| Subject: RE: Steven Greer,
Congress and OU demonstrations Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:20:02 -0500 Dear Dave, We know from hard personal experience with four other COP>1.0 systems that were legitimate but fell by the wayside, that at this stage one must single-mindedly focus on getting the large financial partner and funding required to set up the proper physics lab (not just an electrodynamics lab) to finish the project. If we split our efforts all over the map, or if we allow control of it to pass into other hands just to get some bucks, then the MEG will die right here in front of the required funding cliff (some $29 million). If the control passes, it will simply be suppressed like many others have been. The absolute kiss of death is to get involved in all sorts of publicity and actions all over the map that deviate from the technical objective. That simply triggers every kind of critter that ever crawled out from under a rock, all over us. If enough critters are after you and all over you, eventually one or more will get in there and bite you with a poison fang, with high probability. So we will not do that. We are trying to deal with principals and major investment groups only, and then only with proper do diligence on both sides. We want them to check us out just as rigorously as we check them out. And we do and they do. That said, we are very sympathetic to what Steve Greer is doing, and supportive of it, and we fervently wish for his resounding success. He is an excellent person, well-seasoned and knowledgeable, highly dedicated, and a real mover and shaker on the world scene. Steve has many contacts, including with other COP>1.0 systems and inventors. The MEG is not the only game in town by any means. Steve is aware of several other legitimate systems, and is probably already working with those systems and their inventors. We accent again that there are other legitimate COP>1.0 systems other than the MEG, and Steve is aware of them and their statuses. All of them that I am personally aware of, also are at that funding cliff where they require substantial funding to go further and get to a producible device ready for production and marketing. The only way we can hope to succeed is keep focused on the final MEG
research goal, with single-minded purpose. The situation on the MEG is
as
follows: What we have at present is a set of successful MEG lab experiment apparatuses. They are not by any means full-bore power systems ready to produce, sell, and power one's house, etc. Our first patent (with the simple material) has just issued. A second patent (with the more complex material) has been filed, as has a continuance on the first patent. We still have two additional patents to prepare and file. With that patent status, notice how extraordinarily sensitive we have to be with respect to public demonstrations. The patent laws determine what we can and cannot do at this stage, not public opinion. Else a single demonstration could unwittingly lose all the remainder of one's patent rights. The proper people to call that kind of shot are our excellent and long-suffering patent attorneys. And they are calling it precisely the way we are playing it.In the MEG, there are four unusual areas of physics involved, in addition to the standard electrical engineering aspects. Consequently, to ramp up the MEG to production size units, considerable research and development is required, which includes those unusual areas of physics (such as geometric phase and nonlinear oscillation control theory) also involved. It will require considerable funding to set up a proper lab in both the PHYSICS aspects and the electromagnetic aspects and finish the MEG. It isn't just electronics and electromagnetics equipment and staff that are required; that part is a piece of cake. It is the PHYSICS equipment, instruments, and staff that are required that are so expensive and critical. The MEG is a highly nonlinear unit, and there is no such thing as a "linear scale-up" factor for it, nor a linear functioning for it. It is also a nonlinear oscillation device, and ordinary linear oscillation theory does not hold. Neither does ordinary control theory. It is not a simple electromagnetics problem; that part of it we can easily handle. It's those four specialized areas of physics where the hard work really has to be done --- with VERY expensive instrumentation and technicians --- and it must be done if we are to evolve it to a practical and production unit. We are in serious negotiations with several major financial groups at present, in an effort to raise the funding for the lab and final development of the MEG to systems ready for mass production. All our guys are seasoned and experienced aerospace engineers, and we have been in all sorts of space and defense programs, systems, projects, simulations, etc. We know the technical development game inside out; our careers have been and are based on it and all its aspects. To even build a decent engineering model and simulation of the highly nonlinear MEG involving multidisciplinary functions is a formidable (but doable) undertaking; our guys have done exactly such projects in ballistic missile defense, various missile systems, space defense, NASA space hardware and systems, electronic warfare, directed energy weapons, ABM defense, etc. on a variety of projects. We have indeed developed and managed all the various aspects of development of just such highly nonlinear, multi-disciplined models and simulations. So we know what is required, what must be done, how to do it, and how much it will cost on a "bare bones" program. Bare bones for the MEG development and finishing is $29 million. There are partial programs that can be done for less, but that is what the finishing program costs.So our efforts are concentrated exclusively on obtaining a major financial partner, so we can set up the necessary physics and electrodynamics lab and staff with alacrity, and also obtain the services of four quite rare and very expensive specialists, one required in each of those special physics disciplines. We have some very hard but satisfying physics work to do, not publicity work and not just electrodynamics work. If we deviate from that path, then like so many others the MEG will simply wash away like a wave on the beach, just as has every other legitimate COP>1.0 system when it reached that "sheer cliff" of the major funding needed for the extraordinary nonlinear research to finish it and go from lab experiment devices to production units. Sadly, most of the folks managing the COP>1.0 systems that reached that cliff did not fully appreciate the formidable technical problems they faced, nor were they skilled enough to recognize the full nature of the beast and what exactly was required to finish it. We intend to do everything in our power to see that such does not happen to the MEG, if it is humanly possible to prevent it. If we succeed, we succeed. If we fail, we fail --- but we will have given it our very best shot. Best wishes,Tom Bearden I hope this finds you doing well. I've come across some pretty interesting stuff which I'll condense and share later, but there's been a buzz going around that I was wondering if you could comment on: === Demonstration of Bearden's MEG for Congress w/ Dr. Greer? Posted by Patrick Knowles on Wednesday April 03, @08:21PM Steven M. Greer, M.D. of the Disclosure Project has recently said that several members of the U.S. Congress have agreed to arrange for a demonstration in chambers of any proven over-unity device to members of the appropriate Congressional committees. Greer has been in touch with Dr. Bearden previously, and includes an interview with him in his book, Disclosure. Now that the MEG has been patented, will Dr. Bearden be working with the Disclosure Project to demonstrate it to Congress? I realize that if plans are already underway for such a demonstration, they may be sensitive and necessarily private at this point. But if a Congressional demonstration is not yet in the works, I hope Dr. Beardon will be in touch with Dr. Greer once again so that arrangements can be made. The patenting of the MEG could be a real breakthrough for Disclosure on the technological front. Does anyone know if Dr. Beardon is working with Dr. Greer at this point? Would Dr. Beardon like to comment on this? ===Here's the link to the above post: http://www.atomasoft.com/zpenergy/1017894087/index_html Tom, has Dr. Greer been in touch with you about this? If you can, would
you care to comment?
Best always, |