forwarded ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- From: INTERNET:Tebearden@aol.com, INTERNET:Tebearden@aol.com TO: (unknown), INTERNET:pennyprod@earthlink.net CC: (unknown), INTERNET:Mhermanns@aol.com (unknown), INTERNET:mps@internetmci.com (unknown), INTERNET:randyd@ro.com (unknown), INTERNET:barrier@csranet.com (unknown), INTERNET:Barrett506@aol.com (unknown), INTERNET:jlkenny@bechtel.net (unknown), INTERNET:4kenmoore@sprintmail.com (unknown), FishnChips DATE: 19/08/97 20:14 RE: Reply to Fax Sender: Tebearden@aol.com Tue, 19 Aug 1997 20:14:21 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 20:14:21 To: Mr. Alexander Kropf 1002 1/2 North Croft Ave. Los Angeles, CA 90069 Tel/Fax (213)656-4691 E-mail: pennyprod@earthlink.net Dear Mr.Kropf, Thanks for your kind comments. I will briefly summarize some of the progress we have made toward development of overunity EM generators, including permissible ones which power themselves and their loads simultaneously. CTEC is a small group of 8 engineers and scientists, now rather scattered because of career layoffs in the engineering profession in Huntsville, AL (6,000 engineers laid off in 2 years). Our experimental laboratory work has been seriously obstructed by that occurrence and our scattering. Nonetheless, we have persisted, filed three patents and half-interest in a fourth, and presently envision possibly three or four more major patent applications. Though hampered experimentally, we have made great strides in the theory of overunity (i.e., COP>1.0) EM engines and circuits. I have been able to show that Maxwell's equations DO prescribe such systems, prior to their ARBITRARY symmetrical regauging to easily separate the variables (via the Lorentz condition). I have also gone to particle physics and discovered that it is proven and known there (but NOT in electrodynamics!) that any electrical charge or dipole already is a broken symmetry in the violent local energetic fluctuations of the vacuum. This means that the charge or dipole FREELY extracts directly from the seething vacuum, all the Poynting energy that flows from the source dipole out and down a two wire circuit or transmission line. One does not have to discover how to extract energy from the vacuum. One can extract all one wishes, anywhere in the universe, for a copper cent or two. (A single human body, it turns out, extracts and outputs more energy flow than all the loads in the world consume. It only INTERCEPTS and collects, however, about 10exp(minus 13) of that enormous energy -- producing about the amount of power, e.g., as a 100 watt lightbulb. There is no problem in getting the energy freely. Ever dipole and generator and battery we ever built is already a "free energy" generator, pouring forth copious amounts of energy nearly beyond belief. We will address why such a minuscule amount of the energy is collected, in a moment. It is only by passing the load current back through the back emf of that source dipole (in the generator or battery) that we do work upon the dipole to destroy it and "kill" its free extraction of energy, and the free flow of that Poynting energy through all of space surrounding the wire and generally parallel to the wire. Simply put, here's how a normal generating plant works! First, we burn some fuel, say, to rotate the generator shaft. This produces a magnetic field effect upon the charges, forcing them apart and creating a source dipole. At this point, leaving electrodynamics entirely, particle physics tells us that this source dipole is now freely extracting EM energy from the vacuum and pouring it out in space surrounding and along the outside of the circuit conductors (transmission line) as the Poynting flow. We come back to that later. However, as the electrons in the external circuit intercept and "catch" a little of this gigantic Poynting flow, the amount of energy intercepted and diverted (diverged) into the circuit powers up the electrons as the Slepian vector j(phi). That of course powers up the circuit. However, we are all taught the "single master loop" current concept. In other words, we insist that everytime an electron is driven through a load, a matching electron is driven back through the back emf of our source dipole we just established by some shaft rotation. That's a hidden restoration of the Lorentz condition, and the exact analog of SYMMETRICAL REGAUGING. In other words, we KILL the broken symmetry in the vacuum flux that was producing the free Poynting energy flow. So we do as much work in the source as we do in the load! In short, we destroy the separation of charges that MADE our source dipole, and that destroys our free extraction of energy from the vacuum. The limit of efficiency of such a system is COP = 1.0, and that's what all our professors taught us was the best that could be done. Nonsense! They simply taught us to bring in an oil well gusher, then immediately dynamite the well to seal off the gushing. Can't get much oil out of that kind of oil rig approach! Anyway, killing the dipole shuts off the ffree low of Poynting flow down the wire. and through all of space surrounding the wire. That caps the gusher, so to speak, and puts the genie back in the bottle again and seals him up. So then we have to burn some more fuel, to rotate the generator a little further. This again forces the charges back apart, and restores our dipole. And so the freely flowing Poynting gusher from the vacuum resumes again, creating the Slepian vector j(phi) and powering up the circuit again. Whereupon we let the load electrons passing back through the back emf of the source dipole (or ramming their cousins back through there) destroy the dipole again! So we have to keep repeating this process, and keep on burning the fuel, EVEN THOUGH WE FOOLS HAVE ALWAYS BUILT FREE ENERGY GENERATORS, BUT MURDERED THEM AS FAST AS WE TURNED THEM ON! So we pay the power company to have a gigantic sumo wrestling match inside its own generators! It does not cost the power company a single copper penny for all the ENERGY required, e.g., to run the city of Huntsville here, or all of Alabama for that matter. Instead, the Alabama Power Company is having a heyday sumo wrestling itself inside its own generators! Now if we reduce or eliminate the wrestling match in the generators, we can get the Poynting flow going and keep it going (in the real world, things aren't perfect, and so we have to "trickle charge" it, so to speak). But to do that, we have use a "bridged" two-current loop concept (which we have filed a patent application on). On the sourcing side, we develop good voltage but very little current! Just enough to keep the voltage up, which keeps the Poynting energy flow going. That circuit must "transmit" or "broadcast" the Poynting flow through a special "bridge" section, which blocks dq/dt (ordinary electrical current) but passes the Poynting flow. Then on the receiving side, the circuit is optimized to receive and couple to that Poynting flow, and produce large current for its same (or stepped up) voltage. In short, the load circuit is a separate dq/dt current loop from the source circuit, but it is not a separate POYNTING ENERGY FLOW CURRENT loop! That patent pending process, once perfected, will eventually power the world. And we will quit using the big nuclear powerplants with all their associated hazardous wastes and we will quit burning so much fossil fuel as well. To say that will assist in cleaning up the biosphere is an understatement! The problem is that, just now, the only thing positively we have to do the "bridging" function is the Fogal charge barrier semiconductor (which Fogal holds two patents on). That semiconductor within itself DOES the bridging process, while blocking or partially blocking the dq/dt. Fogal and I have a paper on the Internet on this, with some test results of a prototype Fogal transistor, at internet site http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/. You can download it or read it if you wish. Presently we are getting about 650 hits (downloads) of the material per day. I also wrote and they posted a preliminary glossary where I struggled to show corrections to some of the major errors in electrodynamics. Now back to our source dipole, once established in the generator, and its unleashing the flow of Poynting energy down the external circuit, having extracted that energy directly from the vacuum -- WHICH IS ALREADY PROVEN IN PARTICLE PHYSICS since 1957. But particle physicists do not build power supplies! Instead, they build big accelerators to bust particles into smaller particles, so they always look for a bigger hammer to hit it harder and break it up smaller! Meanwhile, electrodynamics FUNDAMENTALS were finalized during the 1800s (with some 30 major errors in it! And the electrodynamicists have not changed the basics a bit since then, even the parts that have been falsified by the march of modern physics. This flow of energy from a source dipole is ENORMOUS! It is about 10exp13 times as great as the minuscule fraction of it that strikes the surface charges in the wires and components and gets diverted into the circuit and collected to power the circuit. ONLY THAT "INTERCEPTED" small "boundary layer" of the Poynting energy flow is diverged into the circuit. All the rest -- filling all space around the transmission lines -- passes on off along the circuit, where a little more is collected by following surface charges, and then the great remainder roars on off into space and is wasted. I[ got the 10exp13 figure by calculating an actual circuit example. It's rigorous, and will hold up under rigorous scrutiny.] So almost all the Poynting flow extracted so simply and magnificently from the vacuum, just roars on off into the sunset and is wasted. It isn't intercepted and used in the circuit at all. That's a "single pass" single collection system. Not a single electrical engineer or physicist appears to ever have calculated the true value of the Poynting flow, or for that matter has calculated the value of the E-field or the potential phi. Sorry about that, but it's true! E.g., for the scalar potential phi, what is calculated and advanced erroneously as the "definition" of the potential, is precisely the number of joules of energy that will be intercepted and collected upon a single point coulomb of charge, if one is placed at that spatial point where the "magnitude of the potential" is calculated. In fact the "scalar" potential is not even a scalar entity! Stoney in 1897 and Whittaker beautifully in 1903 showed that it is a set of bidirectional hidden LONGITUDINAL EM WAVEPAIRS! So it is a multivectorial, multiwave entity. That's rigorous, and all the textbooks are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG on that respect. Actually, the scalar potential itself must be enormous, since we treat it as infinite or nearly so in the standard work-energy theorem equation W = (phi)(q). That is, if we add more q interceptor/collectors, then from any potential -- no matter how small, so long as it is nonzero -- one can collect AS MUCH ENERGY AS ONE WISHES. I count it as the most collossal scientific joke of all time that, of hundreds of thousands of PhDs, MS's, MEEs, etc., that have graduated in the last century, not a one has (1) defined electrical charge, (2) defined the potential, or (2) calculated a potential's true magnitude. Neither has the author of any of our standard electrical physics or electrodynamics or electromagnetics texts! And Lorentz gave us a procedure (integration of the Poynting vector around a closed surface surrounding the conductor or the component) that just discards all that part of the Poynting flow that does not get intercepted by the surface charges in the conductors and components! Lorentz just said "it is not physically significant!" Well, if you stick in some MORE circuits and some MORE collecting charges, it is certainly significant! Certainly A LITTLE of that nondivergent component of the flow through a particular spherical surface, goes on down the wire and MAY intercept some surface charges on further down, with resulting collection of some more energy! So of course it IS physically insignificant, because it is real energy and you can collect it and use it. In other words, Lorentz taught us to discard everything but the "Slepian vector" or the divergent component. Heaviside pointed out, e.g., that this was only a tiny part of the entire Poynting flow. The Poynting flow from any electric charge, magnetic pole, or dipole fills all space surrounding the two conductors running away from the source dipole! The energy flow does not reach zero until infinite distance. Yet we only collect a smidgeon -- the "boundary layer" that strikes and flows along the surface of the wire! Now it is possible to RETROREFLECT and return the energy flow, or much of it, and bring it through there again. Or one can add additional collectors, etc. The point is, every transmission line and every powerplant already produces nominally some 10exp13 times as much energy as the engineers and scientists think they do! That's a fact, and easily proven. Heaviside knew it; modern physicists and engineers do not. Neither do power companies. If one collects more by "multipass, multicollection," AND does not use half of the excess to destroy the source dipole -- the thing that is asymmetrically self-regauging the system, to extend modern SYMMETRICAL gauge theory by considering ASYMMETRICAL regauging (change of potential) -- then one easily produces a process which PRODUCES MORE ENERGY OUT THAN ONE MUST ONESELF INPUT. The system, of course, is an open system far from thermodynamic equilibrium, so conventional thermodynamics (with its infamous second law) does not even apply. Instead, the nonlinear thermodynamics of open systems in disequilibrium, and freely receiving excess energy from their environment, now applies. It is well-known in THAT thermodynamics that such systems can (1) self-order, (2) exhibit negentropy, and (3) exhibit COP>1.0. A simple example is a watermill, or a sailboat, or a windmill. The same can be done using the free "Poynting energy flow wind" that is freely extracted from the vacuum and radiated out from any electrical charge or magnetic charge or dipole. A rigorous example of such an overunity EM system is given by anti-Stokes emission. E.g., the Lawandy lasing without population inversion process is an adaptation of anti-Stokes emission, as is Patterson's power cell(r). I gave a paper showing that at the Fourth International New Energy Conference in Denver, May 23-26, 1997 -- which was the conference at which the interview for the Atlantis Rising article was held. At any rate, I am aggressively publishing the theoretical results and principles for permissible overunity EM systems, as fast as we work them out. When our little team gets the funds, we expect to bring in an overunity working model EM system and circuit. We have had circuits that destroy themselves abruptly (using the "ping pong" effect of iterative mutual self-targeting), with rather violent foot-in-diameter electrical explosions. We know what has to be done to control it, but do not have the equipment, team, or laboratory to do it. So we are working on an easier way. There is another thing that our professors have taught us falsely, and every engineer believes firmly in his heart, that is totally in error. It is considered a fact of nature that one joule of energy can only do one joule of work. Nothing could be further fromt the truth! The only real energy conservation law is this: ENERGY CAN NEITHER BE CREATED NOR DESTROYED! When you do "work," you can only do one of two things: (1) scatter the energy, or (2) change its form. AFTER the work is done, you still have every single bit of the energy remaining. Think of EM energy as a bunch of photons, like animals in a herd, where the herd is headed in some direction. You can change the ordering of the animals in the herd, or their direction, or both simultaneously. BUT NOTHING ELSE. When you get through doing the work, you still have every photon you had at the beginning. Well, just retroreflect those scattered photons back again (as happens in anti-Stokes emission), and recollect (reorder) them again! That can be done passively and, with development, quite cheaply. Then you can use that recollected energy one more time! Then collect it again, and so on. Rigorously, with multireflection and multicollection, we must change the fundamental work-energy theorem (which assumes single-pass single collection of the energy from the energy flow). Now, instead of W = (phi)(q), we must write W = (lambda)(phi)(q). Here lambda is a reaction cross section, or collection efficiency coefficient. For lambda less than one, you have the usual process for a system that is single-pass, single collection and also not 100 percent efficient. So it wastes energy, and its COP<1.0. That corresponds to Stokes emission, where the "wasted" energy goes into recoil of the absorbing mass of the charge q, etc. Now at resonance absorption, you reach the limit of Stokes emission phenomena. Here all the energy absorbed is reradiated right back again. So this gives a COP of 1.0 because no energy is "wasted" on undesired work or scattering. Then there is anti-STokes emission. In this one, you put some energy into the medium, and it distorts and retroreflects and multicollects. This accomplishes "asymmetrical self-regauging," so it changes its own potential and dipolarity, and extracts and outputs more energy from the vacuum. Accordingly, its total output of observable energy exceeds the amount of energy you put in! Sometimes by many times (i.e., Bohren has shown both theoretically and experimentally an easily achieved ration of COP = 18, and one of the Patterson devices showed COP = 1200. In all of this, the laws of physics, the laws of thermodynamics, and the conservation of energy ARE NOT VIOLATED! These are permissible reactions, substantiated by experiment. Anyway, this gives you some inkling of the energy work I am doing, and CTEC is doing. We hope to continue, in a full laboratory with a full team. We know the individual scientists who have the KONZEPTIA required, and the skills in the disciplines required. Overunity devices and self-powering circuits and engines are things whose time has come. You can send this to your friend the Power Company CPO. I believe this work to be extremely important to forward-looking power companies. It WILL NOT put the power companies out of business, far from it. It will just make their job of producing and distributing the energy a whale of a lot cheaper and easier, and environmentally cleaner. And then they can be heroes, instead of the villains! And they can also pass along substantial savings to the consumers and customers. If we had a Department of Energy worth its salt, one would think that it would be heavily engaged in this very thing! Eerily, they uphold and defend the crazy sumo wrestling paradigm in generators as if it were carved on the stone tablets brought down by Moses, so to speak. Hope this answers your letter, and again thanks for the kind words. We will get there eventually, or a lot sooner if we attract a proper grant or backing in our efforts. Meanwhile, we'll tell everybody what the principles are, so the genie will stay out of the bottle for good. Yours truly, Tom Bearden CEO CTEC, Inc.