Dear Colleagues, I think that the Priore work should be accelerated into the laboratory wherever possible, without waiting for formal funding or further theoretical arguments to come along. Of course I agree that potentials are physical objects. The B(3) is just one aspect of this general law of physics. Sorry if I am advocating the obvious. When possible cures for disease are on the horizon, laboratory work under controlled, ethical conditions is absolutely essential and critically important. Otherwise let us throw away our universities. MWE cc colleagues. ----------------------------------------------- FROM: INTERNET:Tebearden@aol.com, INTERNET:Tebearden@aol.com TO: Prof. G. Kalbermann, INTERNET:HOPE@vms.huji.ac.il CC: Dr Fred Woods Sr., INTERNET:csiri@igc.apc.org Dr Fred Wood, INTERNET:fwood@igc.apc.org Dr. Terence Barrett, INTERNET:Barrett506@aol.com (unknown), INTERNET:Reed15@marshall.edu (unknown), INTERNET:chronos@mail.enter.net (unknown), INTERNET:info@ians.org (unknown), INTERNET:newenergy@acad4newenergy.com (unknown), INTERNET:Exec-Sec-Central@hq.doe.gov (unknown), INTERNET:protech@frii.com (unknown), INTERNET:TCupolo@aol.com (unknown), INTERNET:btillman@colsa.com (unknown), INTERNET:jlhayes@colsa.com (unknown), INTERNET:4kenmoore@sprintmail.com (unknown), FishnChips (unknown), steveferguson (unknown), [70403,3645] (unknown), [76570,2270] DATE: 05/11/97 23:43 Re: Answers to Questions Sender: Tebearden@aol.com Received: from emout38.mail.aol.com (emout38.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.72]) by hil-img-4.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.8) with ESMTP id XAA01876; Wed, 5 Nov 1997 23:43:45 -0500 (EST) From: Tebearden@aol.com Received: (from root@localhost) by emout38.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0) id XAA01956; Wed, 5 Nov 1997 23:43:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 23:43:34 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <971105231735_-1509591573@emout02.mail.aol.com> To: HOPE@vms.huji.ac.il cc: 4kenmoore@sprintmail.com, FishnChips@compuserve.com, jlhayes@colsa.com, btillman@colsa.com, TCupolo@aol.com, steveferguson@compuserve.com, protech@frii.com, Exec-Sec-Central@hq.doe.gov, info@ians.org, newenergy@acad4newenergy.com, chronos@mail.enter.net, Reed15@marshall.edu, Barrett506@aol.com, fwood@igc.apc.org, csiri@igc.apc.org, 70403.3645@compuserve.com, 76570.2270@compuserve.com Subject: Answers to Questions German, You wrote: I am sorry, but I could not understand the paragraph that starts with: > > My energy work is based on use of asymmetrical regauging; i.e., simply > increasing (switching) the potential to a higher value, without concomitant > switching of the other. Ans: We answered that in the first reply, with definitions and examples. Do you have any writeup of your work? Did you actually implement your thoughts experimentally? Sorry for the ignorance. Ans: Many writeups! Simply download one or more of my papers on any of several net nodes; for example, . I also attach a microsoft Word 7 copy of my letter to the Secretary of Energy. Many of my references are contained in there. Some are: T.E. Bearden, "Use of Asymmetrical Regauging and Multivalued Potentials to Achieve Overunity Electromagnetic Engines," Journal of New Energy, 1(2), Summer 1996, p. 60-78; ----- "Regauging and Multivalued Magnetic Scalar Potential: Master Overunity Mechanisms," Explore, 7(1), 1996,pp. 51-58; ----- "Maxwell's equations, regauging, and overunity systems," Explore More!, No. 17, Jul.-Aug. 1996, p. 13-21; ------ "The Master Principle of EM Overunity and the Japanese Overunity Engines," Infinite Energy, 1(5&6), Nov. 1995-Feb. 1996, p. 38-55; ----- "Energy Flow, Collection, and Dissipation in Overunity EM Devices," Proc. 4th Intl. New Energy Conference, Denver, CO, May 23-27, 1997, p. 5-51. > Instead, the nonlinear thermodynamics of open dissipative > As is well known, such systems can readily exhibit (1) > self-oscillation, and (2) coefficient of performance of overunity (COP>1.0). Any reference ? Ans: A good overview is Gregoire Nicolis, "Physics of far-from-equilibrium systems and self-organization," in Paul Davies, Ed., The New Physics, Cambridge U. Press, 1989, p. 316-347. Also Joseph Ford, "What is chaos, that we should be mindful of it?" ibid., p.348-372. Detailed technical work is in G. Nicolis and I. Prigogine, Exploring Complexity, Piper, Munich, 1987; ----- Self-Organization in Nonequilibrium Systems, Wiley, New York, 1977; and P. Glansdorff and I. Prigogine, Thermodynamics of Structure, Stability and Fluctuations, wiley, London, 1971. Also see J. Guckenheimer and P. Holmes, Nonlinear Oscillations, Dynamical Systems and Bifurcations of Vector Fields, Springer, Berlin, 1983. Ans: For a succinct overview, check Gregoire Nicolis, "Physics of far-from-equilibrium systems and self-organization," in Paul Davies, Ed., The New Physics, Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, 1989, p. 316-348. Also check Joseph Ford, "What is chaos, that we should be mindful of it?", ibid., p. 348-372. See also G. Nicolis and I. Prigogine, Exploring Complexity, Piper, Munich, 1987. See P. Glansdorff and I. Prigogine, Thermodynamics of Structure, Stability and Fluctuations," Wiley, London, 1971. Another good mathematical reference is J. Guckenheimer and P. Holmes, Nonlinear Oscillations, Dynamical Systems and Bifurcations of Vector Fields, Springer, Berlin, 1983. > > The end result is that there is no such thing as electrostatics. There is > only equilibrium in violent flows, and in the interceptions of those violent > flows. Nice idea! What is the role of radiation here? Ans: Radiation remains partially the same, except as presently utilized it can always be decomposed into potentials (either vector or scalar). Also, vacuum EM waves are longitudinal wavepairs in harmonic series rather than transverse waves, and photons in vacuum are really coupled photon-antiphoton pairs (gravitons). In a curved spacetime, it appears that more complex gravitons (say, 3 or 4 coupled photons/antiphotons) can exist, at least momentarily. Also, in curved ST the quantum magnitude of the photon may differ. This latter part on complex gravitons is still very tentative, and not to be taken as proven by any means. It is still very much a rank hypothesis, although some obscure Russian work leans in that direction. > > So the excess energy in an asymmetrically regauging circuit simply comes > directly from the vacuum. ans: Yes. [Ultimately it ALL Any charge or dipole is already known (and proven) in particle physics to be a broken symmetry in the violent virtual flux of the vacuum. By definition of broken symmetry, that means that (1) part of the virtual energy received by the charge or dipole is radiated back to the vacuum as virtual energy, and (2) the remainder is radiated by as potentially observable energy. Well, there is only one observable energy flow from a charge or dipole: the Poynting flow. So any charge or dipole is already a "free energy machine," because it radiates an unending flow of potentially observable energy, extracted right out of the vacuum. It will do that indefinitely (apparently as long as the age of the universe, in the case of the proton!) > Every system we have is already a free energy system. No power is provided > by the generator or battery to the load. Instead, because we pass the load > current back through the back emf of the source dipole, we continually kill > the dipole and the very broken symmetry that was extracting free energy for > us directly from the vacuum. In that case, the battery or generator must > continually furnish energy (from chemical reactions in the case of the > battery, or from powered shaft rotation to create magnetic fields and use > them to force the separation of charges again) to restore and reconstitute > the dipole. Very interesting! Please send more information. Ans: Well, that would get really bulky indeed! Just don't have time to deliver a more protracted treatise on it. Better to read some of my papers where we discuss that sort of thing ad nauseum. Ans: Also, download any of my several energy papers on the internet, e.g., on > > this. W-1904 has been utilized and extended by McCrea, Debye, Bromwich, and > others to what is now referred to loosely as superpotential theory. Reference please. Ans: Quick overview is Whittaker has two incredibly fundamental papers of interest to the "infolding" of longitudinal wave electrodynamics inside the potential, and also inside fields and waves. They are: (1) E.T. Whittaker, "On the Partial Differential Equations of Mathematical Physics," Mathematische Annalen, Vol. 57, 1903, p. 333-355; ------ "On an Expression of the Electromagnetic Field Due to Electrons by Means of Two Scalar Potential Functions," Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, Vol. 1, 1904, p. 367-372. An overview of superpotential theory is given by Melba Phillips, "Classical Electrodynamics," in Principles of Electrodynamics and Relativity, Vol. 4 of Encyclopedia of Physics, edited by S. Flugge, Springer Verlag, 1962. Paraphrasing: Whittaker (published 1904) was the first to prove that one can derive a general electromagnetic field from two scalar functions, which are really components of the vector superpotentials, with proper choices of the gauge functions. Whittaker's method is well-known i the source distrubution (assumed given) by a suitable choice of stream functions. The Debye potentials and the Bromwich potentials are essentially radial components of the vector potentials of which Whittaker potentials are the real parts. So in general the particular integral (i.e., the stream potentials) of the inhomogeneous Maxwell equations may be chosen such that the complementary function can be expressed in terms of only two scalars, which are components of the vector superpotentials. The Whittaker and the Debye-Bromwich potentials are special cases of two vector superpotentials. Also paraphrasing: Nisbet has extended the Whittaker and Debye two-potential solutions of Maxwell's equations to points within the source distribution. This is a full generalization of the vector superpotentials (for media of arbitrary properties) together with their relations to such scalar potentials as those of Debye. (See A. Nisbet, Physica, Vol. 21, 1955, p. 799. Also, A. Ricci in 1901 introduced what may be called the magnetization potential, satisfying a certain equation, as an alternate to the Hertz vector. This was a part of early vector superpotentials. [I owe the above to Phillips and to Dr. Bob Flowers, who kindly looked into the matter for me.] Also, for the general properties of the superpotentials and their gauge transformations in tensor form, see W.H. McCrea, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A., Vol. 240, 1957, p. 447. Paraphrasing Phillips: McCrea's treatment is more concise than that of Nisbet, but entirely equivalent when translated into ordinary spacetime coordinates. > > > > However, by performing amplified pumping, as Priore did, the "promotion > order" back to anaerobic form will itself be overridden by the amplified > antiengine formed. It reverses that order (engine) as well. So it quickly > backs the cell and its genetics back into a normal cell, under centralized > growth control again. > > This is the gist of the technological mechanism used by Priore, which neither > he nor anyone else understood. How, did Priore get to try such mechanism without a theoretical basis? Where is this person now? Ans: (1) Priore was initially a radar technician, though he later completed a doctoral program, and an inventor with an insatiable curiosity. Such highly intuitive and creative inventors will often "fiddle" their way into truly complex and obscure new phenomena. Actually, since no one else had a theory at the time that could even begin to explain his results, he was better off "fiddling" than theorizing! Nonlinear optical phase conjugation, e.g., did not get going in the U.S. until the latter 1970s (after a Soviet scientist visiting Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in 1972 briefed U.S. scientists on the "strange backward-traveling wave that restored order." The "infolded EM as vacuum engines" concept or theory for Priore's did not exist (and still does not, although many electrodynamicists have looked at Priore's work, and none could explain it). [Whittaker's 1903 paper pointing out this internal (infolded) electrodynamics inside the scalar potential has not been utilized in the West.] Priore had noticed that sometimes EM nonionizing radiation preserved fruit, etc. longer. So he reasoned that it was perhaps doing something to prevent deterioration. He set about to find out how it did that, and how to apply it to living animals. And he just kept on experimenting till he did it. He also was lucky: He had very powerful high level friends in the French Government, with whom he served during WW II in the French Underground. So those powerful friends saw that the French Government kept funding him, until the Government fell in the 70s and a leftist government took over. That was the almost immediate end of the Priore funding, and therefore of the project. (2) Unfortunately Priore has been dead for over a decade. Another absolutely marvelous summary work, on the present extensions to EM and EM waves, with subluminal and superluminal EM wave velocities in the vacuum, is W.A. Rodrigues and J.-Y. Lu, "On the existence of undistorted progressive waves (UPWs) of arbitrary Speeds 0<= v < infinity in Nature," Foundations of Physics, 27(3), 1997, p. 435-508. A very useful list of references is included. Another "must" reference is T.W. Barrett and D.M. Grimes, Eds., Advanced Electromagnetism: Foundations, Theory & Applications, World Scientific, 1995. This I believe finishes the answers to your questions. Cheers, Tom Bearden