Subject: RE: Dear Dr. Bearden,
about closed looping... Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 15:30:02 -0500
Dear William,
All COP>1.0
electromagnetic systems involve not only positive energy (which you were
thinking exclusively in terms of) but also negative energy. They also
involve a rather precise balance in their two environmental components:
(1) the active vacuum, and (2) the active local curvatures of
spacetime. So the positive energy, negative energy, active vacuum, and
local spacetime curvature have to all be dealt with and "freeze framed"
and locked into a stable COP>1.0 operational state.
It's a horrendous
problem, else we would have done it long ago. One of our bench fellows
is a phase lock loop specialist, so simple clamped positive feedback is
a piece of cake for him. One can try it, and watch all his switching
transistors fail or even explode (they make nice little 1-foot diameter
fireballs, and the fragments stinging one's face do keep the bench
fellows on their toes). Bedini solved it first, without clearly knowing
the mechanism, so I was finally able to contribute the mechanism.
Bedini I have filed a patent application on the process, but he is the
major inventor and I only made very small contributions. There is
another easier way that we at Magnetic Energy Ltd. have discovered, but
it calls for an extremely complex and very expensive system buildup.
We are working on that method now, as we can, and have included it in a
second patent application already filed. Its mechanism is right out
there on the forefront of quantum electrical physics.
No textbook anywhere
discusses or gives the "supersystem" functioning --- all those
components (the system, the active vacuum, and the local curvatures of
spacetime --- which all interact with each other) that must be
absolutely synchronized and stabilized, which is what is necessary for
close-looping a COP>1.0 electrical system.
In the past a very few
inventors also stumbled onto variant methods accidentally, without
understanding the process at all, but just being able to do it by a way
that they found. I know of three of those, and their methods --- once
painfully deciphered --- are different yet again.
Hope this sheds a
little light on the subject.
Best wishes,
Tom Bearden
|