To: "David Crockett
Williams" Subject: RE: Energy Solutions Briefing Info [Sacramento followup] Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 00:13:53 -0500
Dear David,
Thanks for keeping me informed of these important developments.
You are quite correct in that the energy crisis can be solved quickly
and
permanently, whenever the scientific community and other powers will
allow
it to be done, and will fund its development. The cost of a
single large power plant will solve the entire world energy crisis
forever. Due to the now well-known shenanigans of using national
security classification improperly to steal and hide technology from
independent inventors, it is also necessary to place strong shackles
on the various government organizations just willy-nilly doing this.
For that reason, I previously recommended a Presidential Decision
Directive, or some such, which would thus chain those who engage in
under-the-table dealing with favored contractors, becoming tiger
sharks in the sea rather than those who would assist the innovative
small inventor. Simply check out Larry Fullerton's inventions
here in Huntsville in spread spectrum type technology, and the efforts
made to deprive him of it.
Presently I'm slowly recovering from a heart attack, so am on a more
leisurely work pace, but steadily improving. On my website I am
also trying to put up good technical information on permissible
COP>1.0 electrical power systems, and the theory and principles by
which they work. That effort will continue unabated. The
website is graciously furnished pro bono by Network Innovations Inc.
and is also being maintained by Mr. Tony Craddock.
Working with advanced theorists of AIAS (Alpha Foundation's Institute
for
Advanced Study), the AIAS has published one excellent scientific
article on
our experimental device and how it is able to extract EM energy from
the vacuum. This paper was published in one of the leading
physics journals.
The article is 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. A second AIAS paper on the MEG, by the same
authors, showing the unified field theory aspects, has been approved
and will be published in August. It is: "Explanation of the
Motionless Electromagnetic Generator with the Sachs Theory of
Electrodynamics," Foundations of Physics Letters, 14(4), 2001, p.
387-393 (in press). Some other very important AIAS papers with
respect to energy are (same authors): "Derivation of the Lehnert
field equations from gauge theory in vacuum: Space charge and
current," Foundations Of Physics Letters, 13(2), APR 2000,
p.179-184; ---- "Classical electrodynamics without the Lorentz
condition: Extracting energy from the vacuum," Physica Scripta
61(5), May 2000, p. 513-517; ---- "On Whittaker's F and G Fluxes,
Part III: The Existence of Physical Longitudinal and Timelike
Photons," Journal of New Energy, 4(3), Special Issue, Winter
1999, p. 68-71; "Representation of the Vacuum electromagnetic
Field in Terms of Longitudinal and Time-Like Potentials: Canonical
Quantization," Journal of New Energy, 4(3), Special Issue, Winter
1999, p. 82-88; ---- "Operator Derivation of the Gauge Invariant
Proca and Lehnert Equation: Elimination of the Lorentz
Condition," Foundations of Physics, 39(7), 2000, p. 1123-1130.
With regard to disbelief in permissible COP>1.0 electrical systems, one of
the difficulties in the academic community is that the standard
classical U(1) electrodynamics used to design and build all
conventional electrical power systems has two highly simplifying and
erroneous assumptions: (1) that the local spacetime is flat, and (2)
that the local vacuum is either inert or the system is in equilibrium
with it. As is well-known in thermodynamics, only an open system
in disequilibrium exchange with its active environment is
permitted to exhibit COP>1.0. All systems in equilibrium are
covered by classical (equilibrium) thermodynamics and are limited to
COP = 1.0 or less. So the type of electrodynamics -- U(1) --
being taught to all our nation's electrical engineers, already
arbitrarily and erroneously discards the special active environment of
the electrical power system, that "active environment" being
comprised of two parts: (1) the local curvatures of spacetime and
their dynamics, and (2) the local
active vacuum and its exchange dynamics.
In short, none of our universities and power company scientists
consider the
supersystem, which consists of three components: (1) the system and
its dynamics (this is what is taught in university), (2) the active
vacuum and its exchange dynamics, and (3) the local curvatures of
spacetime and their dynamics. All three components of the
supersystem interact with each other.
No analysis of any COP>1.0 system can be adequately made unless a
higher
symmetry electromagnetics is used to analyze it in what is essentially
a unified field theory approach. U(1) electrodynamics eliminates
the entire "active environment" portion of the supersystem,
thus covers only systems in equilibrium and thus limited to
COP<1.0. On the other hand, when the active environment is
included, the supersystem then permits "free electromagnetic
winds" entering the system and consequent COP>1.0 operation.
In short, it permits "electromagnetic windmills" with steady
and free winds, while U(1) permits the windmill but eliminates the
wind.
In fact, such open systems far from equilibrium (i.e.,
"electrical windmills with steady winds, so to speak) are
well-known to permit five "magical" functions. Such a
system can (1) self-order, (2) self-oscillate of self-rotate, (3)
output more energy for work in the load than the operator has to input
(the excess energy is freely received from the active environment),
(4) power itself and its load simultaneously (all the energy is freely
received from the active environment, and (5) exhibit negentropy.
It is indeed strange that every conventional electrical power system
is still designed on the basis of 137-year-old
Maxwell-Heaviside-Lorentz regauged theory, which erroneously assumes
an inert vacuum and a flat spacetime. The active vacuum has been
proven and used in particle physics for decades, and in fact the
broken 3-symmetry of the source dipole in every generator has also
been in particle physics for nearly a half-century. Yet it does
not even appear in U(1) electrodynamics, even though Lee and Yang were
awarded the Nobel Prize for, among other things, predicting that
broken symmetry. Lee and Yang strongly predicted broken symmetry
in 1956, and it was experimentally confirmed by Wu et al., in early
1957. So important and profound a change to physics was this
broken symmetry discovery that Lee and Yang were awarded the Nobel
Prize in latter 1957, the very same year it was experimentally proven!
Yet the broken symmetry of the source dipole (and every charge; see my
Giant Negentropy paper) has not yet even been incorporated into
electrical engineering, or considered in the design of electrical
power systems.
Electrical engineering departments are still completely unaware that
all 3-space EM energy comes from the time-domain, and that cranking
the shaft of the generator separates the internal charges to make the
source dipole between its terminals, but does not add a single watt to
the power line.
The dipole, once made, freely extracts EM energy from the vacuum in
unusable
form, transduces it into usable form, and outputs it in that usable EM
energy form. Every electrical circuit and every electrical power
system is and always has
been powered by EM energy extracted directly from the vacuum.
And even though the rigorous basis for that has been in particle
physics for nearly a half century, it has not yet made it into the
electrical engineering curriculum, or the electrical power company's
lexicon.
One can extract all the EM energy one wishes, cleanly and easily, from
the vacuum -- anywhere, anytime, inexhaustibly. The problem is
not getting out the energy, but in intercepting it and using it
without destroying the source dipole that is doing the extracting.
All our engineers are taught to design in and produce entropy in their
systems, when in fact it is simple to design continuous negentropy
(the fifth function that any open dissipative system is permitted to
do, and that every charge and dipole already do).
In the year 2000, after a three-year struggle I finally solved the long-vexing problem of the source charge, recognized as the most difficult problem in electrodynamics (see D.K. Sen, Fields and/or Particles, Academic Press, London and New York, 1968, p. viii). For the solution, see my paper (available on my website, www.cheniere.org ): "Giant Negentropy from the Common Dipole," Journal of New Energy, 5(1), Summer 2000, p. 11-23. The solution required correcting Whittaker's misinterpretation of the phase conjugate wave half of his phase conjugate longitudinal wavepair, in his 1903 decomposition of the scalar potential. After publication of this paper, I also discovered very strong theoretical support for that reinterpretation, in F. Mandl and G. Shaw, Quantum Field Theory, Wiley, 1984, in Chapter 5. This standard textbook gives a deeper coverage of the photon polarizations in quantum field theory. Mandl and Shaw strongly argue that the longitudinal and scalar polarizations are not directly observable, but only in combination, where they manifest as the "instantaneous" Coulomb (i.e., electrostatic) potential. My comment is that this strong argument,
translated from particle terminology to wave terminology, directly
fits and powerfully supports my re-interpretation of Whittaker's 1903
decomposition
of the scalar potential. However, Mandl and Shaw fail to
account for their assumed interaction of the detecting/observing unit
point charge (which is what does the "combining" of the
scalar and longitudinal photons), and thus fail to account for the
absorption of the incoming time-polarized wave or photon, the
transduction of that excitation energy of the charge into longitudinal
EM wave/photon energy, and the subsequent emission of that excitation
energy as a longitudinal EM wave or photon in 3-space. Thus Mandl and
Shaw missed the time-excitation charging via absorption of the
"coupled" time-polarized EM wave/photon, and the decay by
emission of the 3-space longitudinal EM wave/photon. This novel
but extraordinarily fundamental interaction has been erroneously
omitted in physics prior to our belated recognition of it. So
Mandl and Shaw do not account for photon (or wave) polarization
transduction, where the "causal" time-polarized EM wave or
photon comes in and is absorbed by the detecting charge or dipole,
then re-emitted as the longitudinally polarized EM wave or photon in
3-space.
There are indeed mathematical physicists and electrodynamicists, such
as Evans, Barrett and others, who readily handle non-Abelian
electrodynamics with higher group symmetry such as O(3) or
SU(2)XSU(2). Only such higher symmetry electrodynamics can
directly model COP>1.0 EM systems, because the lower symmetry
models such as U(1) arbitrarily destroy the active environment, the
source of the excess energy, and the interactions that produce it in
the system. Nonetheless, an engineering science is perfectly
possible and can be developed, given the proper funding and carefully
selected theorists to do it, and anytime the scientific community will
allow it to be funded.
In addition to some of the successful units you mentioned, our own MEG
development (presently a successful laboratory experiment) can be
readied for commercial production in about a year of further
research and development.
We have moved our research overseas to a foreign laboratory, because we could find no U.S. laboratories, universities, or government national laboratories willing to undertake or fund such research in a nondisclosure, non-circumvention manner. U.S. universities, e.g., are also quite intensively pressuring their scientists and professors to file patents. So do the U.S. national laboratories, including those under the U.S. Department of Energy. DARPA, e.g., is wont to use nearly piracy in its phrase of the government reserving "march-in rights" anytime it declares the inventor is not getting his invention to market "fast enough". It was a
distinct pleasure to find that there are indeed highly capable foreign
scientists in very modern labs, who are already fully aware that the
U(1) electrodynamics cannot be applied to many areas such as
COP>1.0 EM power systems, and in fact already teach in their
universities the higher symmetry electrodynamics which in the U.S. is
largely confined to use in particle physics, not the electrical
engineering departments.
Anyway, I appreciate you keeping me informed, and look forward to your
success in your own negotiations and research. California and
its experiences should serve as a wake-up call to what is in store for
the rest of the nation, unless more than lip service is given to the
favorite buzz phrase of the day: innovative out-of-the-box research --
such as legitimate research in higher symmetry electrodynamic power
systems.
Best wishes,
Tom Bearden
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 4:42 AM
To: laura.parrish@gov.ca.gov
Subject: Energy Solutions Briefing Info [Sacramento followup]
[please excuse renegade line spaces inserted by my webmail]
From: "David Crockett Williams" <gear2000@lightspeed.net>
Subject: Energy Solutions Briefing Info
Date: Thursday, August 02, 2001 4:50 PM [faxed ~5:05PM]
David Crockett Williams
gear2000@lightspeed.net
General Agency Services
Tehachapi, CA 93561
Phone: 661-822-3309
Fax: 561-658-2735
Thursday, August 2, 2001
Laura Parrish
Scheduling Office of Governor Gray Davis
Sacramento, CA
Phone: 916-445-6533
Fax: 916-323-8725
Dear Ms. Parrish:
Thank you very much for your efforts trying to get Governor Davis'
representative to attend our Energy Crisis Solutions Summit session
earlier this week and for your kind offer to follow up on the
information we left in the Governor's office lobby on Monday with the
Governor's Staff Assistant Sherri Herlinger who said she would deliver
it to the appropriate person in the Governor's office for review and
consideration by Governor Davis' Senior Energy Advisor, David Freeman,
and his Energy Advisor Kellan Fluckiger.
As you suggested I will phone you again next week to see if there is
someone on the Governor's staff with whom by then we can continue to
followup on this information which we hope will be well received there
to help solve the energy crisis in California and the Country.
This note is to offer additional information, some of which has come
to light since our visit Monday to your office and the California
Energy Commission with "new-energy technologies" experts Dr.
Brian O'Leary, Hal Fox, Dr. Fred B. Wood Sr., and Mark Comings.
We were glad to meet with Dr. Surles and Mr. Kukulka at the Energy
Commission after we left your office.
Mr. Freeman may remember Dr. O'Leary in his position as Senior Energy
Advisor to Morris Udall when he ran for US president, and in the
mid-1970's
when in a similar capacity Dr. O'Leary assisted Congressman Udall in
hearings of the Congressional Environment and Energy Subcommittee when
they called Mr. Freeman as a witness before hearings of that
subcommittee in Washington DC.
Should Mr. Freeman want to meet with him, Dr. O'Leary will be back in
California and available to meet with Governor Davis and his advisors
September 6-7, before leaving on his two month European tour to
promote his newest book, "Re-Inheriting the Earth -- Awakening to
Sustainable Solutions and Greater Truths".
Dr. O'Leary co-authored, with Steve Kaplan, an excellent 1999 overview
article on these new-energy technologies [Miracle in the Void] which
is posted at http://www.connexion.org/kaplan/home.html
Mr. Kaplan will be in the Bay Area for a few days soon and would like
to come to Sacramento and meet with California energy officials on
Friday, August 17, to offer suggestions on how they might help utilize
this information to resolve the energy crisis and to discuss research
and development funding ideas.
Dr. O'Leary's previous book, "Miracle in the Void" about
these new-energy technologies related to the Zero-Point Energy Field
of the quantum vacuum flux, overviews some inventors he visited and
provides a "psychological guidebook" for mainstream
physicists coming to grips, as he did, with the reality of new physics
behind these "fuel-less" power technologies. O'Leary
also wrote the foreword to Jeane Manning's book, "The Coming
Energy Revolution", a copy of which I left in our pile of papers
with Ms. Herlinger on Monday and with Rob Schlichting at the Energy
Commission last Friday.
In that book, on p.163, there is reproduced the text of a federal law
by which the author claims many of these new-energy inventions are
classified as secret, patents denied or confiscated along with the
inventors' equipment, and inventors threatened with prison if they
talk about their work in this area. In the preceding pages the
case of Adam Trombly is discussed in this regard. New
information on this case has come to me recently which has a direct
bearing on the immediate situation where a representative of what the
San Jose Mercury News calls "the leading industrial family in San
Jose" wants to build a power plant now in San Jose, utilizing the
best available new-energy technology, on one of the several
parcels of land they have purchased since March of this year for power
plant
constructions in San Jose area. One such new-energy technology
under consideration for this purpose seems fatally encumbered by
suppression related to Manning's claims, the Trombly-Farnsworth
technology.
I first heard of Trombly's work in the early 1980's when he determined
the existence of what is now called (see DOE letter of May 12, 1998,
reproduced at http://www.prop1.org/thomas/peacefulenergy/980512.khan.htm
with related attachment at http://www.prop1.org/thomas/peacefulenergy/casimir.htm
mentioning the harnessing of this energy source as "...the 'Holy
Grail' of energy research") the "Zero-Point Energy Field of
the Quantum Vacuum Flux" from anomalous NASA planetary energy
measurements. Trombly had been a NASA consultant and was the
person who in 1991 headed the team that utilized a new technique to
extinguish the oil well fires in Kuwait after the Persian Gulf War,
which began eleven years ago today with the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.
The Federal gag order against Trombly mentioned in Manning's book
related to the Trombly-Kahn closed path homopolar generator that he
developed as an improvement on Bruce DePalma's "n-Machine"
and was a result of Trombly's visit to the US Naval Submarine
Laboratory where he saw that they were working on this kind of
generator for submarine propulsion. He overcame that gag order
by court action and went on with David Farnsworth, whose father is
credited with the invention of television I believe, to develop the
Trombly-Farnsworth solid-state oscillating electromagnetic zero-point
energy extraction device which Trombly told me on the phone in May
1997 that they had operational for six years producing usable
"fuel-less" electric power. I recently learned from
someone who is now in day-to-day contact with Trombly and Farnsworth
that in 1996 Federal Marshals with chainsaws and sledge hammers
completely destroyed Farnsworth's $20 million electronics laboratory
along with this device. In 1997 Trombly explained to me on the
phone that he had proposed in 1989 the retrofitting of the Four
Corners coal-fired electric power plants with their ZPE device, at a
cost he estimated which I later learned approximates the cost of
installing smoke scrubbers, with the result of additional threats on
his life. During our recent visit to Sacramento my contact told
me of an incident involving President George H.W. Bush in 1989 when
Trombly and Farnsworth had scheduled a demonstration of this ZPE
device for members of the US Senate and President Bush flew into a
tantrum about it, throwing things around his office saying "we
can't let them demonstrate this", after which was scheduled on
the same date as this demonstration the only occasion during his
presidency when President Bush invited Senators to the White House to
"discuss the environment". The audience for this
demonstration was thereby successfully diverted and no Senators
attended it, instead going to this White House meeting.
I mention this information as some of many such "suppression
stories" which many inventors in this area have experienced, and
of which I am aware, over the past 25years of my interest and
involvement in this field.
Hal Fox, who with Dr. O'Leary founded the Institute for New Energy,
left you
two excellent papers prepared specially for Sacramento briefings
("New Energy Devices that will Change the World" and his
specially prepared brief for the Governor and Energy Commission) --
for consideration of his advice as editor of the Journal of New Energy
-- including mention of Thomas Bearden's recently developed
solid-state ZPE device reported in his paper on a DOE website (since
removed pending patent) based on his understanding of the overlooked
original quaternion form of Maxwell's equations of electromagnetism.
Dr. Wood, who also understands these original equations and Bearden's
work, submitted to your office, and the Energy Commission via Mr.
Kukulka, Dr. Bearden's June 24, 2000, paper on how to solve the energy
crisis quickly.
As Dr. O'Leary related to Dr. Surles on the steps of the Energy
Commission
offices Monday, not all of our suggestions relate to these
"new-energy" technologies and many relate to little known
advances in current energy science. Mark Comings discussed with
Dr. Surles and Mr. Kukulka the "lumeloid" new solar electric
technology in final stages of development by the inventor of
polarization film processes, who is now 90 years old. This
process utilizes a coated organic nanotechnology dipole matrix that
produces electricity from sunlight with efficiencies increased on
order of 10-fold and production costs reduced nearly 10-fold compared
to current silicon based photovoltaics. This process is based in
part on an understanding that more sunlight can be converted to
electricity by solar cells after first polarizing the incident light.
This also means that present silicon-based photo-voltaic systems can
be doubled in efficiency by simply coating their light absorbing
surfaces with a polarizing film also developed by this inventor, Dr.
Marx.
I will be happy to help in any way to facilitate future communications with these and other scientists and inventors in this new-energy field with whose work I am acquainted.
At your service,
David Crockett Williams
Cc:
Ronald W. Kukulka, Assistant Deputy Director for Energy Technology
Development, California Energy Commission (www.energy.ca.gov),
1516 9th
Street, MS 44, Sacramento, CA 95814-5504, 916-654-4628, fax
916-654-4676,
rkukulka@energy.state.ca.us
Terry Surles, Ph.D., Public Interest Energy Research (PIER) Program
Manager,
Technology Systems Division Director, California Energy Commission,
Sacramento
Sherri Herlinger, Staff Assistant, Office of Governor Gray Davis,
Sacramento
David Freeman and Kellan Fluckiger at presumed email addresses
Brian O'Leary
Hal Fox
Fred Wood
Mark Comings
Stephen Kaplan
Thomas Bearden
|