troublesome case, and the problem of nonconservation of energy and momentum then vanishes. In short, they separate the spacetime itself from the fields, and then there is no problem! However,
simply avoiding the problem itself is not solving the
problem! Considering the neglected and unaccounted giant Heaviside energy flow always accompanying every Poynting EM energy flow, the gravity effect is always at least of importance, and this solution itself is in general nearly always untenable.
Such a picture was abhorrent to Einstein, who believed there must be a physical objective world, even at the minutest scale of quantum phenomena
(he thought that) perhaps underlying probabilistic behaviour of quantum systems would be the statistical action of smaller ingredients or parts to the system, abut which one had no direct knowledge. David Bohm developed the viewpoint of hidden variables. The most successful hidden variable theory is that known as the de Broglie-Bohm model (de Broglie 1956, Bohm 1952). Hidden variables are consistent with all the observational facts only if the theory is, in an essential way, non local, in the sense that the hidden parameters must be able to affect parts of the system in arbitrarily distant regions instantaneously! [Roger Penrose,
The Emperors New Mind: Concerning Computers, Minds, and the Laws of
Physics. Oxford University Press, 1989, p. 362].
Very best wishes,
* * * *