Hi Simon,

 

Thanks for pointing out the needed correction! Very good eye you have there, and your question is well-taken and very appropriate. The awkward statement should be corrected, just as you have pointed out.

 

The statement in the second paper “Errors and Omissions…” should more properly be:

 

“4.  The charge continually absorbs individually-ordered virtual photons from the vacuum’s overall statistically disordered ensemble, converting each to an ordered differential of mass-energy of the charge.”

 That action by the source charge is of course a total violation of the present old second “half-law” of near-equilibrium thermodynamics, since it involves a true Maxwell’s demon and also a true Feynman ratchet (more on that in a moment). Not to worry, because the source charge together with its virtual state energy input and its observable state output is a system far from equilibrium, and it is not limited by the old second law of the much older “near-equilibrium” thermodynamics. Specifically, such a nonequilibrium steady state (NESS) system is permitted – by the much more modern and more comprehensive far-from-equilibrium thermodynamics – to perform five exceptional functions. Such a system can:

 

(1)     Self-order (closely associated with negative entropy),

(2)     self-oscillate or self-rotate,

(3)     output more useful energy than the operator pays to input (the excess energy is freely input and received from the active local environment, in this case the active vacuum),

(4)     power itself and its load simultaneously (all the necessary energy input is freely received from the active local environment, in this case the active vacuum), and

(5)     produce negative entropy (closely related to self-ordering).

 

Indeed, quoting Nobelist Prigogine:

 

"Entropy ...cannot in general be expressed in terms of observables such as temperature and density. This is only possible in the neighbourhood of equilibrium... It is only then that both entropy and entropy production acquire a macroscopic meaning." [Ilya Prigogine, "Irreversibility as a symmetry-breaking process," Nature, Vol. 246, Nov. 9, 1973, p. 70.].

 

Indeed, for a listing of several areas already known and accepted to allow intentional violation of the old second law of near-equilibrium thermodynamics, see Dilip Kondepudi and Ilya Prigogine, Modern Thermodynamics: From Heat Engines to Dissipative Structures, Wiley, New York, 1998, reprinted with corrections 1999, p. 459. One of these areas is a strong gradient (of energy density across a region of space); another is due to the characteristics and memory of materials. Simply examine the incredible intensity of the EM field of a very small fundamental charged particle, right in on the particle, and one sees an incredibly sharp and strong gradient of energy density across the local vacuum region. So we must expect that source charge to violate the hoary old inappropriate second law of near-equilibrium thermodynamics, because it is a system very far from equilibrium and thus cannot be described by the near-equilibrium classical model. (More on that later).

 

Here's the explanation of the action of the source charge, in producing and continually replenishing its associated fields.

 

First, the virtual state vacuum is a larger entity that is statistically disordered overall. However, during that fleeting moment that each single tiny virtual particle exists, it itself is totally ordered individually.

 

So the situation is similar to Maxwell's remark about the second law of thermodynamics, with respect to macrosystems and their smaller microstructures. Quoting Maxwell (who was a thermodynamicist also):

 

"The truth of the second law is … a statistical, not a mathematical, truth, for it depends on the fact that the bodies we deal with consist of millions of molecules… Hence the second law of thermodynamics is continually being violated, and that to a considerable extent, in any sufficiently small group of molecules belonging to a real body." [J. C. Maxwell, “Tait's Thermodynamics II,” Nature 17, 278–280 (7 February 1878)].

 

Similarly, the virtual state vacuum is a "sea" of seething virtual state changes, each appearing then disappearing so rapidly that it remains subquantal in size and therefore virtual. As one "looks at" that overall seething virtual state sea or any appreciable portion of it, it seems statistically disordered as an “ensemble”. However, from moment to moment it is comprised of jillions of individual virtual particles, each of which is perfectly ordered during its brief existence.

 

So when the source charge absorbs a virtual photon, it is in fact acting as a "Maxwell demon". It is -- so to speak -- sorting out (from the entire “disordered” virtual state vacuum” and absorbing a single piece of perfect order out of that disordered melee. And the next virtual photon it absorbs is also perfectly ordered in the same fashion, though absorbed from that overall statistically disordered ensemble.

 

The end result is that the source charge absorbs perfectly ordered virtual photon after perfectly ordered virtual photon, changing each into an extra virtual mass-energy bit, added to the charge’s own innate mass. Its mass is already unitary, so these successively absorbed individually-ordered bits of energy add coherently as increasing virtual mass-energy of the source charge, until the increase in "virtual mass-energy excitation" is sufficient to reach the next quantal level of mass-energy excitation. At that moment, because of the zitterbewegung (fierce buffeting and shaking) of the source charge’s mass by the vacuum, a full quantum photon is "knocked out" of there. And so the source charge's mass abruptly decays by the sudden emission of an observable photon.

 

So the source charge sits there, iteratively accepting and absorbing individually ordered virtual photons, coherently integrating the resulting virtual mass-energy increases, and continually re-emitting the coherently integrated virtual excitation energy as a real, observable, usable photon. That part -- coherent integration of the individual bits of virtual mass energy to the next quantal level -- is analogous to Feynman's famous ratchet.

 

The process is of course iterative, and so it continually emits photons that move away at light speed.

 

In this way, every charge in the universe continually extracts ordered virtual EM energy from the overall disordered virtual state vacuum, integrates this iteratively absorbed virtual energy, and re-emits the integrated energy as real observable photons zinging in all directions.

 

Conservation of energy thus still applies, but between virtual and observable state. We can say that the source charge “consumes” positive entropy (of the virtual state, considered as a whole entity) via a Maxwell’s demon process, and that it produces negative entropy (of the observable state, considered as a whole entity by a Feynman ratcheting process.

 

This "Maxwell's demon" and "Feynman ratchet" process of every source charge thus accepts individually ordered virtual photons from the "statistically disordered" energy of the overall vacuum, coherently integrates the absorbed virtual energy bits with respect to the charge's mass (a negative entropy operation), and re-emits it as real observable (usable!!!) EM energy (real photons).

 

This process of emission in all directions of real photons by a source charge continually establishes and replenishes its associated EM fields and potentials, which continually spread outward at light speed. Assuming a fixed charge, classically we have been erroneously taught to refer to these fields established by the steadily emitted observable photons as the "static" fields of that source charge. Instead, those fields are comprised of steady flows of real photons! All our classical EM fields in electrical engineering – and the usable EM energy in all those fields – are produced by their associated charges in this fashion.

 

So what we usually think is a "static" field is actually a continuous flow of EM energy in the form of a steady flow of photons. It is precisely analogous to Van Flandern's beautiful unfrozen waterfall analogy. Quoting Van Flandern on the question of a static field actually being made of finer parts in continuous motion:

 

“To retain causality, we must distinguish two distinct meanings of the term ‘static’. One meaning is unchanging in the sense of no moving parts. The other meaning is sameness from moment to moment by continual replacement of all moving parts. We can visualize this difference by thinking of a waterfall. A frozen waterfall is static in the first sense, and a flowing waterfall is static in the second sense. Both are essentially the same at every moment, yet the latter has moving parts capable of transferring momentum, and is made of entities that propagate. …So are … fields for a rigid, stationary source frozen, or are they continually regenerated? Causality seems to require the latter.” [Tom Van Flandern, “The speed of gravity – What the experiments say,” Physics Letters A, Vol. 250, Dec. 21, 1998, p. 8-9]

 

The way the dipolarity comes into play is this: In modern physics, a single charge polarizes its surrounding virtual state vacuum. Indeed, the “bare charge” itself – in the middle – is infinite in charge and contains infinite energy. The polarized charge of opposite sign in the surrounding vacuum also is infinite in charge and contains infinite energy. But to an instrument peering through the surrounding infinite screening charge at the inner bare infinite charge, sees a finite difference between the two infinite quantities. Similarly for the “energy of the charge” that the instrument “sees”. So when one has a “tiny charge” such as a single electron, unknowingly one is already involved with infinite charge and infinite energy – and with a dipolarity. Quoting Nobelist Weinberg:

 

"[The total energy of the atom] depends on the bare mass and bare charge of the electron, the mass and charge that appear in the equations of the theory before we start worrying about photon emissions and reabsorptions. But free electrons as well as electrons in atoms are always emitting and reabsorbing photons that affect the electron's mass and electric charge, and so the bare mass and charge are not the same as the measured electron mass and charge that are listed in tables of elementary particles. In fact, in order to account for the observed values (which of course are finite) of the mass and charge of the electron, the bare mass and charge must themselves be infinite. The total energy of the atom is thus the sum of two terms, both infinite: the bare energy that is infinite because it depends on the infinite bare mass and charge, and the energy shift … that is infinite because it receives contributions from virtual photons of unlimited energy." [Steven Weinberg, Dreams of a Final Theory, Vintage Books, Random House, 1993, p. 109-110.].

 

So every “isolated charge” is actually not isolated at all, and it is also a part of a special dipolarity encompassing the entire universe.

 

In 1957, Lee and Yang were awarded the Nobel Prize for their prediction of broken symmetry in physics in 1956-57. So astounding a revolution was this prediction, if real, that the experimentalists quickly leaped upon it to either validate it or refute it. Almost immediately Wu and her colleagues experimentally proved broken symmetry in Feb. 1957, including the asymmetry of opposite charges (the common dipole). Accordingly, with unprecedented speed the Nobel Committee awarded the Nobel Prize to Lee and Yang the very same year, in Dec. 1957.

 

Well, in a broken symmetry, something virtual has become observable. Quoting Nobelist Lee:

 

“…the violation of symmetry arises whenever what was thought to be a non-observable turns out to be actually an observable.” [T. D. Lee, Particle Physics and Introduction to Field Theory, Harwood Academy Publishers, Chur, New York, and London, 1981, p. 181.]

 

So the broken symmetry of an EM dipole means that it continually receives and absorbs virtual (non-observable) state energy from the seething vacuum, coherently integrates it to observable state energy, and re-emits the absorbed energy as real, observable photons at light speed.

 

We ourselves do not have to find out how “we” can extract energy from the vacuum and convert it to usable energy. Every charge in the universe (including every magnetic charge, which we usually call a “magnetic pole”) already does it for us! We simply have to learn how to properly collect and use the energy from the incredible number of “free energy gushers” (source charges) in the universe.

 

From the moment of its appearance, a charge will continuously pour out real, usable EM energy extracted from the vacuum. An original charge from the creation of the universe has been doing that for some 13.5 billion years (thought to be the present age of the universe), and it hasn’t “run out of steam” yet. It will continue to do it for another 13.5 billion years, if the universe lasts that long.

 

We do not have now, and we have never had, an energy crisis per se. Instead, there is an energy from fuel crisis, because there is an escalating fuel crisis.

 

But all EM energy is actually for free, and it freely flows from every charge or collection of charge, and from every dipolarity, continuously and unendingly, so long as that charge or dipolarity is in existence.

 

It is certainly high time that we changed the sad old CEM/EE model to reflect the above. As the debilitated model stands now, it implicitly assumes that the source charge freely creates – from nothing at all – all that outpouring of energy that establishes and continually replenishes its associated fields.

 

If that were actually true, then it would completely destroy the first law of thermodynamics (conservation of energy), and thereby would destroy all of physics and thermodynamics as well. Since our instruments show that no observable energy is received by the source charge, even though it continually pours out real observable energy in all directions, then if conservation of energy is to apply the source charge must receive its energy from the seething virtual state vacuum, and it must coherently integrate virtual state energy into observable state energy, then emit the energy as observable, real, usable EM energy.

 

The leaders of our scientific community – NAS, NAE, NSF, DoE, etc. – should fund the correction of that sad old classical electromagnetics and electrical engineering model at highest speed. And it should simultaneously fund our sharp young grad students and post doctoral scientists in rapidly developing asymmetrical electrical power systems that simply divert, collect, and use some of the freely-flowing energy from the source dipole once it has been established. Only an asymmetric Maxwellian system can do that, without using half the freely collected EM energy to destroy the source dipole and thus cut off its free flow of energy from the vacuum.

 

If the science community would get its head out of the sand where it has been buried now for a century, the world energy crisis could be solved rapidly and cleanly – and permanently. It would allow cleaning up the biosphere, dramatically reducing emissions that accelerate global warming, etc.

 

I do thank you again for your meticulous reading of the material, and for letting me know of that inadvertent error or at least a very awkwardly worded statement needing substantial clarification! All my pencils still need their erasers, and every writer also needs a good editor!

 

Best wishes,
 

Tom Bearden

---

 

Subject: Can you resolve a little confusion for me?

 

Hi Tony,

 

I've read the Cheniere Announcements list with great interest for the last

several years, and am presently following Tom's comments on Steorn's

technology. However, I seem to have found a contradiction that I don't

understand. It may simply be a typo, but wondered if you or Tom could

clarify it for me.

 

At http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/082606.htm Tom says:

 

 the proven Lee-Yang broken symmetry of any magnetic dipole continually

 absorbs ordered virtual energy (ordered individual virtual photons) from

 the seething interactive vacuum, integrates this ordered virtual energy

 coherently into quantum energy, and re-emits real observable photons in

 all directions in a steady stream.

 

... whereas in Notes #4 of his paper on errors and omissions in

conventional EM theory:

 

... he seems to be saying the opposite - that it's DISordered virtual

photons that are being absorbed:

 

 4.  The charge continually absorbs disordered virtual photons from the

 vacuum, converting each to a differential of mass-energy of the charge.

 

Have I missed a crucial point somewhere along the line? Is it ordered or

disordered virtual photons that are absorbed? Or is it ordered ones by

dipoles and disordered ones by source charges?

 

Hope you can help.

 

All the best,

 

Simon