CTEC, Inc. (and also Alpha
Foundation’s Institute for Advanced Study)
2311 Big Cove Road, Huntsville, Alabama 35801. USA
Generators and batteries do
not furnish any of their internal energy to their external circuit,
but only dissipate it internally to perform work on their own
internal charges to form a source dipole. Once formed, the dipole’s
broken symmetry extracts observable energy from the virtual particle
exchange between dipole charges and active vacuum. The extracted
observable energy is reradiated as the energy flow through all space
surrounding the external circuit. The tiny Poynting fraction
intercepted by the surface charges enters the circuit to power it,
while the huge non-intercepted Heaviside fraction misses the circuit
and is wasted. So electrical loads are powered by energy extracted
from the vacuum, not by chemical energy in the battery or shaft
energy input to the generator.
Any EM system may be asymmetrically regauged freely, changing the energy of the system by changing its
potential. By placing the source dipole in a closed current loop
with external loads and losses, half the free excitation energy then
discharged by the circuit destroys the source dipole while half
powers loads and losses. This applies Lorentz symmetrical regauging
so that additional internal generator/battery energy must be made
available to dissipate on the internal charges to reform the dipole.
Such self-crippling EM power systems exhibit COP < 1.0 a priori.
Requirements for COP > 1.0 EM systems are given, as are recognized
examples of such processes. We also propose the ubiquitous
unaccounted Heaviside energy as the "dark matter" gravitational
energy long sought by astrophysicists.
A permanent solution to the world energy problem, dramatic reduction
of biospheric hydrocarbon combustion pollution, and cessation of
building nuclear power plants (whose nuclear component is used only
as a heater) could be readily accomplished by the scientific
community. However, to solve the energy problem we must,
the century-old notions in electrodynamic theory of how an
electrical circuit is powered
(ii) rid the classical
electrodynamics model of numerous serious foundations flaws
summarize the problems and essential changes, based on more modern
developments in particle physics and gauge theory well after the
foundations of electrodynamics were set. Self-powering systems
readily extracting electrical energy from the vacuum to power
themselves and their loads can be quickly developed whenever the
scientific community will permit their development to be funded.
Actually Powers the External Circuit Connected to a Battery or
Contrary to conventional wisdom, neither the shaft energy introduced
into a generator nor the chemical energy present in a battery is
used to power the external circuit. The internal energy in a
generator or battery is only dissipated to perform work upon the
internal charges, to separate them and form a source dipole between
the terminals, with some of the energy dissipated in other internal
Once formed, the source dipole’s broken symmetry
 in the
vacuum’s energy flux extracts enormous observable EM energy — many
orders of magnitude greater than the small amount of energy input to
the generator or present in the battery — from the virtual particle
exchange between dipole charges and active vacuum. The extracted
observable EM energy is reradiated as the EM energy flow through all
space surrounding the external circuit
. This energy flow is
usually referred to as the Poynting
 flow, but Poynting’s
theory  captured only a very tiny component of it.
captured the remaining huge component, but Lorentz
mathematically discarded it.
To summarize: The total energy flow in space surrounding the
conductors has two components as follows:
1) A tiny Poynting component
 of the energy flow directly along the surface of the
conductors strikes the surface charges
 and is diverged
(deviated) into the conductors to power the circuit.
2) The huge non-diverted Heaviside component
filling all space around the circuit, misses the circuit
entirely and is wasted in all those circuits using only a single
pass of the energy flow. The Heaviside energy flow can furnish
energy to the circuit if retroreflected to again pass over the
surface charges, but conventional power systems completely
ignore this enormous energy source accompanying every circuit.
Other methods of extracting energy from the neglected Heaviside
component are discussed later.
Eliminated the Heaviside Flow Component
The Heaviside component was arbitrarily discarded by H.A. Lorentz
, who integrated the energy flow vector itself around a closed
surface enclosing any volumetric element of interest. This discards
any nondiverted (nondiverged) energy flow components, regardless of
how large , and retains only the diverted (diverged)
component. Effectively Lorentz arbitrarily changed the energy flow
vector into its diverted flow component vector — a fundamental non
sequitur. In one stroke he discarded the bothersome Heaviside
component, reasoning that it was "physically insignificant" because
— in single pass circuits — it does not enter the circuit and power
it. This is rather like arguing that all the wind on the ocean that
does not strike the sails of a single sailboat, is "physically
insignificant." A moment’s reflection shows that the "insignificant"
remaining wind can power a large number of additional sailing
vessels. A very large amount of energy can be extracted and used to
do work, if that "physically insignificant" wind is intercepted by
additional sails  .
If Lorentz had not arbitrarily discarded the huge Heaviside energy
flow component surrounding the circuit and not contributing to its
power, electrodynamicists would have been confronted with the
dilemma of explaining where such an enormous flow of energy —
pouring forth out of the terminals of every generator and battery —
could possibly have come from. Obviously the operator does not input
such enormous energy, because the Heaviside flow is often some 1013
times as large in magnitude  as is the retained
flow. Neither does a battery contain such enormous chemical energy.
Deadly Closed Current Loop Circuit
In conventional systems, a closed current loop contains the
generator or battery source dipole as well as the external circuit’s
loads and losses. This arrangement requires that half the collected
energy in the circuit must forcibly pump spent electrons in the
ground return line back through the back EMF of the source dipole.
Specifically, for every electron passing through the voltage drop
across the loads and losses in the external circuit, an electron
must be forcibly rammed back up through the source dipole against
the same voltage.
Forcing the spent electrons through the source dipole’s back EMF
performs work upon the end charges of the dipole to forcibly scatter
them. This destroys the dipole and cuts off its free extraction of
energy from the vacuum. In a charged battery, this "back EMF work"
causes a partial reversal of the normal chemistry
 of the
electrolyte, which reduces the chemical energy available by the
battery to re-establish the source dipole. The battery’s remaining
chemical energy is expended to continually restore the source dipole
as it is continually destroyed, until the chemical energy is
exhausted. Then one must introduce additional energy into the
battery to "recharge" it by forcing the chemistry back to its
initial fully charged condition.
Electrical loads are and always have been powered by energy
extracted and converted from the vacuum by the source dipole, not by
shaft energy furnished to the generator or by the chemical energy in
the battery. Half the Poynting energy collected in the external
circuit is expended in the circuit loads and losses (forward EMF
direction), and half is expended against the back EMF of the source
dipole (in the back EMF direction), destroying the dipole.
Another way of seeing this is to simply examine the scalar potential
existing between the two charges of a dipole. A "scalar" potential
is not really a scalar entity, although it has a scalar reaction
cross section for reaction with a static charge. Instead, it is a
harmonic set of bidirectional longitudinal EM wavepairs, as shown by
E.T. Whittaker  in 1903. Thus any dipole has:
an enormous set of
longitudinal EM wave energy flows into it from every point in the
and a corresponding enormous set of longitudinal EM wave
energy flows out from it to every point in the universe
source dipole is formed in the generator or battery, this energy
flow exchange between source dipole and the universal active vacuum
is established and ongoing, as is the broken symmetry of the dipole
in that energy flux exchange with the active vacuum. At any point in
the universe in that "potential" (organized bidirectional flow), a
charge will interact with the flow and extract energy from it.
Power Systems Are Designed to Forcibly Apply Lorentz Self-Regauging
Together the two equal halves of a conventional circuit’s energy
dissipation constitute forced Lorentz symmetrical self-regauging
 of the discharge of the excitation energy. In turn, this
causes the excited system to forcibly maintain its equilibrium with
its active vacuum environment while dissipating excitation energy in
the circuit loads and losses. Classical thermodynamics with its
infamous second law rigorously applies, because the system itself is
diabolically designed to continuously and forcibly restore itself
into equilibrium with its active vacuum environment by killing its
own source dipole gusher of vacuum energy flow.
A priori the source dipole is killed faster than the load is
powered, since half the circuit’s excitation energy is discharged to
destroy the dipole, while less than the remaining half of the
circuit’s excitation energy is discharged to power the load.
In a generator-powered system, continual input of energy to the
generator shaft is required to continually add energy to perform
work on the scattered charges, in order to restore the source dipole
which the closed current loop continually destroys. Thus our present
self-crippling vacuum-powered generator circuits/systems exhibit COP
< 1.0 a priori, as do our self-crippling battery-powered circuits
We must pay for the initial energy input to the generator to
establish the source dipole. Once formed, the dipole continuously
extracts and pours out enormous observable EM energy flow from the
vacuum. The typical closed current loop circuit receives only a
single-pass of the energy flow, and therefore only intercepts,
collects, and utilizes the very small Poynting component, simply
wasting the enormous Heaviside component that misses the circuit
altogether. Our present single-pass power systems waste some 1013
times as much energy as they catch and utilize. Scientists can
easily do better than this if they,
(i) remove Lorentz’s arbitrary
and erroneous discarding of the Heaviside energy flow
develop circuits and circuit functions to catch and use much of that
available but presently neglected huge energy flow
The intercepted Poynting energy flow component freely
"excites" the external circuit, which then will decay from its
excited state and release its excitation energy back to its vacuum
environment. Due to the design of the closed current loop circuit,
that decay is self-enforced to be a symmetrical regauging of the
system back to a non-excited state. In present closed current loop
circuits, half the Poynting excitation energy is still used in this
symmetrical decay to destroy the source dipole.
The other half of
the Poynting excitation energy is used to power the load and losses,
so that only a part of that half is dissipated in the load. A real
circuit has losses, so less energy is dissipated in the load than is
dissipated to kill the dipole. Since it requires at least as much
energy to re-create the dipole as to destroy it, then the energy
continually dissipated in the load is less than the energy we have
to continuously input to the shaft of the generator to re-create the
dipole. For real systems, with such a self-defeating circuit design
we cannot obtain as much work in the load as the energy we have to
input to keep restoring the dipole that our circuit diabolically
keeps killing. So conventional circuits exhibit COP < 1.0.
Mostly Pay the Power Company To Do
Essentially we pay the power company to engage in a giant Sumo
wrestling match inside its generators and to lose by killing the
free extraction of energy from the vacuum faster than the wrestling
process powers the loads.
We pay the power company to use only a "single pass" of the energy
flow along its transmission lines and the consumer power circuits,
and thereby to just "waste" some 1013 times as much available EM
energy as the company allows us to "use".
Present electrical power systems simply repeat this travesty over
and over, so that we are continually inputting external energy to
the generator to restore the source dipole, and having to input more
than we get back out as work in the load. That is why all
conventional EM power systems exhibit COP < 1.0 a priori. The system
is specifically designed to force itself to do precisely that, by
killing itself faster than it powers its load.
Such an inane power system continually forms a marvelous extractor
of vacuum energy, then turns upon itself suicidally. In an oil
derrick analogy, the system continually destroys its own energy flow
"well head" (source dipole) and does not capitalize upon it. That is
rather like drilling an oil well, bringing in a great gusher,
catching a little oil in barrels, burning half of the barreled oil
to deliberately cap the well, then drilling another well beside the
first one, forcibly recapping the second one, and so on.
This is what keeps those coal trains running, the fleets of oil
tankers steaming, the natural gas lines flowing with gas and the oil
pipe lines flowing with oil, and gasoline and diesel engines
powering our transport. It keeps enormously expensive nuclear power
plants being built so that their nuclear reactors can produce heat
to boil water to make steam to run turbines to input shaft power to
the electrical generators for the generators to restore their
continually-killed source dipoles.
insanity keeps our energy costs high, economically
burdens every citizen and every nation, impoverishes many
undeveloped and developing nations along with their peoples,
and pollutes the planet to the limit of its tolerance and
On our present course, we
are embarked upon destroying our biosphere and ourselves along with
it. Eerily, our scientific community ignores the terrible
135-year-old foundations errors in classical electromagnetics and
assures us that this is the best that electrodynamics can do. In
fact, the scientific community has not yet even recognized the
problem, much less the solution. Heartbreakingly, the community
itself seems adamantly bent on defending gross non sequiturs, dogma,
and the status quo, rather than correcting an aged discipline so
seriously flawed that it has become a scientific disgrace.
Requirements for Maxwellian EM Power Systems Exhibiting COP > 1.0
Along with some suggestions, the characteristics for permissible
electrical power systems that exhibit COP > 1.0 are:
1) The system must be an open
thermodynamic system far from equilibrium in its energetic
exchange with the active vacuum. In that case classical
equilibrium thermodynamics does not apply, and such a system is
(iii) power itself
and its loads simultaneously (the energy is just taken
from the vacuum)
2) The external circuit’s
loads and losses must not be completely coupled into the same
closed current loop with the source dipole in the generator. One
suggestion is to develop and use proven energy shuttling in
circuits. This discovery by Tesla
 can only be seen (and
designed) by electrodynamics theory embedded in an algebra of
higher topology than tensors  ,.
3) The system must iteratively collect additional energy
from the available but normally wasted enormous Heaviside energy
a) A primary way to do
this is to iteratively retroreflect the non-diverted Heaviside energy flow component after each pass, reflecting
it back and forth across the surface charges in the
circuit’s conductors, collecting additional EM energy in the
circuit on each repass.
b) A second avenue is to
intensively re-investigate and develop Kron’s
[8 , 63 ]
discovery of the "open path" for EM networks as a dual of
the conventional closed path.
c) A third suggestion is to further investigate and
develop (in higher topology algebra) Tesla’s
energy-shuttling in EM circuits as shown and improved by
Barrett [13 , 14 ]
d) A fourth suggestion is to utilize intensely
scattering optically active media (ISOAM) and develop
self-excitation processes in the medium. With output in the
infrared region, such a process could use the excess heat to
provide the heater portion of conventional power plants,
allowing relatively straightforward phase-in of clean vacuum
energy powering of most present major power systems.
Previous experiments with such ISOAM have utilized external
excitation of the medium and thus have COP < 1.0. However,
self-excitation looms in the mechanisms being uncovered in
the most recent experiments , which have shown
positive feedback loops, trapping of light flow energy in
large random walks of over 1,000 individual interactions,
weak Anderson-type localization, and constructive
interference of forward time and reversed time light paths.
These recent experiments point toward a potential
"vacuum-energy-powered heater." With additional research,
such a heater can become self-powering by the presence of
sufficient positive feedback (which will allow excess
collection from the Heaviside energy flow component). We
have pointed out  that this
ISOAM process — with the
self-excitation occurring spontaneously as a "kick-in"
process in an exploding gas — probably accounts for the
phenomena observed in the gamma ray burster. Re-ignition,
afterglow, and similar effects are observed in both the
gamma ray burster and also in the latest ISOAM experiments.
Similar phenomena occur in x-ray bursters as well, and
perhaps even in the recently confirmed gamma ray emissions
from intense storm clouds.
e) A fifth suggestion is to reopen the intensive
investigation of true negative resistors such as those by
Kron [8 , 63 ] and
Chung , adding the consideration of
vacuum energy interaction into the electrodynamics utilized
for the investigation. Indeed, the original point-contact
transistor often behaved in true negative resistor fashion,
but was never understood . The point-contact
transistor was simply bypassed by advancing to other
transistor types more easily manufactured and with less
f) As a sixth suggestion, we point out that all
semiconductor materials are also optically active materials,
and that a point discharge into such materials represents a
very sharp regauging discharge due to the increase in
potential at the tip. This means that the junction involves
asymmetrical self-regauging, iterative time-reversal
retroreflection, increased Poynting and Heaviside energy
flow components, optical scattering processes inside the
junction materials, etc.
g) As a seventh suggestion, intense sudden discharges
in ionized gases are especially of interest due to the
presence of optical frequency components and the involvement
of iterative optical retroreflection etc. These processes
seem to be involved in several investigations and inventions
h) As an eighth possibility, the present author
 has advanced an engineerable mechanism — still
proprietary at this time — for altering the rate of flow of
a mass particle (or a set of them, comprising a mass)
through time, including time-reversing the particle back to
a previous state. The mechanism provides for exciting and
discharging a charge with a time-charge excitation, where
time-charge (time-energy) is ordinary spatial energy
compressed by the factor c2. Hence time-charge (time-energy
excitation) has equal energy density to mass. In a small
time-reversal zone (TRZ) created by the process, like
electrical charges attract and unlike electrical charges
repel. We believe this process or a similar one may be
involved in the intense clusters of like charges
demonstrated by Shoulders
 and in cold fusion
reactions. The law of attraction and repulsion of charges is
reversed in a TRZ, but the TRZ then decays away, providing
an entirely new class of "inside-to-outside" nuclear
interactions not achievable by present "outside to inside"
collision physics at low spatial EM energy. As the TRZ
decays, energetic changes are initiated which start from
every point in space-time inside the TRZ — including inside
nucleons located in the zone — and move outward, interacting
first with the nearly-time-reversed quarks and gluons so
that quark-flipping and change of proton to neutron and vice
versa become favored reactions. In the highly localized TRZ
the quarks are nearly unglued anyway, so that alteration of
quarks is not formidable. We have proposed novel new
reactions  which produce most of the observed low
energy transmutations of the electrolyte experiments, and
also explain the anomalous phenomena experienced in the
instruments for several years in electrolyte experiments at
China lake. In addition to a vast new set of highly
localized nuclear reactions of extremely high time-energy
but extremely low spatial energy, the TRZ mechanism would
seem to allow the production of true negative resistors —
e.g., to be used as an external circuit bypass shunt around
the source dipole in the generator, transformer, or battery.
If so, once the process is developed and shown to be valid,
EM circuits exhibiting COP > 1.0 will hopefully become a
standard development, as will direct engineering of the
atomic nucleus and nucleons in that nucleus.
i) As a ninth mechanism, application by Kawai
 of adroit self-switching of the magnetic path in magnetic
motors results in approximately doubling the COP.
Modification of an ordinary magnetic engine of COP < 0.5
will not produce COP > 1.0. However, modification of
available high efficiency (COP = 0.6 to 0.8) engines to use
the Kawai process does result in engines exhibiting
COP = 1.2 to 1.6. Two Kawai-modified Hitachi engines were
rigorously tested by Hitachi engineers and produced COP =
1.4 and COP = 1.6 respectively. The Kawai process and
several other Japanese overunity systems have been blocked
from further development and marketing.
j) As a tenth suggestion, the Magnetic Wankel
engine  should also be capable of COP > 1.0 and closed-loop
self-powering, but apparently it has also been suppressed,
as have all Japanese COP > 1.0 EM systems.
k) As an eleventh suggestion, multivalued magnetic
potentials arise naturally in magnetics theory, but
theoreticians do all in their power to minimize or eliminate
their consideration. However, if deliberately used and
optimized, the multivalued magnetic potential can provide a
nonconservative field, where the
¹ 0 around a rotary
permanent magnet loop. In theory, this can enable a
"self-powering" permanent magnet rotary engine
l) As a twelfth suggestion, certain passive nonlinear
circuit components such as ferroelectric capacitors
have multiple nonlinear current processes ongoing inside. It
is possible to utilize such components only during the time
they pass the current against the applied voltage. By adroit
switching, in theory one can intermittently connect and
utilize such passive components as true negative resistors.
m) As a thirteenth suggestion, DeSantis et al.
 showed that feedback systems with a multipower open loop
chain can produce COP > 1.0 performance. Indeed, a frequency
converter using 64 transistor stages and similar
sophisticated feedforward and feedback mechanisms was placed
in the original Minuteman missile, then deliberately
modified to stop its demonstrated COP > 1.0 performance.
Very quietly, Westinghouse engineers then obtained several
patents  surrounding the technology, but no further
mention of it appears in the literature.
n) As a fourteenth approach, Johnson
built many novel linear and rotary motors and at least one
self-powering magnetic rotary device — later stolen in a
mysterious break-in at his laboratory — personally tested by
the present author. Johnson uses a bidirectional "two
particle" theory of magnetic flux lines which can be
justified by Whittaker’s earlier work showing the internal
bidirectional energy flows in all potentials and fields. He
also utilizes controlled spin-waves and self-initiated
precise exchange forces, which are known to momentarily
produce bursts of very strong forcefields
approach is to use highly nonlinear assemblies of magnets
which initiate the foregoing phenomena at very precise
points in the rotation cycle. In short, he seeks to produce
precisely located and directed sudden magnetic forces, using
self-initiated nonlinear magnetic phenomena. This is
analogous to what the Wankel engine did using the Lenz law
effect by sharply interrupting a weak current in a external
coil. We point out that the Lenz law effect and other very
abrupt field changes momentarily produce not only an
amplified Poynting energy flow component, but also an
amplified Heaviside energy flow component as well.
o) As a fifteenth approach, we previously proposed a
patent-pending mechanism whereby a degenerate semiconductor
alloy (say, of a bit of iron in aluminum wire) is utilized
for the conductors of the external circuit. By obtaining an
electron relaxation time of, say, a millisecond, one can
excite the circuit with potential alone, then switch away
the excitation source prior to its decay. In this way, pure
asymmetrical regauging is used to excite the circuit,
without requiring work (except for switching, which can be
made very efficient). The excited circuit then discharges in
Lorentz symmetrical fashion, but all the work in the load is
"free". If LE is load energy and SE is switch energy
utilized, this approach yields COP = LE ÷ SE and COP > 1.0
p) We are presently working on a patent-pending,
still-proprietary process whereby a permanent magnet is
given a "memory" at will. By adroitly manipulating the
memory, the magnetic flux from the magnet can be made to
prefer and take a desired magnetic path among several
available. Once one controls what the flux "prefers" and
when it prefers it, obviously COP > 1.0 is possible.
4) The system must dissipate
the excess collected energy in the circuit in the load (and in
the losses) without dissipating the source dipole, or by
dissipating the source dipole much slower than it powers the
load. For a two-wire circuit, one method might be to utilize a
true negative resistor shunt  in parallel with the
primary source dipole but in its external circuit. In that way,
some of the return current in the external circuit that is
forced back up through the back EMF will not pass through the
source dipole, but remain in the external circuit and the
bypass. With that arrangement, less than half the energy
collected in the circuit is then used to destroy the dipole, and
with minimal losses in the external circuit, more power can be
developed in the load than is dissipated in the source dipole to
destroy it. Hence such a system exhibits COP > 1.0.
5) For self-powering of Maxwellian COP > 1.0 systems once
developed, clamped positive energy flow feedback from output
side to input side and excess collection from the Heaviside
component can be used to power a motor turning the generator
shaft, with the remainder of the output dissipated in a load. We
stress that no laws of physics, electrodynamics, or
thermodynamics are violated, nor are Maxwell’s equations
violated before arbitrary Lorentz regauging. The conservation of
energy law is obeyed at all times. Such an open dissipative
Maxwellian system — which is what is being described —
rigorously is permitted to self-power itself in that fashion, as
shown by Prigogine  and others
 in the study of
nonlinear systems far from thermodynamic equilibrium. But
following Lorentz, electrodynamicists have arbitrarily discarded
all such Maxwellian systems because it simplifies the
Proof of the
Available But Neglected Heaviside Energy Flow Component
To prove the ubiquitous existence of the Heaviside energy flow
component, and to demonstrate that it can easily be tapped, one can
refer to Bohren’s  demonstration that a resonant particle
collects and emits up to 18 times as much energy as is input to it
by conventional accounting (that is, in the Poynting component of
the true energy input). Resonant particle absorption and emission is
a COP > 1.0 process already proven and standard in the literature
for decades; e.g., see the pioneering work by Letokhov [15 ]. The
effect reported by Bohren was confirmed and verified, e.g., by Paul
and Fischer . Bohren, Paul, Fischer, and other
electrodynamicists are unaware that their energy input actually
included the huge unaccounted Heaviside energy flow component as
well as the accounted Poynting flow defined by reaction with a
static unit point charge.
The reason for the COP > 1.0 in this process is that the resonant
particle sweeps out a greater geometrical reaction cross section in
the total energy flow than is included in Poynting’s theory for a
standard static particle’s interception. In short, it proves that
the neglected Heaviside component is present and can be readily
intercepted to obtain real expendable energy. We did a
back-of-the-envelope calculation for the relative magnitude in a
simple DC circuit of the Heaviside component compared to the
Poynting component. The neglected Heaviside component for a nominal
simple circuit was on the order of 1013 times as great in magnitude
as the feeble Poynting component. A more exact calculation would be
welcomed, but we could not locate such a calculation in the
Heaviside Energy Flow Component Was Arbitrarily Discarded
Practical EM power systems exhibiting COP > 1.0 are included in the
Maxwell-Heaviside equations prior to Lorentz’s symmetrical regauging
, which changed the equations to a small subset of the
Maxwell-Heaviside theory. Specifically, the Lorentz procedure
arbitrarily discards that entire class of Maxwellian systems that
are not in equilibrium with their active vacuum environment. It is
precisely that discarded class of Maxwellian systems that contains
all Maxwellian EM power systems exhibiting COP >1.0, by functioning
as open dissipative systems freely receiving and using excess energy
from the active vacuum.
Proposed Aspect of the Missing "Dark Matter" Gravitational Energy
Lorentz arbitrarily discarded the vast Heaviside energy flow
component accompanying every EM field or potential and charge
reaction — i.e., their reaction cross sections. The calculations of
the fields, potentials, and energy radiations for all such reactions
in the universe have grossly underestimated the actual EM energy
involved, using only the reaction cross section of the field or
potential to a unit point static charge. It follows that throughout
the observed universe a myriad of interactions are pouring forth
very large amounts of unaccounted Heaviside EM field energy flow,
across the universe in all directions. Consequently, at any location
in space, there exists a vast flux of these Heaviside "dark
radiation" energy flow components. Indeed, the nonlinear wave and
field interactions of these unaccounted dark energy flows may be
taken as what is "driving" the EM vacuum fluctuation of "zero-point"
energy, essentially what is included in Puthoff’s cosmological
feedback principle .
Three facts  are of interest:
(i) the local gravitational
potential from the distribution of stars perpendicular to the
Galactic plane seems greater than can be provided by the masses of
known types of stars
(ii) due to the decrease in luminosity to mass
(or energy) in the outward direction from the center of galaxies,
there must be some form of missing "dark" (non-Poynting radiant)
matter (or alternatively, unaccounted and therefore "dark" energy
flow) in the outer galactic regions which contributes to the
(iii) in clusters of galaxies it is known that there
must be more mass (or dark energy) present than is contained in the
visible (by Poynting detection) parts of galaxies
We point out that the Heaviside component of radiation,
does in fact
represent a "dark" form of radiated EM energy that is missed by
is arbitrarily excluded from the EM theory
has been completely unaccounted in astrophysics, as well as
Certainly the EM dark energy radiation is gravitational,
so one may hypothesize this as a candidate or contributor to
resolving the dark matter problem. In short, the dark matter problem
may arise not because of missing matter, but because of unaccounted,
undetected, and theoretically discarded dark radiation of Heaviside
form. As with any other hypothesis, of course, this one requires
falsification or validation by future experimental and theoretical
"Scalar" Potential Is Not a Scalar Entity, But a Multi-Vectorial,
There is of course a scalar potential established between the two
end charges of a source dipole. Let us examine what kind of energy
flows actually comprise a "scalar" potential, and whether it is a
scalar entity or actually a set of multi-wave multi-vector EM energy
When a "scalar" potential is set upon a transmission line, it speeds
down the line at nearly light speed, revealing its vector nature.
When it is set onto the middle of the transmission line, it speeds
off in both directions simultaneously, revealing its bidirectional
vector nature. In addition to this observation, there is rigorous
mathematical proof as well.
In 1903 E.T. Whittaker  showed that
the scalar potential
identically is a harmonic set of longitudinal EM bidirectional
wavepairs, where each wavepair is comprised of a coupled
longitudinal EM wave and its phase conjugate replica. Hence the
potential is a bidirectional, multiwave, multi-vectorial entity and
an equilibrium condition in a myriad bidirectional flows of
longitudinal EM wave energy. There is thus a vast, bidirectional,
longitudinal electromagnetic wave "infolded electrodynamics" inside
every potential and comprising it.
In 1904 Whittaker  showed that any EM field or wave consists
of two scalar potential functions, initiating what is known as
superpotential theory . By
Whittaker 1903, each of the
scalar potential functions is derived from internally structured
scalar potentials. Hence all EM fields, potentials, and waves may be
expressed in terms of sets of more primary "interior" or "infolded"
longitudinal EM waves and their impressed dynamics
. This is
indeed a far more fundamental electrodynamics than is presently
utilized, and one which provides for a vast set of new phenomenology
presently unknown to conventional theorists.
No Such Thing As An Isolated Charge in Space
From quantum electrodynamics and particle physics, it is known that
"empty space" is filled with intense virtual particle activity. An
"isolated charge in space" must interact with the fleeting virtual
charges that appear and disappear in accordance with the uncertainty
principle of quantum mechanics. Consequently, virtual charges of
opposite sign will be drawn toward the observable charge, before
they disappear. The result is a formation of denser virtual charges
of opposite sign, surrounding the observable charge, and a
polarization of the local vacuum. We may take a tiny "piece" of the
observable charge, coupled with a nearby virtual charge of opposite
sign during its existence, and consider the pair to be a dipole in a
special "composite" (coherent virtual and observable) sense. So the
"unit point charge" often used in electrodynamics to interact with
the fields and potentials — and erroneously "define" them as their
own reaction cross sections — is not really a point charge at all
but is a set of composite dipoles. Further, it occupies the
"neighborhood of a point" rather than a point.
Each little composite dipole also has a "scalar potential" between
its ends. We may decompose that potential into a harmonic set of
bidirectional EM longitudinal wave (LW) pairs, where each pair
consists of an outgoing LW and an incoming LW. Now, however, the
incoming (convergent) LWs are virtual; i.e., comprised of
organization and dynamics in the virtual flux of the vacuum.
We may repeat this analysis for each of the composite dipoles
comprising the so-called "isolated observable charge".
So any "isolated charge" in fact organizes and dynamicizes the
entire vacuum potential of the universe. The simple charge imposes
negentropy and organization upon the entire vacuum, all across the
universe. A vast set of "energy circulations" in the form of LWs and
virtual LWs is established by charge-vacuum interaction, where a set
of convergent virtual LWs feeds virtual energy continuously into the
"charge", and the charge organizes some of its received energy into
observable LW energy radiated out to the ends of the universe.
Each of the virtual particles comprising the composite end of the
dipole, e.g., will also be accompanied by an organization of much
finer, localized virtual particles of opposite sign. Hence another
set of even finer composite dipoles is formed, each of which can
again be decomposed into finer harmonic composite bidirectional LW
The organization of the vacuum process continues at ever finer
levels without limit.
A single electron organizes the entire vacuum energy of the
universe, to a very surprising depth and degree. The vast,
ever-changing interactions of the vacuum organization and dynamics,
with particle dynamics, simply stretches one’s imagination. But it
is real, and the total energy content affected by each
"reorganization" is enormous. This is an indication of the vast
extent and dynamics of the "self-ordering" that the entire energetic
vacuum performs, in response to the slightest stimulation by a
charge. It is also illustrates that the vacuum is a special kind of
scalar potential, with internal Whittaker structuring and dynamics.
To change the internal structuring of a potential requires no work,
because no force is involved or translated against resistance.
Virtual energy which appears and disappears need exhibit no inertia
in this reordering, since the reordering occurs "between" the
extinction of one virtual particle and the appearance of another.
There is no "change of an ordering" in the classical sense, but only
the "emergence of a new ordering." In short, in the causal domain
(such as the active vacuum) prior to the invocation of the
observation operator, negentropy is readily and freely obtained on a
It is therefore not surprising that the "self-organization action"
of a small source dipole in a generator or battery should produce
such an enormous reorganization of vacuum energy and such great
negentropy as is demonstrated in the Heaviside component. It should
also not be surprising that, with no available theory dealing with
or even touching such matters, Lorentz simply chose to resolve the "Heaviside
energy flow component" problem by eliminating it altogether. One
result of the Lorentz integration of the energy flow vector around a
closed surface was to eliminate all that intense negentropic
self-reorganization of the local vacuum that did not interact
immediately with the circuit. In today’s terms, he effectively
eliminated vacuum energy engineering from electrodynamics. Decades
later, the vision of vacuum engineering was glimpsed by modern
physicists such as Lee . But vacuum engineering by electrodynamic means, though fairly straightforward and practical by
extended electrodynamics, is still missing from electrodynamics by
and Potential Are Erroneously Equated As Their Own Reaction Cross
As we stated, neither the scalar potential’s magnitude nor the
field’s magnitude is calculated in conventional classical
electrodynamics . Instead, only the magnitude of the static
particle reaction cross section of the potential or field is
calculated at each point in space where it exists. Assuming a unit
point static charge at each point in space occupied by the "scalar"
potential, each of the longitudinal EM waves comprising the
potential is slightly diverged around the intercepting charge. The
amount of energy in the stationary divergence of all the waves
around the point charge is rigorously the reaction cross section of
the potential, not the magnitude of the potential itself. The small
amount of water diverged from a river’s flow, around a small fixed
pebble on the bottom, is most certainly not the magnitude of the
river itself. A tiny whirlpool in a river is not the river itself.
The magnitude of any nonzero potential is indefinite, since as much
energy as one wishes can be collected from it (from its composite
unceasing energy flows driven by the negentropic charged vacuum), if
one uses sufficient intercepting charge q. That of course is shown
by the simple equation W =
fq, where W is the total energy collected
by intercepting charges q from a potential (set of bidirectional
longitudinal EM wave flows) having static particle reaction cross
section f. If the particles comprising q are resonated, W increases
up to 18 times greater.
A similar situation exists in the erroneous "definition" of a field
as its own static particle reaction cross section.
The very "definitions" of field and potential have been corrupted in
conventional electrodynamics to only include their Poynting
(intercepted and diverged) energy flow component, and to discard
their enormous Heaviside (nondiverged) energy flow component. A
priori, classical electrodynamics (CEM) does not calculate the field
or the potential, but only a tiny (Poynting-based) component of each
— precisely that tiny portion diverged around an arbitrarily assumed
unit point static charge. CEM calculates the reaction cross section
only for a stationary intercepting/diverging static particle. The
actual reaction cross section will be changed, e.g., for a resonant
(nonstationary) particle, without any change in the true field or
potential. The resonant particle will therefore seem to collect and
output "more energy than was actually input to it", as shown by
Bohren  and others
. It collects the additional energy
from the neglected Heaviside energy flow component unwittingly input
by the researchers but not accounted by them.
In the topological approach to EM fields, such as in modern gauge
field theory, this problem is bypassed and does not occur. But the
problem remains a serious foundations problem in orthodox
electrodynamics not based on gauge field theory and topology. Thus
it remains a serious problem of omission in the electrodynamics used
to design and build electrical power systems.
The continued presence in electromagnetics of such major foundations
non sequiturs is responsible for our present "energy crisis." A
single large electrical power plant generates sufficient Heaviside
energy flow to power all electrical loads on Earth, were it
intercepted, collected, and used to power loads without destroying
the source dipoles in the generators. Indeed, when the Heaviside
component is considered, a single human body in its tiny double
surfaces produces about 1015 joules per second of total energy flow!
But its reaction cross section is only about 10-13. Hence it
intercepts, collects, and dissipates only about 100 watts — enough
to light a common light bulb .
Open dissipative EM power systems freely receiving and using
environmental energy from the ignored Heaviside component are
permitted by the Heaviside-Maxwell equations before arbitrary Lorentz regauging.
Classical Electrodynamics Charges are Implicitly Assumed to be
Perpetual Motion Machines
In classical electromagnetics with an inert vacuum assumed, by
implication the "source charge" has no external energy input. It is
assumed to create its associated fields and potentials (and their
energy), which then reach across the entire universe in all
directions, changing the energy density of the entire vacuum
potential of the universe. Since those fields and potentials in
their entirety contain enormous energy, CEM implies that the source
charge creates all that energy from nothing. This of course violates
the primary maxim that energy cannot be created or destroyed.
Consequently, as stated by Sen , "The connection between the
field and its source has always been and still is the most difficult
problem in classical and quantum electrodynamics."
The problem is already resolved in particle physics, since the
charge is a broken symmetry in its exchange with the vacuum. Hence
it is an open system far from thermodynamic equilibrium in its
active vacuum environment. As such, classical equilibrium
thermodynamics does not apply to the charge. As an open dissipative
system, the source charge is permitted to
(i) self-order (some of
its received disordered virtual energy)
(ii) self-oscillate (in
this case, self-spin)
(iii) power itself (its
spin) and its output (continuous bidirectional EM energy
flows across the universe, establishing the fields and
(iv) exhibit negentropy
These capabilities follow from the well
known theory of open systems far from thermodynamic equilibrium.
Even though we are using the customary terms "source" and "source
charge" in this paper, there is really no such thing as a true
"source". Semiz  states it succinctly:
"The very expression ’energy source’ is actually a misnomer. As is known since the early
days of thermodynamics, and formulated as the first law, energy is
conserved in any physical process. Since energy cannot be created or
destroyed, nothing can be an energy source, or sink. Devices we call
energy sources do not create energy, they convert it from a form not
suitable for our needs to a form that is suitable, a form we can do
The source charge and the source dipole are therefore special energy
converters, freely converting some of the disordered vacuum EM
virtual energy they receive into observable, ordered EM energy, and
outputting that ordered component as the field energy and potential
energy outpouring in all directions.
So we have argued that the basic "energy source" — the charge — is
not a source but a transducer. Indeed, if Yilmaz
correct, then the ultimate energy sink — the black hole — may not
exist as such either, once one corrects Einstein’s elimination of
gravitational energy as the only kind of energy not producing
curvature of space-time.
Lorentz’s Demons Can Be Identified In Every Electrical Power System
In the Lorentz symmetrical regauging, it is assumed that the
potential energy of the system is changed twice (in two simultaneous
asymmetrical regaugings) in carefully selected equal and opposite
fashions, so that the two new force fields also formed are equal and
opposite. We point out where these two Lorentz demons are invoked in
the closed current loop.
First, we pay to asymmetrically regauge the generator to produce the
source dipole initially.
The external circuit is then potentialized when the source dipole
extracts an enormous energy flow from the vacuum and sends it
through space surrounding the conductors of the external circuit.
The surface charges intercept the tiny Poynting component and
diverge it into the wires, potentializing the Drude electrons and
freely exciting the system with excess energy.
The excitation energy is then dissipated in two equal parts, one
half in the external loads and losses and one half in the source
dipole itself, against the back emf. Using a simple dc example, the
E-field E1 across the circuit loads and losses is given by
E1 = -ÑV,
where V is the voltage between positive and ground terminal. The
E-field E2 generated upon the electrons in the current returned
through the source dipole is E2 =
ÑV which then can return the
electrons from the ground side to the positive terminal through the
source dipole and against its potential. Hence E1
= - E2, and the
two force fields (which are Lorentz’s two asymmetrical demons) are
equal and opposite. This is how Lorentz symmetrical regauging of the
excitation discharge is accomplished.
Those "two Lorentz asymmetric but equal and opposite regauging
demons" must appear and do appear in all EM power systems designed
in accord with the Lorentz-regauged Heaviside Maxwell equations,
since the demons are assumed in the equations themselves. The
standard closed current loop circuit guarantees that the circuit
forcibly and symmetrically discharges its free excess excitation
energy, in accord with Lorentz symmetrical regauging of the Maxwell-Heaviside
The limitation to COP < 1.0 is because the second Lorentz demon
(driving the current back though the back emf of the source dipole)
dissipates more energy to kill the dipole and shut off any further
free self-excitation, than the first Lorentz demon dissipates in the
external circuit’s loads. COP may be defined as usable energy
(usually load) output divided by the required energy input by the
operator. To restore the scattered source dipole, we have to input
as much energy to the generator (and a bit more to cover the
generator’s own inefficiencies) as was dissipated by the second
demon in destroying the source dipole. We get less usable output
energy (as work in the load) than we have to input to the generator.
Thus the system exhibits COP < 1.0.
Further, the circuit killed its own dipole during the Lorentz
excitation discharge. It is incapable of self-excitation again,
since it also killed the local Heaviside energetic reorganization of
the vacuum from which its Poynting excitation energy must be
intercepted. So we must again pay to restore the source dipole, so
that it again reorganizes its own local Heaviside vacuum and
extracts additional Poynting energy from that reorganized vacuum’s
This self-crippling design of two fighting Lorentz excitation
discharge demons in all our power systems keeps all the coal trains
moving, the fleets of oil tankers steaming, the natural gas being
burned, the nuclear fuel rods being consumed, etc. It also keeps up
the vast production of CO, CO2 and other hydrocarbon combustion
byproducts, as well as nuclear waste byproducts and their as yet
unresolved storage problem. Even the storage problem for the CO2 is
now of epic proportion, and the planned injection of CO2 in vast
amounts underneath the bottom of the sea is a recipe for future
global disaster. The huge combustion of hydrocarbons contributes to
global warming and the remarkably accelerated melting of the polar
icecaps, and in general seriously pollutes the biosphere, affecting
and slowly strangling many living species.
Contributions To a New Electrodynamics
The Alpha Foundation’s Institute for Advanced Study (AIAS) is a
novel organization directed by Dr. Myron W. Evans, a noted scientist
who has nearly 600 papers in the refereed literature. Other noted
scientists such as Dr. Lehnert of the Alfven Laboratory in Sweden
and Dr. Vigier in the Laboratoire de Gravitation et Cosmologie
Relativistes, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, France
constitute the Fellows of the AIAS. A major effort has been underway
by AIAS theorists (and a few other scientists as well) to extend
electrodynamics into a non-Abelian electrodynamics in O(3) symmetry
using gauge field theory . Numerous failings of the present
U(1) electrodynamics have been pointed out by the AIAS in a series
of papers published in the literature and others presently in the
referee process. Some 70 AIAS extended electrodynamics papers are
presently carried on a controlled Department of Energy (DOE) website
for reference by DOE scientists. The papers are being published in
journals as rapidly as possible.
In a recent AIAS group paper  on the stress energy momentum
tensor, it is shown that the Poynting vector in the received view is
identically zero: reductio ad absurdum
. In the new method,
based on equating f with A, the Poynting flow in vacuo is unlimited,
simply because the Am drawn from the vacuum defines the Lehnert
charge current density in the vacuum. A new paper in this area of
vacuum energy, treating the subject in greater depth, has just been
completed . The results appear direct from local gauge
invariance. In the new method, it is only assumed that there is an A
present in the internal gauge space, and that A can be subjected in vacuo to a local gauge transform.
Thus the vacuum is indeed a very active medium, filled with many
kinds of real EM energy currents, and these energy currents may and
do interact with EM circuits in such a manner that the circuits
extract usable EM energy from the vacuum. As we have argued,
conventional circuits receive all their EM energy from the vacuum
interaction with the source dipole and not from the generator or
battery. As is slowly being developed and published, there is a
rigorous theoretical basis for extracting and using electrical
energy directly from the vacuum. We also recognize the enormous
contributions made by other advanced theorists outside the AIAS such
as Barrett [13 -14 , 51],
Cole  and
Puthoff [54 , 55] as well as
many others. We also specifically recognize inventors including
Mills , Shoulders
, Mead and
Sweet  (now deceased),
Mandel’shtam et al. ,
Bedini, and many others.
There are many foundations non sequiturs in classical
electrodynamics that are sorely in need of correction; we have
pointed out only a few. The present energy crisis has occurred
largely as a result of continuing to perpetuate these major flaws in
electrodynamics theory, and continuing to build our electrical power
systems in accord with the flawed theory.
Most electrodynamicists hold the opinion that extracting usable
electrical energy from the vacuum is extraordinarily difficult. In
fact it is a very simple thing to do and has always been done by our
power systems anyway. Just collect some charge (a composite dipole)
or form a dipole, and the "scalar" potential between its end charges
represents an organized, enormous, bidirectional flow of EM energy,
established over the entire vacuum. Energy flows outward from the
dipole to every point in the universe, and from every point in the
universe energy converges back to the dipole, as shown by Whittaker
 nearly a century ago. Since the beginning, every electrical
load has been powered by energy extracted directly from the vacuum,
and not by the heat produced from all the hydrocarbons burned and
nuclear fuel rods consumed, or by the energy from the hydroturbines
and waterwheels turned by dams across streams, or by
windmill-powered generators, or by solar cells, etc.
The problem is in collecting and using the enormous energy easily
extracted from the vacuum, not in simply producing the direct Heaviside EM energy flows. In short, the problem is how to obtain
much more Poynting energy from the easily available and enormous
Heaviside energy. One can build a "vacuum energy extractor" for less
than a dollar. Simply place a charged capacitor (or electret) upon a
permanent magnet, so that the E-field of the capacitor is at right
angles to the H-field of the magnet, and the energy flow from the
magnet (a function of ExH) is maximized
. The system will
extract energy from the vacuum and steadily output it indefinitely
as a Heaviside energy flow. It does, however, sharply focus
attention on the real problem of how to collect and use some of the
energy from the balanced vacuum energy circulations set up by the
system between the local vacuum and the distant, nonlocal vacuum.
Again, the problem is how to convert Heaviside energy flow to
Poynting energy flow.
Once the vacuum energy transducer (generator’s source dipole) is in
place, it is another matter to intercept, collect, and use the
"modified local vacuum circulation energy" pouring from the
transducer to power loads, and to do so without destroying the
source dipole created in the collecting generator. Unfortunately our
power scientists and engineers have been focusing upon the wrong end
of the problem.
This is one of the great ironies in the history of science: All the
hydrocarbons ever burned, all the steam turbines that ever turned
the shaft of a generator, all the rivers ever dammed, all the
nuclear fuel rods ever consumed, all the windmills and waterwheels,
all the solar cells, and all the chemistry in all the batteries ever
produced, have not directly delivered a single watt into the
external circuit’s load. All that incredible fuel consumption and
energy extracted from the environment has only been used to
continually restore the source dipole that our own closed current
loop circuits are deliberately designed to destroy faster than we
We strongly urge the rapid, high priority development of permissible
COP > 1.0 EM power systems which violate the Lorentz symmetrical
regauging condition in their discharge of free excitation energy
received from the vacuum via the source dipole. We will gladly
contribute our own findings to the effort, including citing COP >
1.0 power systems  and negative resistors    produced by known scientists and documented in the literature, but
usually suppressed by fierce scientific resistance to any dramatic
change in U(1) electrodynamics and the Lorentz condition.
It is known in particle physics that there can be no symmetry of a
mass system without the incorporation of the active vacuum
interaction, yet this too is missing from classical electrodynamics.
Symmetry implies nonobservables, and asymmetry implies observables.
So every observable mass system, being asymmetrical a priori, must
be accompanied by nonobservables interacting with it, else it can
have no symmetry (or equilibrium). Yet classical electrodynamics
continues to assume equilibrium and symmetry in observable systems
without incorporating the active vacuum. Everywhere we examine
classical electrodynamics, we find non sequiturs of first magnitude.
This alone should be a compelling reason for the scientific
community to assign the highest priority, ample funding, and the
best theoreticians to the sorely-needed revision of electrodynamics
from the foundations level up.
With vigorous and refocused attention by the scientific community to
a more proper development of the electrodynamics of energy systems
and circuits, self-powering COP > 1.0 electrical power systems
fueled by vacuum energy can be developed and deployed in rather
straightforward manner. The problem is nowhere near as complex as
hot fusion or developing a large new accelerator. The cost of one
large hydrocarbon-burning power-plant will allow the development to
be done. The energy crisis can be solved forever. The present
enormous pollution of the Earth’s environment by hydrocarbon
combustion and nuclear wastes can be dramatically lowered. Global
warming can be slowed and eventually even reversed.
Our children, the biosphere, and the slowly strangling species on
Earth will benefit enormously from that sorely needed scientific
effort. We desperately need to do it, and we need to do it now.
 . E.g., see T. D. Lee, Particle
Physics and Introduction to Field Theory, Harwood, New York,
1981, p. 184. The broken symmetry of a dipole in its vacuum flux
exchange has been known in particle physics for more than 40
years. In classical electrodynamics (CEM) the active vacuum and
its exchange are omitted altogether, even though experimentally
established for many years. The asymmetry between positive and
negative charges was discovered in 1957. As Lee states, “Since
non-observables imply symmetry, these discoveries of asymmetry
must imply observables.” There can be no symmetry of any
observable system anyway, unless the vacuum interaction is
included. Further, by the definition of broken symmetry, the
proven asymmetry of the source dipole in the vacuum flux must
extract and output observable energy.
 . See John D. Kraus, Electromagnetics, Fourth Edn.,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1992. Figure 12-60, a and b, p. 578 shows
the huge energy flow filling all space around the conductors, in
a single pass circuit. Almost all of the energy flow misses the
circuit entirely, is not diverged into the circuit to power it,
and is just "wasted."
 . Poynting and Heaviside independently discovered the flow
of energy through space. See J.H. Poynting, “On the transfer of
energy in the electromagnetic field,” Philosophical Transactions
of the Royal Society of London, Vol. 175, Part II, 1885, p.
343-361; Oliver Heaviside, "Electromagnetic Induction and Its
Propagation," The Electrician, 1885, 1886, 1887, and later;
Electrical Papers, Vol. 2, 1887, p. 94, 405, 514; "On the
Forces, Stresses, and Fluxes of Energy in the Electromagnetic
Field," Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond., 183A, 1893, p. 423-480.
Poynting erroneously considered only that energy flow component
entering the circuit, and completely missed the huge additional
component shown by Heaviside that missed the circuit. Hence
Poynting got the direction of the energy flow in error by
essentially 90°, and was later corrected by Heaviside. In this
paper we call the neglected nondiverged component of energy flow
the Heaviside component.
 . Arguably the most influential Western electrodynamics text
for 25 years has been
J.D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics, Second Edition, Wiley,
New York, 1975, which hardly addresses circuits at all. On page
237, following Lorentz, Jackson disposes of the huge nondiverted
component of the energy flow in space around a circuit, that
misses the circuit entirely and is wasted, with these words:
"...the Poynting vector is arbitrary to the extent that the curl
of any vector field can be added to it. Such an added term can,
however, have no physical consequences." Since one properly adds
only like entities, what is really true is that the energy flow
component represented by Poynting’s vector is defined as the
divergence of a more general energy flow vector. Therefore,
since the Poynting component is just the divergent fraction of
this overall flow, the Poynting component can be (and is)
accompanied by an unaccounted energy flow that has zero
divergence. Since the divergence of the curl of any field is
zero, Poynting’s flow component is not a divergence from any
flow component represented by the curl of a field. However,
Jackson errs in implying that a zero-divergence energy flow
present in one very general type of circuit can have no physical
consequences. If we change the circuit so that part of the
former "inconsequential" flow is now intercepted and diverged
into the circuit, then additional real energy will be collected
by the modified circuit from the former Heaviside energy flow
component and it will perform additional useful work. Bohren’s
experiment (cited) clearly shows this. Twenty-one years later
Jackson pointed out the decisive role played by the surface
charges in the circuit; see J. D. Jackson, "Surface charges on
circuit wires and resistors play three roles," American Journal
of Physics, 64(7), July 1996, p. 855-870. But still he has not
included the ignored Heaviside energy flow component, including
in the third edition of his renowned text.
 . Heaviside realized both the diverged (intercepted) and
nondiverged (nonintercepted) components of the energy flow
associated with a circuit, corrected Poynting on the direction,
and obliquely pointed out that the amount diverged into the
circuit (the Poynting component) was tiny compared to the amount
not diverged (which we have chosen to call the Heaviside
component). See Heaviside, Electrical Papers, Vol. 2, 1887, p.
94. We quote as follows:
“It [the energy transfer flow] takes
place, in the vicinity of the wire, very nearly parallel to it,
with a slight slope towards the wire… . Prof. Poynting, on the
other hand, holds a different view, representing the transfer as
nearly perpendicular to a wire, i.e., with a slight departure
from the vertical. This difference of a quadrant can, I think,
only arise from what seems to be a misconception on his part as
to the nature of the electric field in the vicinity of a wire
supporting electric current. The lines of electric force are
nearly perpendicular to the wire. The departure from
perpendicularity is usually so small that I have sometimes
spoken of them as being perpendicular to it, as they practically
are, before I recognized the great physical importance of the
slight departure. It causes the convergence of energy into the
 . See H.A. Lorentz, Vorlesungen über Theoretische Physik an
der Universität Leiden, Vol. V, Die Maxwellsche Theorie
(1900-1902), Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft M.B.H., Leipzig,
1931, "Die Energie im elektromagnetischen Feld," p. 179-186.
Figure 25 on p. 185 shows the Lorentz concept of integrating the
energy flow vector around a closed cylindrical surface
surrounding a volumetric element.
 . Consequently electrodynamicists caution against
interpreting the Poynting vector as the true energy flow vector,
pointing out that any nondivergent (flow) vector can be added to
it — not realizing they are simply stating that an indefinite
amount of nondivergent energy flow may be (and is) present in
the erroneously discarded Heaviside component. In other words,
any amount of nondiverged energy flow can be present in addition
to their accounting because they deliberately fail to calculate
or account for that component — present and available for every
 . It appears that the availability of this Heaviside energy
component surrounding any portion of the circuit may be the long
sought secret to Gabriel Kron’s "open path" that enabled him to
produce a true negative resistor in the 1930s, as the chief
scientist for General Electric on the U.S. Navy contract for the
Network Analyzer at Stanford University. Kron was never
permitted to release how he made his negative resistor, but did
state that, when placed in the Network Analyzer, the generator
could be disconnected because the negative resistor would power
the circuit. Since a negative resistor converges surrounding
energy and diverges it into the circuit, it appears that Kron’s
negative resistor gathered energy from the Heaviside component
of energy flow as an "open path" flow of energy — connecting
together the local vicinities of any two separated circuit
components — that had been discarded by previous
electrodynamicists following Lorentz. Hence Kron referred to it
as the "open path." Particularly see Gabriel Kron, "The
frustrating search for a geometrical model of electrodynamic
networks," circa 1962. We quote:
"...the missing concept of
"open-paths" (the dual of "closed-paths") was discovered, in
which currents could be made to flow in branches that lie
between any set of two nodes. (Previously — following Maxwell —
engineers tied all of their open-paths to a single datum point,
the ’ground’). That discovery of open-paths established a second
rectangular transformation matrix... which created ’lamellar’
"A network with the simultaneous presence of both
closed and open paths was the answer to the author’s years-long
 . The Heaviside component represents a huge region of
dynamic organization of the vacuum energy. There is no limit to
such vacuum organization. It may surprise or even shock the
reader that in general relativity there are really no
conservation of energy laws as we know them, as was pointed out
by Hilbert shortly after Einstein published his general theory.
In D. Hilbert, Gottingen Nachrichten, Vol. 4, 1917, p. 21
Hilbert wrote: "I assert... that for the general theory of
relativity, i.e., in the case of general invariance of the
Hamiltonian function, energy equations... corresponding to the
energy equations in orthogonally invariant theories do not exist
at all. I could even take this circumstance as the
characteristic feature of the general theory of relativity."
Commenting on Hilbert’s remarkable assessment, A.A. Logunov and
Yu. M. Loskutov in their "Nonuniqueness of the predictions of
the general theory of relativity," Sov. J. Part. Nucl., 18(3),
p. 179 made the following statement:
"Unfortunately, this remark
of Hilbert was evidently not understood by his contemporaries,
since neither Einstein himself nor other physicists recognized
the fact that in general relativity conservation laws for
energy, momentum, and angular momentum are in principle
In simple language, the reason is as follows: The
organization of the vacuum represents a change to the "primal
cause" or "primal energy." Organization of energy without the
involvement of mass effects does not require work, because force
is not involved and work ultimately involves the translation of
a resisting mass. So one can organize the "potential for doing
work" without having to perform work in doing so. This is in
fact what "regauging" actually involves. Any local region of the
vacuum is after all an open system far from equilibrium with the
surrounding rest of the vacuum. So that local region can exhibit,
(ii) self-oscillation, self-spinning, etc.
To use this principle in practice, the
trick is to "tickle" the local vacuum into performing the exact
type of reordering and self-structuring that one wishes. One
does this by adroitly changing the effect side of the
observation process, thereby altering the causative side as
well; a discussion of this process is well-beyond the extent of
this document. In mechanics and electrodynamics the interaction
of the effect back upon the cause has been erroneously omitted,
but it is present in general relativity since curvature of spacetime (cause) acts on mass-energy (effect) to change it, and
a change in mass-energy (effect) interacts back upon spacetime
curvature (cause) to change it accordingly. A logical mess
exists in electrodynamics, where the effect has been rather
universally confused with the cause, and there exists not a
single text or paper illustrating how the EM wave exists in
spacetime. All illustrations continue to show the E-H planar
(X-Y) wave in 3-space, which is an effect existing after the
interaction with charge. What exists in spacetime before
interaction must be Et-Ht, since observation itself is a d/dt
operator imposed upon LLLT and producing LLL. The integration of
E-H along z does not add the missing time dimension, hence
merely represents a "spatial composite" of many X-Y slices.
Consideration of the Et-Ht "impulse" or causal wave in spacetime
prior to the interaction with matter, particularly in phase
conjugation pairs, leads to many very interesting new phenomena,
but that is beyond the scope of this paper.
 . The pertinent battery chemistry is well known; e.g., see
David Linden, Editor in Chief, Handbook of Batteries, Second
Edition, McGraw Hill, New York, 1995; see also Colin A. Vincent
and Bruno Scrosati, Modern Batteries: An Introduction to
Electrochemical Power Sources, Second Edition, Wiley, New York,
 . J.D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics, 2nd Ed., 1975.
The application of Lorentz symmetrical regauging is shown on p.
219-220, with the erroneous statement on p. 220 that the
resulting set of equations is equivalent in all respects to the
 . In several of his patented circuits, as analyzed and
rigorously shown by Barrett.
 . When examined in a higher topology electrodynamics, Nikola Tesla’s patented circuits do demonstrate this very
functioning. For proof, see T.W. Barrett, "Tesla’s Nonlinear
Oscillator-Shuttle-Circuit (OSC) Theory," Annales de la
Fondation Louis de Broglie, 16(1), 1991, p. 23-41.
 . Barrett later improved this mechanism for use in
communication systems and patented it. See T.W. Barrett, "Active
Signalling (sic) Systems," U.S. Patent No. 5,486,833, Jan. 23,
1996; "Oscillator-Shuttle-Circuit (OSC) Networks for
Conditioning Energy in Higher-Order Symmetry Algebraic
Topological Forms and RF Phase Conjugation," U.S. Patent No.
5,493,691. Feb. 20, 1996.
 . For the early discovery, see V.S. Letokhov, “Generation
of light by a scattering medium with negative resonance
absorption,” Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz., Vol. 53, 1967, p. 1442;
Soviet Physics JETP, Vol. 26, 1968, p. 835-839; “Laser Maxwell’s
Demon,” Contemporary Physics, 36(4), 1995, p. 235-243. For
initiating experiments with external excitation of the medium,
see N.M. Lawandy et al., "Laser action in strongly scattering
media," Nature, 368(6470), Mar. 31, 1994, p. 436-438. See also
D.S. Wiersma, M.P. van Albada, and A. Lagendijk, Nature, Vol.
373, 1995, p. 103. For new effects, see D.S. Wiersma and Ad.
Lagendijk, "Light diffusion with gain and random lasers,"
Physical Review E, 54(4), 1996, p. 4256-4265; D.S. Wiersma,
Meint. P. van Albada, Bart A. van Tiggelen, and Ad Lagendijk,
"Experimental Evidence for Recurring Multiple Scattering Events
of Light in Disordered Media," Physical Review Letters, 74(21),
1995, p. 4193-4196; D.S. Wiersma, M.P. Van Albada, and A.
Lagendijk, Physical Review Letters, Vol. 75, 1995, p. 1739; D.S.
Wiersma et al., Nature, Vol. 390, 1997, p. 671-673; F. Sheffold
et. al., Nature, Vol. 398, 1999, p. 206;
J. Gomez Rivas et al., Europhysics Letters, 48(1), 1999, p.
22-28; Gijs van Soest, Makoto Tomita, and Ad Lagendijk,
"Amplifying volume in scattering media," Optics Letters, 24(5),
1999, p. 306-308; A. Kirchner, K. Busch and C. M. Soukoulis,
Physical Review B, Vol. 57, 1998, p. 277. An excellent overview
is in Diederik Wiersma and Ad Lagendijk, "Laser Action in Very
White Paint," Physics World, Jan. 1997, p. 33-37.
 . M.W. Evans et al., Classical Electrodynamics Without the
Lorentz Condition: Extracting Energy from the Vacuum," Physica
Scripta, 2000 (in publication).
 . William B. Burford III and H. Grey Verner, Semiconductor
Junctions and Devices, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1965, p. 281-291.
Quoting p. 281 on point-contact transistors:
underlying their function is imperfectly understood even after
almost a century… although the very nature of these units limits
them to small power capabilities, the concept of small-signal
behavior, in the sense of the term when applied to junction
devices, is meaningless, since there is no region of operation
wherein equilibrium or theoretical performance is observed.
Point-contact devices may therefore be described as sharply
nonlinear under all operating conditions."
Our comment is that
point-contact transistors can easily be developed into true
negative resistors enabling COP > 1.0 circuits.
 . E.g., the anomalous quenching of the Hall effect
generates a negative resistance effect. The Hall voltage across
a narrow current-carrying channel in the presence of a
perpendicular magnetic field B behaves anomalously around B=0.
The Hall resistance fluctuates about zero and is "quenched",
then rises to a plateau at higher fields, then recovers and
exhibits normal behavior beyond that region. Also see Paulo N.
Correa and Alexandra N. Correa, "Electrochemical Transduction of
Plasma Pulses," U.S. Patent No. 5,416,391, May 16, 1995; patent
no 5,449,989, "Energy Conversion System," Sept. 12, 1995; and
related patent no. 5,502,354, Mar. 26, 1996. See also cited
patents by Mills and by Shoulders.
 . T.E. Bearden, "Formation and Use of Time-Reversal Zones,
EM Wave Transduction, Time-Density (Scalar) EM Excitation and
Decay, and Spacetime Curvature Engines to Alter Matter and
Convert Time Into Energy," Invention Disclosure Document
#446522, Oct. 26, 1998. While this paper is proprietary, some
overall details have been given in T.E. Bearden, "EM Corrections
Enabling a Practical Unified Field Theory with Emphasis on
Time-Charging Interactions of Longitudinal EM Waves," Explore,
8(6), 1998, p. 7-16; and in T.E. Bearden, "Toward a Practical
Unified Field Theory and a Deep Experimental Example," presented
at the INE Symposium, University of Utah, Aug. 14-15, 1998.
 . Kenneth R. Shoulders, "Energy Conversion Using High
Charge Density," U.S. Patent
# 5,018,180, May 21, 1991. See also Shoulders’ patents 5,054,046
(1991); 5,054,047 (1991); 5,123,039 (1992), and 5,148,461
(1992). See also Ken Shoulders and Steve Shoulders,
"Observations on the Role of Charge Clusters in Nuclear Cluster
Reactions," Journal of New Energy, 1(3), Fall 1996, p. 111-121.
A proposed theory is given by Shang-Xian Jin and Hal Fox,
"Characteristics of High-Density Charge Clusters: A Theoretical
Model," Journal of New Energy, 1(4), Winter 1996, p. 5-20.
 . Teruo Kawai, "Motive Power Generating Device," U.S.
Patent No. 5,436,518, Jul. 25, 1995.
 . For details, see T.E. Bearden, "The Master Principle of
EM Overunity and the Japanese Overunity Engines," Infinite
Energy, 1(5&6), Nov. 1995-Feb. 1996, p. 38-55; "The Master
Principle of Overunity and the Japanese Overunity Engines: A New
Pearl Harbor?", The Virtual Times, Internet Node www.hsv.com,
 . T.E. Bearden, "Use of Regauging and Multivalued
Potentials to Achieve Overunity EM Engines: Concepts and
Specific Engine Examples," Proceedings of the International
Scientific Conference "New Ideas in Natural Sciences," St.
Petersburg, Russia, June 17-22, 1996; Part I: Problems of Modern
Physics, 1996, p. 277-297.
 . E.g., see phenomena detailed in Martin Diestelhorst;
Horst Beige, and Ralph-Peter Kapsch, "Parametric small signal
amplification near pitchfork bifurcations," Ferroelectrics, Vol.
172, 1995, p. 419-423. In particular, multivalued conjugate
reflectivities may become involved in some ferroelectric
capacitors; see S. Itoh et al., "Simulational and experimental
studies on anomalous reflectivity of phase conjugate wave."
Ferroelectrics, Vol. 170, 1995, p. 209-217.
 . Romano M. DeSantis et al., "On the Analysis of Feedback
Systems With a Multipower Open Loop Chain," Oct. 1973, AD
773188, available through the U.S. National Technical
 . J. H. Andreatta, "High Power Switching Amplifier Wherein
Energy is Transferred to a Tuned Circuit During Both Half
Cycles," U.S. Patent No. 3,239,771, Mar. 8, 1966; Tom L. Dennis,
Jr., "Highly Efficient Semiconductor Switching Amplifier," U.S.
Patent No. 3,239,772, Mar. 8, 1966; Heber J. Morrison, "Square
Wave Driven Power Amplifier," U.S. Patent No. 3,815,030, June 4,
 . Howard R. Johnson, "Permanent Magnet Motor." U.S. Patent
No. 4,151,431, Apr. 24, 1979. See also Johnson’s U.S. Patents
4,877,983, Oct. 31, 1989 and 5,402,021, Mar. 28, 1995.
 . For an exposition of exchange forces and exchange energy,
see B. D. Cullity, Introduction to Magnetic Materials,
Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1972; A.G. Gurevich and G.A. Melkov,
Magnetization Oscillations and Waves, CRC Press, 1996; Victor S.
L’vov, Wave Turbulence Under Parametric Excitation: Applications
to Magnets, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1994. See also V.S. L’vov
and L.A. Prozorova, "Spin Waves Above the Threshold of
Parametric Excitation," in A.S. Borovik-Romanov and S.K. Sinha,
Eds., Spin Waves and Magnetic Excitations, North-Holland,
 . Negative resistor candidates for such a shunt may arise
from point-contact transistors and from the work of Chung et al.
See Shoukai Wang and D.D.L. Chung, "Apparent negative electrical
resistance in carbon fiber composites," Composites, Part B, Vol.
30, 1999, p. 579-590. Chung et al. found that the carbon fiber
composite can be produced as either a negative resistance or a
positive resistance, by controlling the production process.
 . Ilya Prigogine, From Being to Becoming: Time and
Complexity in the Physical Sciences, W.H. Freeman and Company,
San Francisco, 1980. In 1977, Russian-born Belgian chemist Ilya
Prigogine received the Nobel Prize for chemistry for
contributions to nonequilibrium thermodynamics, especially the
theory of dissipative structures.
 . E.g., see L. Brillouin, "Life, thermodynamics, and
cybernetics," Am. Sci. Vol. 37, 1949, p. 554-568; G. Nicolis and
I. Prigogine, Exploring Complexity, Piper, Munich, 1987.
 . 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. The resonant particle simply sweeps out a
greater geometrical area intercepting an incident energy flow
than does a static particle. Hence the Bohren resonant particle
intercepts not only the Poynting energy flow component (the one
intercepted by the static particle), but also part of the
neglected Heaviside component that does not interact with the
static particle. In short, Bohren’s work conclusively proves the
existence of the Heaviside component of energy flow, and also
clearly demonstrates an open dissipative EM system process
exhibiting COP > 1.0.
 . H. Paul and R. Fischer, "Comment on ’How can a particle
absorb more than the light incident on it?’,” American Journal
of Physics, 51(4), Apr. 1983, p. 327.
 . In a private AIAS correspondence, Dr. Myron Evans,
Director of the Alpha Foundation’s Institute for Advanced Study
(AIAS), has rigorously shown a variety of EM energy components
in the vacuum topology which can and do interact with
electromagnetic circuits. He has shown that these energy
currents enter into integral interactions where the constant of
integration does capture the Heaviside component. This work will
be published in Contemporary Optics and Electrodynamics, 3
volumes, Wylie, 2001 (in preparation).
 . Effectively Ludwig Valentin Lorenz first symmetrically
regauged the Heaviside-Maxwell equations in Lorenz, "On the
identity of the vibrations of light with electrical currents,"
Philosophical Magazine, Vol. 34, 1867, p. 287-301, not long
after Maxwell’s seminal 1864 oral presentation of his paper, "A
dynamical theory of the electromagnetic field," published in
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Vol.
155, 1865. When the prestigious H.A. Lorentz later adopted the
symmetrical regauging because it provided simpler equations that
were easier to solve, electrodynamicists adopted it quickly. No
one seemed to notice that physically this constituted the
arbitrary and total discard of all Heaviside-Maxwell systems not
in thermodynamic equilibrium with their active vacuum. Even
Jackson, 2nd Edition, ibid. erroneously states that the
Lorentz-regauged equations are the same in every respect.
 . E.g., see Malcolm Longair, "The New Astrophysics," in
Paul Davies, Ed., The New Physics, Cambridge University Press,
New York, 1989 — specifically "Dark matter in galaxies and
clusters of galaxies," p. 163.
 . E.T. Whittaker, “On the Partial Differential Equations of
Mathematical Physics,” Mathematische Annalen, Vol. 57, 1903, p.
333-355. In addition to Whittaker’s sum set of waves comprising
the "scalar" potential, Ziolkowski added the product set. See
Richard W. Ziolkowski, "Exact Solutions of the Wave Equation
With Complex Source Locations," Journal of Mathematical Physics,
26(4), April 1985, p. 861-863.
 . E.T. Whittaker, “On an Expression of the Electromagnetic
Field Due to Electrons by Means of Two Scalar Potential
Functions,” Proc. Lond. Math. Soc., Series 2, Vol. 1, 1904, p.
367-372. The paper was published in 1904 and orally delivered in
 . An overview of much of superpotential theory is given by
Melba Phillips, “Classical Electrodynamics,” in Principles of
Electrodynamics and Relativity, Vol. IV of Encyclopedia of
Physics, edited by S. Flugge, Springer-Verlag, 1962.
 . One might appropriate the Russian name "information
content of the field" for this more fundamental interior EM,
from which all other EM is made. The "infolded" electrodynamics
is largely ignored in the Western scientific community, which
heretofore has erroneously equated "information content of the
field" as mere spectral analysis. In so doing, it has dismissed
an engineerable unified field theory of great power.
 . T. D. Lee, 1981, ibid., p. 380-381. On p. 383 Lee points
out that the microstructure of the scalar vacuum field (i.e., of
vacuum charge and polarization structuring) is not utilized. Lee
indicates the possibility of using vacuum engineering in
“Chapter 25: Outlook: Possibility of Vacuum Engineering,” ibid.,
 . We stress that this error does not appear in the
electrodynamics work of Dr. Evans and the AIAS theoreticians. In
that work a gauge field theoretic approach is used, and the
field results directly from the topology, not from confusing the
nonreacted field (the cause) in space with its reaction cross
section upon a unit point static charge (i.e., with the reacted
effect) as has been done in classical electrodynamics theory.
 . However, the neglected Heaviside energy flow component is
real EM energy and therefore gravitational. Considering the vast
number of interactions in the cosmos and the neglect of their
Heaviside energy flow components, we propose that this enormous,
unaccounted, ubiquitous energy probably accounts for the missing
"dark matter" or "dark energy" of the universe, so ardently
sought by the astrophysicists.
 . D.K. Sen, Fields and/or Particles, Academic Press, London
and New York, 1968, p. viii.
 . Ibrahim Semiz, "Black hole as the ultimate energy
source," American Journal of Physics, 63(2), Feb. 1995, p. 151.
 . Huseyin Yilmaz, "New approach to relativity and
gravitation," Annals of Physics, Vol. 81, 1973, p. 179-200;
Annals of Physics (NY), Vol. 101, 1976, p. 413-432; Il Nuovo
Cimento, Vol. 107B, 1992, p. 941; Carroll O. Alley, Per Kennett
Aschan, and Hüseyin Yilmaz, preprint gr-qc/9506082 in the LANL
archive, 30 June, 1995. Criticisms are given by Charles W.
Misner, preprint gr-qc/9504050 in the LANL archive, 28 April
1995 and by
F.I. Cooperstock and D.N. Vollick, Il Nuovo Cimento, Vol. 111B,
1996, p. 265.
 . E.g., see M.W. Evans et al., AIAS group paper, "A General
Theory of Non-Abelian Electrodynamics," Foundations of Physics
Letters, 12(3), June 1999, p. 251-265. See particularly M.W.
Evans, "O(3) Electrodynamics," a review of 250 pages in M.W.
Evans (ed.), Contemporary Optics and Electrodynamics, a special
topical issue of I. Prigogine and S.A. Rice (series eds.),
Advances in Chemical Physics, Wiley, New York, 2001, in
preparation, vol. 114(2).
 . M.W. Evans et al., AIAS group paper, "Inconsistencies of
the U(1) Theory of Electrodynamics: Stress Energy Momentum
Tensor," Foundations of Physics Letters, 12(2), Apr. 1999, p.
 . M.W. Evans, AIAS correspondence.
 . M.W. Evans et al., "Vacuum Energy Flow and Poynting
Theorem from Topology and Gauge Theory," to be placed on the DOE
website. It has also been submitted to a leading journal.
 . T.W. Barrett and D. M Grimes, [Eds.], Advanced
Electromagnetism: Foundations, Theory, & Applications, World
Scientific, Singapore, 1995. See particularly T.W. Barrett,
"Electromagnetic Phenomena Not Explained by Maxwell’s
Equations," in A. Lakhtakia, (ed.), Essays on the Formal Aspects
of Electromagnetic Theory, World Scientific Publishing, River
Edge, NJ, 1993, p. 6-86.
 . Patrick Cornille, “Inhomogeneous waves and Maxwell’s
equations,” Chapter 4 in Essays on the formal Aspects of
Electromagnetic Theory, Ed. A. Lakhtakia, World Scientific,
1993, p. 138-182. Quoting, p. 168:
“The calculation concerning
the electromagnetic conservation laws given in most textbooks,
for example in Jackson [Classical Electromagnetics, 2nd Edition,
John Wiley, New York, 1975, p. 239] is not correct, as noted by
Selak [Astrophys. Space Sci., Vol. 158, 1989, p. 159] et al.,
because it is not permissible to substitute a convective time
derivative for an Eulerian time derivative even when we have a
constant volume of integration.”
 . E.g., Richard W. Ziolkowski, "Exact Solutions of the Wave
Equation With Complex Source Locations," Journal of Mathematical
Physics, 26(4), April 1985, p. 861-863; — "Localized
Transmission of Electromagnetic Energy," Physical Review A, Vol.
39, 1989, p. 2005, — and Michael K. Tippett, "Collective effect
in an electron plasma system catalyzed by a localized
electromagnetic wave," Physical Review A, 43(6), Mar. 15, 1991,
 . Daniel C. Cole and Harold E. Puthoff, “Extracting Energy
and Heat from the Vacuum,” Physical Review E, 48(2), Aug. 1993,
 . H. E. Puthoff, “Source of Vacuum Electromagnetic
Zero-Point Energy,” Physical Review A, 40(9), Nov. 1, 1989, p.
 . Randell Lee Mills et al., "Lower-Energy Hydrogen Methods
and Structures," U.S. Patent 6,024,935, Feb. 15, 2000 with 499
claims recognized. Randell Lee Mills, "Energy/Matter Conversion
Methods and Structures," Australian Patent No. 668678, Nov. 20,
1991. See also Art Rosenblum, "Randall L. Mills — New Energy and
the Cosmic Hydrino Sea," Infinite Energy, 3(17), Dec. 1997-Jan.
1998, p. 21-34.; Eugene Mallove, "Dr. Randall Mills and the
power of BlackLight," Infinite Energy, 2(12), Jan.-Feb. 1997, p.
21, 35, 41.
 . James Patterson, "System for Electrolysis of Liquid
Electrolyte," U.S. Patent No. 5,372,688, Dec. 13, 1994. See also
U.S. Patent Nos. 5,318,675; 5,607,563; 5,036,031; and 4,943,355.
 . Nabil M. Lawandy, "Optical Gain Medium Having Doped
Nanocrystals of Semiconductors and Also Optical Scatterers,"
U.S. Patent No. 5,434,878, July 18, 1995. Lawandy’s epochal
experiment is described in Nabil M. Lawandy, et al., "Laser
action in strongly scattering media," Nature, 368(6470), Mar.
31, 1994, p. 436-438.
 . Franklin B. Mead and Jack Nachamkin, “System for
Converting Electromagnetic Radiation Energy to Electrical
Energy,” U.S. Patent No. 5,590,031, Dec. 31, 1996.
 . Floyd Sweet and T. E. Bearden, "Utilizing Scalar Electromagnetics to Tap Vacuum Energy," Proceedings of the 26th
Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference (IECEC ’91), Boston, Massachusetts, 1991, p. 370-375. Sweet’s solid
state vacuum triode used specially conditioned barium ferrite
magnetics whose H-field was in self-oscillation. The device
produced a COP = 1.2´106, outputting some 500 watts for an input
of only 33 milliwatts. Sweet never revealed his complete ELF
self-oscillation conditioning procedure for the magnets.
However, in ferromagnets, self-oscillations of,
(ii) spin-waves above spin-wave instability
(iii) magnons are known at frequencies from about
1 kHz to 1 MHz
For an entry into this technical area with
detailed reference citations, see A.G. Gurevich and G.A. Melkov,
Magnetization Oscillations and Waves, CRC Press, 1996, p. 279.
See particularly Victor S. L’vov, Wave Turbulence Under
Parametric Excitation: Applications to Magnets, Springer-Verlag,
Berlin, 1994, p. 214-218, 226-234, 281-289.
 . For that matter, the charged capacitor and the magnet are
dipoles. Individually, each extracts and outputs enormous energy
flow from the local vacuum, continuously pouring out the
extracted energy toward the ends of the universe and thus
establishing its fields and potentials by altering the entire
ambient vacuum potential of the universe.
 . E.g., see L Mandelstam. [L.I. Mendel’shtam], N. Papalexi,
A. Andronov, S. Chaikin and A. Witt, "Report on Recent Research
on Nonlinear Oscillations," Translation of "Expose Des
Recherches Recentes Sur Les Oscillations Non Lineaires,"
Technical Physics of the USSR, Leningrad, Vol. 2, 1935, p.
81-134. NASA Translation Doc. TTF-12,678, Nov. 1969. In the
1930s Russian scientists at the University of Moscow and
supporting agencies developed and tested parametric oscillator
generators exhibiting COP > 1.0. The theory, results, pictures,
etc. are in both the Russian and French literature, with many
references cited in this particular translation. Apparently the
work was never resurrected after WW II. Other pertinent
references are Mandelstam, L.I.; and N.D. Papaleksi., "On the
parametric excitation of electric oscillations," Zhurnal
Teknicheskoy Fiziki, 4(1), 1934, p. 5-29; Mandelstam, L. and N.
Papalexi, "On resonance phenomena with frequency distribution,"
Z.f. Phys., No. 72, 1931, p. 223; — "Concerning asynchronous
excitation of oscillations," Zhurnal Tekhnicheskoi Fiziki, 4(1),
1934, p. TBD; — "Concerning asynchronous excitation of
oscillations," Zhurnal Tekhnicheskoi Fiziki, 4(1), 1934; —
"Concerning nonstationary processes occurring in the case of
resonance phenomena of the second class," Zhurnal Tekhnicheskoi
Fiziki, 4(1), 1934. See also A. Andronov, “The limiting cycles
of Poincare and the theory of self-maintained oscillations,”
Comptes-Rendus, Vol. 189, 1929, p. 559. See also A. Andronov and
A. Witt, , “On the mathematical theory of self-excitations,”
Comptes-Rendus, Vol. 190, 1930, p. 256; — “On the mathematical
theory of self-excitation systems with two degrees of freedom,”
Zhurnal Tekhnicheskioi Fiziki, 4(1), 1934; — “Discontinuous
periodic movements and theory of multivibrators of Abraham and
Bloch,” Bull. De l’Acad. Ed Sc. De l”URSS, vol. 189, 1930. See
also S. Chaikin, “Continuous and ‘discontinuous’ oscillations,”
Zhurnal Prikladnoi Fiziki, Vol. 7, 1930, p. 6; — and A. Witt, ,
“Drift in a case of small amplitudes,” Zhurnal Teknicheskoi
Fiziki, 1(5), 1931, p. 428; — and N. Kaidanowski, “Mechanical
relaxation oscillations,” Zhurnal Teknicheskoi Fiziki, Vol. 3,
1933, p. 1.
 . E.g., a true negative resistor appears to have been
developed by the renowned Gabriel Kron, who was never permitted
to reveal its construction or specifically reveal its
development. For an oblique statement of his negative resistor
success, see Gabriel Kron, "Numerical solution of ordinary and
partial differential equations by means of equivalent circuits,"
Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. 16, Mar. 1945a, p. 173.
"When only positive and negative real numbers exist, it
is customary to replace a positive resistance by an inductance
and a negative resistance by a capacitor (since none or only a
few negative resistances exist on practical network analyzers)."
Apparently Kron was required to insert the words "none or" in
that statement. See also Gabriel Kron, “Electric circuit models
of the Schrödinger equation,” Phys. Rev. 67(1-2), Jan. 1 and 15,
1945, p. 39. We quote:
"Although negative resistances are
available for use with a network analyzer,…".
introductory clause states in rather certain terms that negative
resistors were available for use on the network analyzer, and Kron slipped this one through the censors. It may be of interest
that Kron was a mentor of Sweet, who was his protégé. Sweet
worked for the same company, but not on the Network Analyzer
project. However, he almost certainly knew the secret of Kron’s
"open path" discovery and his negative resistor.