Tony,

here is a draft letter I've written to a major power company, which came in with a somewhat odd contact, but I've not released it yet as I'm still pondering it.  See what you think about putting this on the website????  It might be a good one for folks from the EOP to read, as it's slanted toward that type of audience. Anyway, call it like you see it on that one.  Just wanted you to have a copy of it.

Cheers,

Tom

Dear Dr. XXX,

Your courteous letter is appreciated, and we understand your skepticism. But we regret that presently we have no time to deviate from our straight line toward developing and putting into production motionless electromagnetic generator (MEG)  units for the open market.  Dr. Kenny, who is traveling, sends his regrets and asks that I reply for him.

I have been asked by Dr. Kenny to also give you a somewhat more technical explanation of what we are about, and why COP>1.0 electromagnetic systems are already well proven in physics.  They are just arbitrarily excluded from electrical engineering, particularly electrical power engineering, but they already exist in the hard physics literature, and have for some time.

First, our present status.  We do not yet have an operating MEG power unit ready for production power system ready to power homes and businesses etc. Instead, we have a set of successful COP>1.0 laboratory experiments.  We have filed two patents, the first of which has issued, and a continuance. Our foreign patent filing actions are in progress now.  Several more patent applications are already anticipated.  Our primary concerns are (1) to protect and strengthen our intellectual property rights position, and (2) to secure the necessary large financial partner to get on with the intense research necessary to finish the MEG and put real MEG power systems into mass production.  The "return on investment" figures are large, and the risk only low to medium at worst, so we are in excellent position for appropriate and conventional financing.  We are confident that we will obtain it shortly, so we can proceed apace.  Once we have the proper laboratory and team set up, we will produce the first MEG units ready for production at the end of one year's intense final research and development.  The first MEG power unit is expected to be 2.5 KW, and with a synchronizer developed simultaneously so that up to 6 MEG units can be linked together into a single power array.  That will cover from 2.5 KW to 15 KW.   The first units are expected to be self-powering, taking all their energy directly from the vacuum.  Bedini and I have filed the necessary patent application for how to close-loop a COP>1.0 system for stable self-powering operation, and we at Magnetic Energy Ltd. have a second method of doing it also. That is not a trivial problem, by the way, and requires some very special knowledge and techniques.  It is not as simple as clamped positive feedback, as so many think.

The MEG does not work by the standard electrical engineering model used in the power industry, but by an outgrowth of quantum electrodynamics and quantum mechanics.  It is the first useful macroscopic electrical power system application of the geometrical phase (Aharonov-Bohm effect), which has been in the literature since 1959.  The geometrical phase is not even included in the standard electrical engineering electrodynamics, but there are some 25,000 or so scientific papers on it in the hard physics literature.  Geometric phase has been found to be involved in just about everything, from quantum computing to chemistry to mechanical systems, etc. For a good sampling, simply visit Dr. M. V. Berry's website in the U.K. and download some of the many papers he has published as one of the pioneers in the field.  Or just do a Google search on the web.  We are just the first ones who noticed it applies admirably to power systems.

Due to the nature of the patent laws, we give MEG demonstrations and allow measurements only in our direct negotiations with potential major financial partners, under nondisclosure and noncircumvention agreements.  This is necessary in order to protect our intellectual property rights.  Obviously we have to pass measurement tests when large financial groups bring their own test scientists, and absolutely nothing is covered or hidden.    There are thousands of scientific papers in the physics literature on the geometric phase (a generalization of the Berry phase, which was a further generalization of the Aharonov-Bohm Effect).  Anyone knowledgeable of the AB effect understands that the magnetic field from a magnetic source --- including a permanent magnet --- can be localized completely in a local region, while --- in nonlocal space where normally that magnetic field would extend --- there now appears extra magnetic energy in the form of the curl-free magnetic vector potential A.  Even a toroid will do that but then one has to pay for the input energy to it.  The object is not to have to pay for the energy to do it.

In short, by inducing the AB effect, one gets all the normal magnetic field energy but localized, plus lots of additional magnetic vector potential energy nonlocalized.  It is then fairly straightforward to use both sets of EM energy.

In our case, since the MEG uses a special materials transformer core to perform the AB localization freely, and uses a strong permanent magnet to furnish the magnetic field energy freely, we pay absolutely nothing at all for this input magnetic energy and its separation into two different types of EM energy in two different spatial regions.  All the energy is freely furnished from the active vacuum, via the proven broken symmetry of that magnetic dipole (the permanent magnet).  More on the asymmetry of a dipole shortly.

As to the exact technical mechanism by which the energy current appears in the vacuum and can be utilized, you may wish to read M. W. Evans, P.K. Anastasovski, T. E. Bearden et al., "Explanation of the Motionless Electromagnetic Generator with O(3) Electrodynamics," Foundations of Physics Letters, 14(1), Feb. 2001, p. 87-94; - "Explanation of the Motionless Electromagnetic Generator by Sachs's Theory of Electrodynamics," Foundations of Physics Letters, 14(4), 2001, p. 387-393.  Another paper of interest is (by the same group) "Classical Electrodynamics Without the Lorentz Condition: Extracting Energy from the Vacuum," Physica Scripta 61(5), May 2000, p. 513-517.   Another is M. W. Evans and T. E. Bearden, "The Most General Form of the Vector Potential in Electrodynamics," Foundations of Physics Letters, 2002 (in press and approved).   In the first two papers, two different types of higher group symmetry electrodynamics were used to provide the theoretical explanation from slightly differing theoretical models.  It cannot be provided from the standard much-too-limited classical U(1) electrodynamics, which does not even model the active vacuum, much less an asymmetry in its energy flux exchange with a physical EM system such as a source dipole.

The EM model you gentlemen (and the entire power industry) use, is hopelessly archaic, with the original model published by Maxwell in 1865 as 20 quaternion equations in 20 unknowns, then severely curtailed (after Maxwell's death) by Heaviside et al, then even further curtailed by Lorentz's symmetrical regauging (actually that regauging work was done much earlier in 1867 by Ludwig Lorenz, but credit was later given to Lorentz unfairly.  See J. D. Jackson and L. B. Okun, "Historical roots of gauge invariance," Rev. Mod. Phys., Vol. 73, July 2001, p. 663-680 for a proper historical discussion of that part of it).

The totally arbitrary Lorentz symmetrical regauging of the Maxwell-Heaviside equations also arbitrarily discards all Maxwellian systems far from equilibrium in their energy exchange with their active environment (the modern active vacuum).  Hence, Lorentz circa the 1880s to early 1890s (and Ludwig Lorenz in 1867) simply discarded COP>1.0 EM systems quite arbitrarily, to get simpler equations whose variables were separable and which could be solved analytically rather than requiring numerical methods. The ubiquitous Lorentz regauging practice continues today.  Every electrical engineering department and power company component on the planet continues to very arbitrarily discard and never work with disequilibrium Maxwellian systems having COP>1.0 and capable of self-powering per the recognized thermodynamics of open systems far from equilibrium in their exchange with an active environment.  Simply see why Prigogine was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1977 for his contributions to that second type of thermodynamics, which only applies to open disequilibrium systems --- the very kind of EM systems, e.g., that Lorentz arbitrarily discarded merely to ease the mathematical labor of solving the equations.

In short, all the perfectly permissible COP>1.0 Maxwellian systems were quite arbitrarily discarded, merely for mathematical convenience, more than a century ago.  Nature did not and does not discard them; human beings and today's scientists do.

A Lorentz regauging of the Maxwell-Heaviside equations actually assumes that the two potentials of a Maxwellian system are changed arbitrarily and freely.  It assumes that the vacuum furnishes extra potential energy to the system in two forms simultaneously.  However, it assumes that the system has been built to only accept these two free energy changes such that the two free EM fields so created are equal and opposite.  So the net translation field is zero, which prevents any use of the excess energy to translate electrons and do work in an external load.  But the two free fields and their energy are still present and now are converted into a stress potential.  This stress potential energy continually does internal work inside the system and upon it, to increase and maintain the system's stress. Further, the stress potential is a relativistic change of energy of local spacetime, so the system's frame has been arbitrarily rotated away from the laboratory frame.

For any professor or text to state that this highly modified system is the "same" as the system without such modifications, is rather ludicrous to say the least.  Almost all the texts say that  they are the same, or imply it. So there is a very big problem when the engineering departments do not understand the physics involved any better than that.

Indeed, let me make a very strong and very sad statement.  There is not now, and there never has been, a single electrical engineering department, electrical engineering professor, or electrical engineering textbook that even knows and teaches what powers an EM circuit.  It's really that bad. Let me now prove that statement.

In 1957, the Nobel Prize was awarded to Lee and Yang for their strong prediction of broken symmetry (particularly in 1956).  Wu and her colleagues proved it experimentally in early 1957.  So revolutionary a change to all of physics was the discovery of broken symmetry, that in a nearly unprecedented move by the Nobel Committee, Lee and Yang were awarded the Nobel Prize later that same year in Dec. 1957.

Sadly, electrical engineering has never recognized what really happened there in 1957, or what a profound change had been made to their  archaic old EM model, that doesn't even model the active vacuum and its energetic virtual photon exchange with the system, let alone a broken symmetry in that exchange.  So for 45 years electrical engineering has sat on its hands and refused to incorporate changes already long proven in particle physics.  I personally blame the National Academy of Sciences, National Science Foundation, great national laboratories, and universities for such an incredible oversight (shortsightedness or even blindness are more appropriate terms!).  And I feel that the blame for the entire worldwide electrical energy problem is squarely at the feet of the leaders of the scientific community.  We strongly believe that history will agree.

One of the broken symmetries proven by Wu et al. is the asymmetry of opposite charges --- such as are on the opposite ends of a dipole.

By the very definition of broken symmetry, this means that any dipole --- once formed --- will continuously absorb virtual photon energy from the seething vacuum, coherently integrate it into observable photons, and pour it out in all directions in space.  That's for free, once you make the dipole.  And the energy flow will continue forever, if you simply leave the dipole alone and do not destroy it.  We do not have to prove that.  It has long been proven in particle physics.  That it does not even exist in electrical engineering and the EE model, even after nearly a half-century, is a fault of the EE departments and the leaders of the scientific and engineering communities.

Let us perform a gedanken experiment.  Suddenly make a little dipole in the laboratory, having previously placed perfect instrument sets at every second of light travel length, along a radial axis across the universe. At the end of the first second, the first instrument package suddenly reads the value of the fields and potentials that appear there, as well as their energy densities, and the reading remains continuously thereafter rather than falling back to zero. This excludes considering that a pulse passed; instead, it was the front of a continuous flow of EM energy.  At the end of the next second, the second instrument package reads, and the reading remains thereafter.  And so on.  Wait one year, and you have changed the energy density of a volume of space that is one light year in radius --- reaching out beyond the solar system.  That is a mind-boggling amount of EM energy poured out of that little dipole you so easily and cheaply made and it is still pouring out at the same steady and constant rate. For the dipoles in the original atoms of the universe, etc., they have been doing that for some 14 billion years and have not "run down" yet.  And no one has input any observable EM energy into them.

There is an associated process by which the energy returns, but that is beyond the scope of this letter.  It is, however, perfectly consistent with quantum field theory.  It is not present at all in electrical engineering.

Back in the lab, after you made the dipole, all your perfect instruments also cannot detect any observable EM energy input to the source dipole.  So from whence comes all that energy that pours out of it?  Either there is an input of the energy in some other form, or this simple experiment destroys the entire conservation of energy law.  One cannot have it both ways, although electrodynamics has waffled for over a century on that "most difficult problem in electrodynamics".

A simple charge suddenly produced in the lab will continuously pour out observable EM energy in all directions in the same manner, freely and indefinitely.  Consider a fundamental charged particle, such as an electron. From quantum mechanics we know it is clustered around by virtual charges in the local vacuum, of opposite sign.  If I take a differential piece of the "isolated" observable charge, together with one of the virtual charges of opposite sign, then I have a composite dipole, and that dipole is a recognized, proven broken symmetry in the seething vacuum flux energy exchange with the end charges of that dipole.  In other words, a simple "isolated charge" is actually a set of composite dipoles, and thereby it also pours out EM energy in 3-space in all directions, continuously.  (It's a little more complicated than that, but this simple model is the gist of it for first order thinking.)

Every charge and every dipole already exhibits giant negentropy in that fashion.  You don't have to pay for the energy flow!  Nature provides that copiously and entirely freely. You just have to pay a little to make the dipole (or produce the charge), and then just let it alone and let it "do its thing".  It will happily pour out energy indefinitely and unceasingly for you.

So in 1999 (published in 2000) I used that "charge as a set of composite dipoles" to solve what has been called the most difficult electrodynamics problem (e.g., D. K. Sen, Fields and/or Particles, Academic Press, London and New York, 1968, p. viii.  Quoting: "The connection between the field and its source has always been and still is the most difficult problem in classical and quantum electrodynamics.").    In other words, until 2000 there was no clear electrical understanding of how a source charge --- any charge in the universe ---- continuously pours out real observable EM energy in all directions across space, forming its associated fields and potentials and their energy across all space (if the charge has been around since the beginning). Yet there is absolutely no observable EM energy input into that charge.  Standard U(1) electrodynamics (a part of which electrical engineering uses) just accepts (experimentally verified, easily) the outpouring of energy with no explanation of input energy.  My initial rather crude paper is: T. E. Bearden, "Giant Negentropy from the Common Dipole," Proceedings of Congress 2000, St. Petersburg, Russia, Vol. 1, July 2000 , p. 86-98.  Also published in J. New Energy, 5(1), Summer 2000, p. 11-23.  Also carried on DoE restricted website http://www.ott.doe.gov/electromagnetic/ and www.cheniere.org., the latter being my own website.

Hence because of the unresolved source charge problem, every electrical engineering professor, department,  textbook, and electrical power company already unwittingly assumes that every charge in the universe is a gross perpetual motion machine, freely creating energy out of nothing and pouring it out continuously.  That such an illogical mess continues in every engineering textbook and every electrical engineering department is a gross commentary on our scientific community, particularly since the basis for the solution to the problem has been in particle physics for 45 years.

Yet these are the very gentlemen that adamantly insist that a COP>1.0 Maxwellian system is impossible and against the laws of nature.  Every charge and dipole in the universe already refutes such a totally illogical stand.  It only takes a single white crow to prove that not all crows are black.  And we have trillions and trillions of proven "white crows" with respect to COP = infinity Maxwellian systems; these white crows are called charges and dipoles.

Anyone really committed to the notion that COP>1.0 Maxwellian systems are impossible, must either purge all charges and dipoles from his electrodynamics, or he stands convicted of teaching and advocating deliberate lies.  If he purges the charges, he will have no electrodynamics left.  Period.

It gets worse.

What does a generator do, once we forcibly turn its shaft?  Not one joule of that input mechanical energy to the shaft gets transduced into direct electrical energy on the attached power line.   Generators and batteries do not directly power circuits or power lines; they never have and they never will.  ALL electromagnetic energy --- in the fields, potentials, and waves --- come from the free output energy flow from the source charges, a priori.  The electrical engineering departments, professors, and texts do not seem to know that input energy to the generators and chemical energy in the batteries does not power the attached circuits, and they do not teach it.  It is true, nonetheless.  The basis for it has been well known in particle physics for 45 years.

Let us follow through to see what actually happens.

Let us assume a perfect generator with no losses.  Once the generator shaft is forcibly rotated (we pay for that!), the rotation of the rotor now transduces all the input mechanical shaft energy into internal magnetic field energy (we have assumed 100% efficiency).  So what happens to that internal magnetic field energy?

Every bit of it is dissipated upon the internal charges inside the generator, to force the positive charges in one direction and the negative charges in the other.  That creates the source dipole and dipolarity between the terminals of the generator.  We must pay for establishing that dipole. Once.  If we just let the dipole alone, we never have to pay for it again.

And that is all that powering a generator does.  That is all that burning the hydrocarbons, building dams, putting up windmills, using nuclear fuel rods, etc. does.  It simply makes that little source dipole inside the generator.  And yes, we have to pay for that --- ONCE, unless we are completely insane and deliberately destroy it, which is precisely the state that electrical power engineering has been in for the last 100 years.

Once the dipole is formed, now we pass to particle physics because electrical engineering in its 120 year old antiquity has not yet even included the vacuum interaction and asymmetry in that interaction, long after it has been resoundingly proven in particle physics.  One does not have to reprove that which is already well proven.  It is already well proven that the opposite charges on the ends of a source dipole, once made, will continuously absorb EM energy from the vacuum in virtual photon form. Further, the dipole will transduce that absorbed virtual photon energy into real observable photon energy, and it will then emit that real EM energy --- in this case, it will pour it out of the terminals of the generator in a mighty torrent, but still in a special form but now usable and observable when one interacts it with intercepting charge.  One does not have EM field energy of the engineering kind, until the mass-free and force-free "field" in space (existing as simply curvature of spacetime, in general relativity terms) has interacted with charged matter.  Only after interaction do we really have Poynting energy S = E X H because only then do we have E or H, or force.  Until then, we have the energy in a torrential flow as a pure virtual energy current in the active vacuum  (being made of virtual stuff, the vacuum currents are of virtual energy, which is also "force-free field energy" currents of energy.  That is higher group symmetry electrodynamics, not the old electrical engineering stuff so long outdated.)

>From that torrent of "energy current flow" in the vacuum, generally parallel to the external conductors acting as special "waveguides", the external circuit (particularly the surface charges in the conductors and their fields reaching outward) intercepts the energy flow  and diverges a small component of it into the conductors, interacting with the Drude electrons.  That is the Poynting (diverged) energy flow component only.  The rest of the field-free energy flow current in the vacuum in space around the conductors just misses the circuit and is wasted.   That Heaviside nondiverged energy flow component may be, and usually is, a trillion times or so as large as the intercepted Poynting energy flow component caught by the circuit.

All the energy pouring out of the terminals of a generator or battery, and filling all space around the external conductors and power lines, comes directly from the vacuum, via the broken symmetry of the source dipole.

The power companies waste enormously more electromagnetic energy than they catch and utilize.  And they don't even know it.  They continue to blindly use a neat little integration trick that Lorentz taught them before 1900, to arbitrarily drop from all accounting that enormous Heaviside nondiverged "dark energy" flow associated with every field/charge interaction and with every EM circuit.

In honor of Heaviside, I have personally nominated that long unaccounted "dark Heaviside energy flow component" accompanying every field/charge interaction as the long-sought source of the excess gravity that is holding the arms of the spiral galaxies together.  In short, we proposed it as the solution to the "dark matter or dark energy" problem.  We have also proposed a novel but bench-testable solution for the source of the antigravity responsible for accelerating the expanding universe.

Then our electrical engineers give us a fiendish standard closed current loop circuit, which drives all spent electrons in the ground return line back through that source dipole inside the generator, against its back emf. It is easily shown that HALF the EM energy caught in the external circuit is used to scatter the source dipole charges and destroy the source dipole in the generator, thereby cutting off any further extraction of EM energy from the vacuum.   The other half of the "intercepted and caught Poynting energy" is dissipated in the losses and loads of the external circuit.  That means that the silly closed current loop circuit uses more of its available "collected" energy to destroy its free input of EM energy extracted from the vacuum, than it uses to power its load.  That is NOT the way to run an energy railroad!

Well, it takes at least as much energy (precisely as much in an assumed perfect generator, more than as much if the generator has internal losses) to restore that dipole again, as it took to destroy it.  So to restore the dipole and its extraction of the EM energy from the vacuum, it requires that we now input more additional mechanical shaft energy to the generator than the useful energy we got out as work in the distant load or loads.

The closed current loop circuit automatically self-enforces that silly Lorentz symmetry condition!  It forces every Maxwellian system ---- using it exclusively ---- to be a COP<1.0 system.  The circuit  is specifically designed to destroy its own free source of EM energy from the vacuum, faster than it powers its loads.

We pay the power company to engage in an absolutely insane Sumo wrestling match inside its own generators, and LOSE!

We pay the power company to take a little free vacuum energy and furnish it to the power line, but to use a majority of the free energy collected to destroy the system's further operation.

We pay the power company to actually extract a trillion or so times as much energy from the vacuum as it catches and uses, and just inanely waste the rest and not even try to catch it an use it.

We pay the power company so that the oil and coal and gas and pipeline and nuclear companies can continue to rape and pollute the planet, just so the power company and electrical engineers can continue to insanely wrestle inside their generators, destroying their free extraction of EM energy from the vacuum faster than they power their loads.

To borrow a phrase from Nikola Tesla, that is one of the "most inexplicable aberrations of the scientific mind that has every been recorded in history." Harsh words, but true.  Forgivable until 1957, but certainly no longer forgivable after the discovery of broken symmetry and the award of the Nobel Prize to Lee and Yang.

Further, if we get rid of Lorentz's arbitrary discarding of that huge Heaviside nondiverged energy flow component, then every generator and every battery is already a COP>>1.0  energy transducing system.  It produces enormously more energy flow, extracted from the vacuum exchange via the source dipole's broken symmetry, than the feeble amount of shaft input energy to the generator to form that dipole.  It was precisely to avoid having to face that awful and then-inexplicable fact, that Lorentz created that neat little integration trick in the first place.  If he had had to state the truth openly, he would have been destroyed by the scientific community as a perpetual motion nut advocating violation of the conservation of energy law.  The electron, atom, and nucleus had not been discovered. There was little of anything of today's modern particle physics.  The molecule was a "blob" without structure.  There was no special or general relativity, quantum mechanics, quantum electrodynamics, or the great non-Abelian EM models later built for particle physics because the Maxwell-Heaviside-Lorentz theory did not describe nature adequately. Electrodynamics was just material fluid theory --- hydrodynamics by another name.  Space was filled with the luminiferous material ether, and there was considered to be no point in all the universe where mass was absent.  There was no active vacuum, no broken symmetry in the vacuum's interaction with systems, etc.

So unable to solve the problem of the COP>>1.0 of every power source as an energy transducer, Lorentz got rid of the problem itself.  He stated that the huge nondiverged Heaviside energy flow component "had no physical significance" because it powered nothing.  That's true, for that particular system only, so long as no attempt is made to intercept and collect more of it, which is easily done.

Can we prove that latter statement?  Yes.

In nonlinear optical materials media, there is a well-known effect variously called "negative absorption of the medium," "negative resonance absorption of the medium", "negative resonance absorption," etc. which actually means "excess emission by the medium" and COP>1.0.  E.g., an example of the thousands of proven experiments along those lines is given by Craig F. Bohren, "How can a particle absorb more than the light incident on it?" American Journal of Physics, 51(4), Apr. 1983, p. 323-327. Under nonlinear conditions, a particle can absorb more energy than is in the light incident on it.  Metallic particles at ultraviolet frequencies are one class of such particles and insulating particles at infrared frequencies are another. See also H. Paul and R. Fischer, {Comment on "How can a particle absorb more than the light incident on it?'}," Am. J. Phys., 51(4), Apr. 1983, p. 327. The Bohren experiment is easily repeatable by any university nonlinear optics lab and produces COP = 18.  Anywhere, anytime.

The real electrodynamics explanation for negative resonance absorption is simple.  The fields are defined in terms of their interception by a unit point STATIC charge, assumed at every point in space in the field, and this static charge sweeps out a sort of "standard, static" geometrical interaction area.  It therefore provides the standard "reaction cross section", rigorously, that is used in defining the field (actually, in defining its local intensity of interaction with a unit point static charge).   By placing the same charge into resonance, it sweeps out a greater geometrical interaction area in space, therefore now intercepting some of that available but unaccounted Poynting nondiverged component (with respect to that static charge).  It simply redefines the field's magnitude, since it redefines the intensity of the field's interaction for a RESONANT charge as opposed to the former definition for interaction with a STATIC charge.  So the same charge now intercepts 18 times as much energy from the same energy flow and "field energy" as we "calculate" we input by Poynting calculations.  Of course, we actually did input lots more energy than what we accounted, but in the form of that unaccounted Heaviside nondiverged energy flow component.

In short, there are thousands and thousands of rigorous, easily performed experiments already well known in physics, which actually prove the existence of that Heaviside component, prove it can easily be intercepted to extract additional energy,  and therefore prove COP>1.0 electromagnetic systems.

In Heaviside's honor, I have nominated that long discarded but huge Heaviside energy flow component --accompanying every field/charge interaction but long neglected since Lorentz arbitrarily discarded it from accountability  -- as the source of the excess gravitation holding the arms of the spiral galaxies together.  It is testable on the bench, and I believe the proposed mechanism will hold.  In other words, that is the solution to the dark matter/dark energy problem generating the excess gravity in the arms of the spiral galaxies.  The silly Lorentz integration trick in conventional electrodynamics and electrical engineering has been blocking that solution for decades.

At any rate, the MEG is simply an application where the known asymmetry of a source dipole -- the permanent magnet -- is never destroyed.  Hence we never have to furnish any energy to "restore the source dipole".   Instead, we only have to furnish a little "perturbation" energy to perform dA/dt = - E, and dB/dt = - k(E).  We can make E-fields as large in magnitude as we wish, merely by adjusting the rise and decay times of the nearly rectangular input "perturbation" pulses.  All that is quite rigorous, and a decent mathematical analysis will and does easily show it.

>From any field E, one can collect as much emf and force F as desired, given sufficient intercepting charges.  That is just the very simple equation F = Eq.  So with the MEG, since we never use half the collected EM energy in the external circuit to destroy the primary source dipole (the permanent magnet dipole), all we have to do to provide COP>1.0 is collect enough of the perturbed E-field energy to power sufficient loads.

It's really that simple, even though the actual physics mechanisms are very complex.  Nonetheless, they are quite real and documented in the hard literature already, in a great number of papers.  They just do not appear in electrical engineering, and particularly in power system engineering.

That is the technical explanation, in simplest terms, of what we have done. Have any good particle physicist you wish examine it.  But be sure he knows about the Aharonov Bohm effect and geometrical phase, and understands that much better higher group symmetry EM models than the old U(1) stuff and the old Maxwell-Heaviside-Lorentz stuff have long been developed in particle physics.  And be sure he realizes what E = F/q means, where q can be changed from a "static" charge to the same charge in particle resonance.  Most have not considered it.

That will give you something to chew on.  We are not interested in devoting time to "convincing" anyone, since it is already in the accepted scientific literature.  As we stated, there is no need to reprove that which is already well proven in the literature.  One just has to read the literature and recognize it. Or in our case, we just have to cite the requisite literature.

Our job is to obtain our financial partner and set up the lab (in four areas of physics as well as the ordinary electrodynamics stuff) and get it done as rapidly as is humanly possible.  We are not particularly interested in government work, because of the "march-in rights" clauses and other squirrelly means where they try to steal one's patent, and we are not very much interested in large electrical power companies, having unfortunately found most of them notoriously short in their knowledge of physics, and particularly of particle physics, but long on their belief that their financial clout will rule the day.  Also, most of them understandably have a nearly incredible long-term financial investment in the present status quo, and are extraordinarily resistant to any serious change because of the significant financial implications.  They are particularly committed to Big Nuclear power and the present centralized infrastructure.  A nuclear power plant is just a glorified heater to make the steam to run the steam turbines to crank the generator shafts to make the source dipole to extract the energy from the vacuum.   The same group then designs the external power distribution system to deliberately destroy the source dipole faster than it powers the loads.  Just so they can keep burning all that hydrocarbon or using those nuclear fuel rods, to keep making the heat for the boilers etc., to continuously restore the dipoles that they themselves destroy.

As we said, that is not the way to run the energy railroad.

We will have all this and a great amount of detailed information in book to be published at the end of this year or first of 2003.  After that, all the doubts and skepticism of the power companies and the scientific community are of little consequence or concern.  We intend to turn loose all those sharp young grad students and post-docs who have been ill-informed by the universities at best, and misinformed at worst, for many decades.

Very shortly thereafter, we expect to see a permanent solution to the electrical energy problem, with gradual decentralizing of the present highly vulnerable and untenable centralized power infrastructure over a period of years.  The Hubble curve for cheap oil has peaked, and oil prices will inevitably rise from now on, one way or another.  Our administration is now openly warning the American public of the coming advent of mass casualties from terrorist attacks.  The terrorists are also going to lay that terribly vulnerable centralize energy infrastructure of ours down.  Consider they hijack another jet liner and fly it into a nuclear power plant main container building.  One risks a meltdown, which would make Chernobyl look like a picnic.   It would contaminate several states with nuclear radiation, with millions of casualties.  Any nation such as Iraq or such can easily build a portable EMP shooter, which can be loaded in the back of a personal van or other vehicle.  A few shots from that beast can also take out the electrical controls of a nuclear plant, easily.  That kind of vulnerability is intolerable.  20% of the domestic oil in the U.S. passes through a single pipeline 800 miles long in Alaska, and above ground.  You can fire a high-powered rifle bullet through the casing; someone did it a few months ago.  Several terrorist teams with C4 packages and timers, and with duct tape, can go in at night, plant the explosives, and be long out of there when the pipeline is cut in multiple places.  In addition to the biospheric disaster, the pipeline will be out for years, and there went 20% of the domestic oil in one shot.  Every pipeline runs for miles through the boonies, and a couple guys with shaped charges and timers can easily take it out, any time they wishes.  Most of the equipment and crews for the oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico pass down a single two-lane state highway in Florida, which is just above sea level with many bridges.  More than 1,000 18-wheelers pass down that road every day. Again consider what a few fellows with C4 packages and timers can do.  Or a few skin divers with the C4 and timers, to the 20,000 miles of undersea pipeline that brings the oil ashore from the Gulf offshore rigs, etc.  

The entire energy infrastructure is so vulnerable, and so easily damaged heavily, that it is highly probable the terrorists will do it.  That is one way to defeat the U.S. quite easily: Just destroy enough of its energy infrastructure, and the economy will fold. The resulting collapse of the U.S. economy will also collapse much of the economy of the world.  This is a doable, and the nations backing the really professional terrorists know it.  There are also nuclear weapons in every major U.S. city; the Russians brought them in quite some time ago, before the collapse of the former Soviet empire.  Read Lunev's book; he tells you several ways they brought them in here, along with the Spetznaz teams to detonate them if the need ever arises.  Power lines run for hundreds of miles on towers, all easily interdicted by terrorist commandos with C4 and timers.  You can see the point.  There really should be a huge Manhattan Project right now, to quickly and massively develop and deploy with great rapidity self-powering decentralized power systems.  Otherwise, there is a high probability that the nation can be destroyed by interdicting its monstrous centralized energy infrastructure and collapsing its economy.

Other developed nations are in precisely the same shape.

My personal advice to the power companies would be to get on board, come off the skepticism, and go read some physics.  Simply find out what has been discovered and proven in the last 100 years in physics, that the electrical engineers have adamantly refused to adopt into their very archaic and obsolete model --- and hence into their practice and into our present monstrously archaic and highly vulnerable power systems and infrastructure.

You can also get lots of additional information from my website, www.cheniere.org .

Very best wishes,

Tom Bearden, Ph.D. Magnetic Energy Ltd.

Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:10 AM

Subject: The President comes calling

Hi Tom FYI we received a few hits today on the Website for the first time from EOP.GOV - the executive office of the President.

Certainly much there for his staff to digest amid the clamor of special interests.

Best

Tony