Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 19:38:06
Here's a simple explanation of what powers every electrical
When we crank the shaft of the generator and rotate it, the
rotation transforms the input "mechanical" energy into internal
"magnetic field" energy. In that little part of the circuit that
is between the terminals of the generator and inside it, the
magnetic field energy is dissipated on the charges right there,
to do work on them. This work (expending the magnetic energy)
forces the negative charges in one direction, and the positive
charges in the other direction. In copper, for example, for
every electron we "push" off an atom into the conductor as a
free electron to make "current", there is a "hole" left on that
atom. That "hole" is a positive charge.
So the same magnetic field energy, while moving those electrons,
also applies forces to those positive holes. The positive charge
of each hole, however, is attached to a far heavier mass (the
atom) than is the charge of the electron. So the atoms with
positive charges (ions) are pushed and rocked back a little.
That's all that rotating the shaft of the generator
accomplishes. None of that input shaft energy was transformed
into EM energy and sent out down the powerline, as electrical
engineers assume. Not to worry, energy does get sent down the
powerline. But not from the generator shaft energy or its
Essentially then, all the energy we put into the shaft of the
generator is dissipated inside the generator itself, to push the
positive charges in one direction and the negative charges in
The separation of the charges forms what is called a
"dipole" (opposite charges separated from each other a bit).
Diagram of a
equipotential surfaces and field lines indicated
That is all that the generator does. That is all that burning
all that coal or oil or gas does.
It heats a boiler to make
steam, so that the steam runs a steam turbine attached to the
shaft of the generator, and turns it - and therefore forcing
those charges apart and making that dipole between the terminals
of the generator.
Generators and batteries make source dipoles, nothing else.
Let's stop right there and see what happens, once we have a
In 1957, Lee and Yang were awarded the Nobel Prize for the
discovery of broken symmetry, including the broken symmetry of
opposite charges (such as the ends of a dipole, like between
those terminals of that generator). Ugh! In lay language, what
the dickens is that? What does it mean? Let us deviate a little,
so we understand what has been said when we say that "the
dipole, once made, is a broken symmetry in the fierce energy
flux of the vacuum".
In quantum mechanics, the vacuum (empty space) is not inert at
all, but is one of the most active and energetic things in the
entire universe. Imagine a giant sea of "energetic bubbles",
boiling up and bursting, and with mind-boggling energy. Each
little bubble arises and disappears so quickly that it cannot be
individually seen; but during the moment that it exists, it has
The vacuum or so-called "empty space" is just a seething sea of
such extraordinarily energetic bubbles of energetic particles
appearing and disappearing at an incredible rate. Because an
individual bubble cannot be seen, it is said to be "virtual"
(not observable) as compared to something that hangs around a
long time and thus can be "seen" or "observed". An ordinary old
electron that hangs around all the time is thus observable; an
electron born as a special "bubble" momentarily in the seething
vacuum and disappearing again almost instantly, is not
observable but "virtual".
Photons (pieces of electromagnetic energy) also come in both
"observable" and "virtual" size. An ordinary old photon hangs
around a long time and so it is observable. We say it is "real
energy" because we can interact with it, detect it, and observe
it. A photon born momentarily as a "special bubble" in that
seething vacuum does not hang around, and so cannot be "seen" or
measured or observed. So it is said to be "virtual".
|These virtual bubbles appearing and disappearing in the vacuum
are quite real. The reactions of lots of them with mass
creates all the forces of the universe. Any and every kind of
It turns out that a charge - any charge, either
magnetic - is in violent virtual photon energy exchange with
that vacuum, continuously. That fierce absorption of energy and
emission of energy is in fact "what charge really is".
Let's visualize that as virtual photons (photon bubbles) in the
frenzied vacuum continuously interacting by the uncountable
zillions with an ordinary old charge (say an electron). All the
forces we observe acting upon that electron, are created by the
frenzied interaction of those virtual photon bubbles with that
And the same for any other charge.
So a dipole (two opposite charges separated a little) is a
broken symmetry in that violent energy exchange between the
charges of the dipole and that seething energy bubble sea. That
is well-proven, both experimentally and theoretically, in
particle physics since 1957 and the award of the Nobel Prize to
Lee and Yang.
It still hasn't made it into the electrical engineering
textbooks and curricula yet.
Here's what we mean by that "broken symmetry of the dipole in
the fierce flux of vacuum".
The charges on the dipole continuously receive energy in little
temporary "bullet strikes" called virtual photon absorptions. So
the charge continuously absorbs EM energy, steadily and
violently, from the active vacuum at an incredible rate. All the
time. Night and day. More in one second than all the manmade
power systems on earth have used in our entire history. In other
words, it really receives an incredible amount of energy
So the dipole has to re-radiate (emit) that continuously
absorbed virtual energy back to the active vacuum, as fast as it
receives it. Else its rapidly increasing stored energy would
rise so sharply that it would create a new "Big Bang" and an
entire new universe bursting out of the old one.
Obviously the world is not continuously exploding around every
dipole or electron. In fact, the dipole and the electron are
quite stable. So the dipole or electron has to be
that absorbed energy back to the vacuum as fast as it receives
Now there are two ways the opposite charges in a dipole could
possibly radiate that energy back to space.
(1) they could radiate it
back as the same kind of virtual photons that it absorbed.
In that case, there would exist "mirror symmetry" in the
vacuum flux, as if everything hitting the dipole charges
from the vacuum were just reflected exactly right back to
the vacuum, like light reflecting perfectly from a mirror.
But that's not what happens. What
(2) a lot of the little
bitty momentary photons are "piled up" and added together,
to make a bigger "chunk" of EM energy. These "big chunks" of
EM energy are the bigger, permanent kind of photons! They
are observable. That's real energy, and you can intercept
it, collect it, and use it to power real loads.
That reradiating the absorbed
virtual photon energy as observable photon energy called a
"broken symmetry" in that vacuum "bubble flux". In other words,
the dipole charges absorb energy from the vacuum in very tiny
momentary bits - as something like "disintegrated" EM energy.
But the spin of the charges of the dipole integrates that
"disintegrated" EM energy into very much bigger pieces that are
permanent and hang around. So part of the energy received from
the vacuum in a form that cannot be "seen", is "glued together"
into energy that can be and is seen, and re-emitted back to the
vacuum in that real EM energy form.
So we "see" the dipole as if it were just sitting there and
pouring out real EM energy continuously, in all directions, like
a spray nozzle or giant energy gusher. We don't see the input
energy from the vacuum at all! But it's there, and it's
well-known in particle physics. It's just that electrical
engineers - particularly those that have designed and built all
our electrical power systems for more than a century - do not
So, according to proven particle physics and a Nobel Prize, the
easiest thing in all the world is to extract EM energy from the
vacuum. All you wish. Anywhere in the universe. For free. Just
pay a little bit once, to make a little dipole, and that silly
thing is like a great oil well you just successfully drilled
that has turned into a mighty gusher of oil without you having
to pump it. The dipole just sits there and does its thing, and
it pours energy out forever, for free, as long as that dipole
continues to exist.
So pouring from the terminals (from the internal source dipole)
of every generator and battery, there is a stream of EM energy
pouring out, once that internal dipole is made. This outflowing
EM energy has been extracted and converted directly from the
seething vacuum by that dipole's broken symmetry. The outflowing
EM energy is not transformed shaft energy one put into the
generator! That flow of energy extracted from the vacuum fills
all space around the external wires attached to the terminals,
and it flows at the speed of light.
The external (attached) circuits and power lines etc. catch some
of that available EM energy flowing through space (generally
flowing parallel to the wires but outside them). Some of the
flowing energy is intercepted and diverted into the wires
themselves, to power up the internal electrons and force them
into currents, thus powering the entire power line and all its
However, the power system engineers use just one kind of
circuit. In the standard "closed current loop" circuit, all the
"spent electrons" (spent after giving up their excess energy in
the loads, losses, etc.) are then forcibly "rammed" back through
that little internal section between the ends of the source
dipole (between the terminals). These "rammed" electrons smash
the charges in the dipole away, and destroy the dipole then and
It can easily be shown that half the "caught" energy in the
external circuit is used to destroy that source dipole, and
For more than a century, our misguided engineers have thus used
a type of circuit that takes half of the energy it catches, and
uses that half to destroy the source dipole that is actually
extracting the EM energy from the vacuum and pouring it out of
the terminals for that power line to "catch" in the first place!
The other half of the "caught energy" in the powerline is used
to power the external loads and losses.
So half the caught energy in the power line is used to kill the
source dipole (kill the free energy gusher), and less than half
is used to power the loads. It follows that our electrical
engineers are trained to use only those power circuits that kill
themselves (kill their gushing free energy from the vacuum)
faster than they can power their loads.
Well, to get the energy gusher going again, the dipole has to be
restored in order to extract the energy and pour it out again.
So we have to pay to crank the shaft of that generator some
more, to turn that generator some more, so that we can dissipate
some more magnetic energy to re-make the dipole. We have to work
on that shaft at least as much as the external circuit worked on
that source dipole to destroy it. So we have to "input more
shaft energy" to the generator than the external power system
uses to power its loads. Since we pay for the input shaft
energy, we have to keep on burning that coal, oil, and gas etc.
to do so.
All our electrical power systems are "suicidal" vacuum-powered
systems, freely extracting their useful EM energy from the
seething vacuum, but deliberately killing themselves faster than
they power their loads.
All that the burning of all that coal, oil, gas, etc.
accomplishes is to continually remake the source dipole, which
our engineers insure will then receive be killed by the system
itself faster than the system gives us work in the load.
To borrow a phrase from
Tesla, this is probably "the most
inexplicable aberration of the scientific mind ever recorded in
No electrical engineering department or professor in the United
states teaches or even knows what powers an EM circuit, or an
electrical power line, even though the basis has been available
in particle physics for nearly half a century.
All that wanton and senseless destruction of the biosphere and
pollution of the planet, just to get our electrical energy from
self-suicidal power system, is insane. There is absolutely no
need for it. That hundreds of thousands of engineers and
scientists have continued this gigantic farce uncomplaining, is
absolutely inexcusable. That the leaders of our scientific
community continue to propagate such nonsense, is also
There is no problem in getting all the EM energy one wishes, for
nearly free, anywhere in the universe, and that follows from the
broken symmetry of the dipole. Just make a dipole. You get the
energy flow for free, thereafter, so long as you will just leave
that dipole intact and not destroy it (or at least destroy it
slower than you power the load).
All the universities, the National Academy of Sciences, the
National Science Foundation, and the great national laboratories
are completely working on the wrong end of the energy problem.
So is the Department of Energy, save one small project to donate
a website to the
Alpha Foundation's Institute for Advanced Study
(AIAS), of which the present author is a fellow emeritus (old
dog). The conventional power system scientists have got the cart
before the horse, have had it that way for more than a century,
and are determined to forever keep it that way.
The real and only energy PROBLEM is simple:
Figure out better
mechanisms to intercept that FREE electromagnetic energy flow
from the source dipole, once made
Collect lots of that freely
flowing energy in collectors and circuits
Then discard the
stupid closed current loop circuit and dissipate the collected
energy in the loads WITHOUT dissipating half of it to kill the
dipole and the free-flowing EM energy from the vacuum
In one AIAS paper, we gave some
17 ways to attack that real only
energy problem. Several of those ways are doable now, but just
require funding and a proper development program. And some
engineers who also know some particle physics. I personally know
three inventor or inventor groups with overunity EM systems in
at least successful laboratory experiment, or in actual
prototype. Our own group with its motionless electromagnetic
generator using the Aharonov-Bohm effect is one of those three
systems that can be developed and brought into mass production
within one year, given adequate funding (say, about 23 million
per system). The energy crisis can be totally solved, forever,
anytime the scientific community will permit it, fund it, and
not try to "steal" it from the inventor(s).
The electrodynamics that U.S. electrical engineers are using to
design those present electrical power system monstrosities and
the accompanying extraordinarily vulnerable and awkward and
archaic infrastructures and distribution systems is 137 years
old, put together in the time of the American Civil War, for
goodness sakes! At that time, the atom, the nucleus, and the
electron were not even discovered yet. The classical EM model is
known today to be seriously flawed (e.g., Wheeler and
pointed part of it out, and even tried to correct it. They
failed because their corrections were not sufficiently
extensive). Even so, later even that 1865 Maxwellian EM model
was also seriously curtailed in the 1880s (after Maxwell was
It was further crippled, first
partially crippled by Heaviside and then permanently crippled
(as far as free energy systems) by Lorentz. Prior to Lorentz's
changes, the Maxwell-Heaviside equations do prescribe both,
(1) Maxwellian systems
that put out less energy than the operator inputs (i.e., the
(2) Maxwellian systems
that put out more energy than the operator himself inputs.
The model (before Lorentz's changes)
does include "electromagnetic windmills in a free electrical
wind", so to speak. After Lorentz's change, it is as if the
further-stripped model now only contains "windmills which are
sealed in a barn so no wind can ever get to them".
Let me put it this way. Every electrical system we ever built,
and every one today, is powered by EM energy extracted directly
from the active vacuum by the source dipole in the system.
Always has been, always will be. If one really wants to get
serious about it, all EM energy in space comes from the time
domain (see my Giant Negentropy paper). Literally we "consume or
use a little time, to get EM energy in 3-space. One second of
time converts to something like 9x1016 joules of EM energy.
So if we convert one microsecond per second, at one point in
space, into EM energy in space, we get something like 9x1010
joules per second - that's 90,000 megawatts at that single
point. Even at a very efficient conversion process, we can get
1,000 megawatts there at that single point or location. And we
can simultaneously do that at each and every spatial point or
location that we choose.
So how many programs are the National Academy of Sciences and
National Science Foundations funding for working on the only
real fundamental electrical power system problem (how to
dissipate the freely flowing EM energy in loads, without ramming
the spent electrons back through the source dipole and
destroying it)? Check their websites. There is no really
"innovative science" going on to solve that problem. The
scientific community will spend and has spent billions on the
notion of hot fusion, without adding one watt to the power grid,
but they will not spend a paltry $40 million to solve the only
remaining problem that would allow very cheap and clean
electrical energy for the entire world, forever. And that would
dramatically and permanently reduce the despoiling of this
beautiful biosphere, the strangling of species, and the global
warming. Let alone eliminate those nuclear powerplants and
eliminate further nuclear wastes from them.
The cost of a single large new electrical power plant for a few
years, can solve the energy crisis forever.
Kyoto was a flash in the pan prior to what can really be done
with a single well-funded and well-directed research program in
3 years. We could have working commercial power systems,
self-powering, going into production in one year from the date
such a program is initiated, if we can get something like a
Presidential Decision Directive to keep the infuriated
scientific community, the Big Nuke Power boys, and the Big Oil
and Big Coal boys off our backs. Two years later that that first
year, the range of systems will include nearly everything
necessary to permanently replace this terribly vulnerable and
antiquated centralized power system that is going to require
vast billions of new dollars and years of work, just to try to
stay up with demand.
Oh, how long will a dipole pour out that EM energy freely, you
asked? Let's put it this way. The dipoles in the atoms of all
the primary matter in the universe, have been continuously
pouring out EM energy freely extracted from the vacuum, for some
14 billion years or so. So as far as we are concerned, the
dipole will pour the energy out freely forever, or for at least
the next 14 billion years - and that's close enough to forever
for government work, so to speak.
All we have to do is take the "electrical windmills" out of the
closed current loop barns we have been putting them in for over
If the environmentalists really want to save the planet, then it
is the scientific community they should be attacking and
condemning. To do that, they will have to have some decidedly
unorthodox scientific advise. But we do have some extraordinary
scientists who can and would do it. They would have to be paid,
but they can meet all objections and the deepest scientific
The global warming, hydrocarbon combustion pollution,
power plant pollution, and dams pollution and degradation of
species and the biosphere, are totally unnecessary. The only
reason we have an environmental problem now approaching such
epic proportions, is because of the abject and total failure of
our own scientific community for more than a century. That was
excusable for a half century, but since the rise of particle
physics - and specifically since the discovery of broken
symmetry - it is no longer excusable. Indeed, it so threatens
the very survival of the United States (and about 3/4 of the
Earth that is going to be destroyed by about 2010 on our present
course) that it has become simply inexplicable.
How else can one explain the fact that, in 100 years, we have
not produced a single electrical engineering department,
university, national laboratory, etc. that even understands what
powers an electrical circuit? And still do not, even though the
broken symmetry of the common source dipole has been established
for nearly a half century?
The organized scientific community --- not the political
community --- is totally responsible for the environmental
Unfortunately, the environmental community and the political
community have been very na´ve; they have turned for their
"expert advice" to those same engineers and scientists and
organizations and laboratories that do not even know what powers
an electrical circuit. And that have been responsible for the
crisis in the first place. And they have naively believed every
word they were told by those advisors.
Hey! Those who brought on the problem in the first place, and
who so stoutly defend the present mess (destroying the careers
of scientists who object and try to change it), cannot be
depended upon to properly advise anyone on how to correct it.
That is like setting the fox in the henhouse to guard the hens.
The environmental community does a lot of activism, because it
is filled with persons sincerely passionate in their urgent
intent to save this precious planet. The community has a lot of
clout, and it also attracts a lot of money from donors wishing
to clean up the biosphere, and to have a clean air and planet
once again, with thriving natural species rather that species
strangling in the sludge and the mud.
However, sadly the community focuses (understandably!) on the
wrong problem, because it receives the wrong scientific advice.
The environmental community is led to believe that what is being
done by our energy scientists and engineers is the very best
that can be done. That is totally false. Both the
environmentalists and the politicians are being misled by our
Contrary to popular opinion, science does not progress by sweet
reason, but by an unending series of cur dog fights. Any
historian of science can give dozens and dozens of notorious
examples (vacuum energy and cold fusion are two present cases
where the innovative scientists are being savaged without
mercy). The Big Dogs who hold the upper hand in the present cur
dog fights, are irrevocably committed to more of the same
systems the environmentalists despise:
You cannot power the big cities and the
increasing populace with windmills and solar cells. Or with fuel
cells either, though that is now the "decision" made by the
various cartels that we shall have forced upon us.
with fuel cells, you will
have to keep burning some fuel, and keep that energy meter on
your house and some kind of "gas meter" on your car.
from the vacuum is deadly opposed by the cartels because it is
total anathema to that desire. By removing that gas meter on
your car and that electric meter on your house, some vast
financial empires are threatened and will be destroyed
eventually. We simply wryly point out that the top dogs did not
get on top by placing touch football; they got there by playing
very hard-nosed football. They will do whatever it takes to
oppose the knowledge and funding of COP>1.0 electrical systems
freely taking their energy from the seething vacuum. Including
kill the inventors and discoverers as necessary. They have been
doing it for several decades already.
So the dispute over eliminating the energy crisis versus saving
the environment then becomes artificially limited to the false
"either-or" choice between more energy-systems-as-conventional
to provide more energy, versus severe curtailment of energy use
from less energy-systems-as-conventional to decrease the impact
on the environment.
That choice forces one to a choice in the national economy and
way of life, when only the conventional power system technology
is considered. With conventional technology, to maintain the
economy for a decent standard of living for all, we have to have
CHEAP AND ABUNDANT electrical energy and more of it every year.
With conventional approaches, to maintain the environment we
have to have CLEANER AND LESS electrical energy every year.
The real solution is to kill the controversy and cut the Gordian
knot, and get rid of that phrase "conventional power system
technology" and that phrase "and less". To do BOTH things at
once - have cheaper, clean, and more abundant electrical energy
and more every year - we only have to turn to proper use of the
enormous electromagnetic energy so easily and universally
produced from the seething vacuum.
There is a very good and proper science of the type of
electrodynamic models that have to be used to develop such
new "vacuum powering" systems:
(1) higher group symmetry
electrodynamics should be used, such as O(3), which is
capable of modeling the vacuum interaction as well as the
curvatures of spacetime interactions (both of which
conventional classical electrical engineering discards), and
(2) we have to put some
sharp but open-minded scientists on working on the real
problem: how to dissipate the collected EM energy in a
dipolar circuit, without using half of it to destroy its own dipolarity.
We have to fund those sharp young
grad students working on their doctorate, and those post-docs
working on new energy research, to work in "EM energy from the
vacuum". Try finding a single doctoral thesis, candidate, or
post-doc working on a funded project in that respect.
The entire solution to the energy crisis and to the
environmental problem due to energy is doable, and it's doable
in three years. But take an example: To get those two things
going via our own proposed COP>1.0 power system (the motionless
electromagnetic generator), we have had to move our final year
of research to the National Material Sciences Laboratory of the
National Academy of Science of a friendly foreign nation.
Which, by the way, has been teaching the higher electrodynamics
in its universities now for more than a dozen years.
And which, by the way, does know what really powers an EM
Hope this fills the bill for you.
Modern Nonlinear Optics, Second
Edition, 3 vols., edited by M. W. Evans, Wiley, 2001. The 3
volumes comprise a Special Topic issue as Vol. 119, I.
Prigogine and S. A. Rice (series eds.), Advances in Chemical
Physics, Wiley, ongoing.
M.W. Evans, P. K. Anastasovski,
T. E. Bearden et al., "Derivation of the B(3) Field and
Concomitant Vacuum Energy Density from the Sachs Theory of
Electrodynamics," Foundations of Physics Letters, 14(6),
Dec. 2001, p. 589-593
----- "Development of the Sachs
Theory of Electrodynamics," Foundations of Physics Letters,
14(6), Dec. 2001, p. 595-600;
----- "Explanation of the
Motionless Electromagnetic Generator with O(3)
Electrodynamics," Foundations of Physics Letters, 14(1),
Feb. 2001, p. 87-94.
------ "Explanation of the
Motionless Electromagnetic Generator by Sachs's Theory of
Electrodynamics," Foundations of Physics Letters, 14(4),
2001, p. 387-393.
------ "Operator Derivation of
the Gauge Invariant Proca and Lehnert Equation: Elimination
of the Lorentz Condition," Foundations of Physics, 39(7),
2000, p. 1123-1130.
----- "Effect of Vacuum Energy
on the Atomic Spectra," Foundations of Physics Letters,
13(3), June 2000, p. 289-296.
----- "Runaway Solutions of the
Lehnert Equations: The Possibility of Extracting Energy from
the Vacuum," Optik, 111(9), 2000, p. 407-409.
----- "Classical Electrodynamics
Without the Lorentz Condition: Extracting Energy from the
Vacuum," Physica Scripta 61(5), May 2000, p. 513-517.
----- "On the Representation of
the Maxwell-Heaviside Equations in Terms of the Barut Field
Four-Vector," Optik 111(6), 2000, p. 246-248.
"The New Maxwell Electrodynamic
Equations: New Tools for New Technologies. A Collection of
60 papers from the Alpha Foundation's Institute for Advanced
Study. Published as a Special Issue of the Journal of New
Energy, 4(3), Winter 1999. 335 p.
T. E. Bearden, "Extracting and
Using Electromagnetic Energy from the Active Vacuum," in M.W.
Evans (ed.), Modern Nonlinear Optics, Second Edition, 3
vols., Wiley, 2001; Vol. 2, p. 639-698.
T. E. Bearden, "Energy from the
Active Vacuum: The Motionless Electromagnetic Generator," in
M. W. Evans (Ed.), Modern Nonlinear Optics, Second Edition,
3-vols., Wiley, 2001; Vol. 2, p. 699-776.
T. E. Bearden, Energy from the
Vacuum: Concepts and Principles, World Scientific,
Singapore, 2002, in process.
T. E. Bearden, "Giant Negentropy
from the Common Dipole," Proceedings of Congress 2000, St.
Petersburg, Russia, Vol. 1, July 2000 , p. 86-98. Also
published in Journal of New Energy, 5(1), Summer 2000, p.
11-23. Also carried on DoE restricted website
T. E. Bearden, "Bedini's Method
For Forming Negative Resistors In Batteries," Proceedings of
Congress 2000, St. Petersburg, Russia, Vol. 1, July 2000, p.
24-38. Also published in Journal of New Energy, 5(1), Summer
2000, p. 24-38.
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.
M.W. Evans, "The Link Between
the Sachs and O(3) Theories of Electrodynamics," in M. W.
Evans (Ed.), Modern Nonlinear Optics, Second Edition, , 3
vols. Wiley, 2001; vol. 2, p. 469-494.
M. W. Evans, "The Link Between
the Topological Theory of Ranada and Trueba, the Sachs
Theory, and O(3) Electrodynamics," in M. W. Evans (Ed.),
Modern Nonlinear Optics, Second Edition, , 3 vols. Wiley,
2001, vol. 2, p. 495-499.
M. W. Evans, "O(3)
Electrodynamics," a review in M.W. Evans (ed.), Modern
Nonlinear Optics, Second Edition, 3 vols., Wiley, 2001; Vol.
2, p. 79-267.
M. W. Evans and L. B. Crowell,
Classical and Quantum Electrodynamics and the B(3) Field,
World Scientific, Singapore, 2001.
M. W. Evans and S. Jeffers, "The
Present Status of the Quantum Theory of Light," in M. W.
Evans (ed.), Modern Nonlinear Optics, Second Edition, 3
vols., Wiley, 2001; Vol. 3, p. 1-196.
B. Lehnert, "Optical Effects of
an Extended Electromagnetic Theory," in Modern Nonlinear
Optics, Second Edition, 3 vols., Wiley, 2001; Vol. 2, p.
Subject: Re: RE: Please Forward
to Tom Bearden
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 02:15:20 -0500
Dear Mr. Tom Bearden,
Thank you for your quick and courteous response to my email. I
truly appreciate that you are willing to take the time to
correspond with those of us who are fascinated with your
research, but are obviously not anywhere your level of education
or understanding of these concepts.
I have printed out some of the material on your website
(especially "The Unnecessary Energy Crisis") and have passed it
along to a friend of mine at school. I have also mentioned your
website to a couple of my professors. My English teacher is a
staunch democrat and an has an intense devotion to environmental
protection. I told her that if she wanted to truly know how the
environment of this planet could be protected, she needed to
read your website. She told me she would take a look at it.
I understand that you would have difficulty writing a paper both
detailed, but also generalized. There is a huge amount of
information about your concept, and it is not simple at all. But
the most fascinating concept in my mind is the fact that *all*
of the energy we use today does not come from coal, nuclear fuel
rods, gasoline, or other similar sources. It comes from the zero
point energy that is released when a dipole is created! Those
other products only create the energy to separate the charges in
the dipole, the ZPE field does the rest!
That in my opinion is a truly revolutionary concept. And I truly
want to share it with other people! But my problem is that even
though I grasp the *basic* idea of the theory, the technical
aspects are beyond my understanding.
In my opinion someone needs to write a paper, "for dummies" so
to speak, that is basically a tutorial on the *basic* theory of
electricity, magnetism, and how power generation works. But this
paper would also explain, MOST IMPORTANTLY, that all we humans
have done is separate the dipoles and that ZPE does the rest.
Then perhaps afterwards there could be an additional section
with slightly more technical information, references, etc.
In my opinion to get the word out about this, we need such a
document that lay people will be interested in reading. I am
such a layperson, and I still enjoy reading your papers (even
though I do not understand 90% or more of their content). But
most people would look at them and cringe with fear, because
honestly you are *way* above the rest of us.
If you would be willing to write such a paper I would be more
than willing to distribute it at my college and to several of my
online friends. And I know of other people on the internet that
would be willing to do the same. I believe such a paper, could
make a huge impact.
Your website has motivated me to start studying these subjects
on my own starting next semester. I am going to try and start
from the *very* basics (which I need to seriously study) and
work my way up.
Also, I read your paper on the Rife Microscope. One of my more
serious interests is biology and anti-aging research. I have
been reading about subjects such as
...and so fourth for a few
years now. One reason I went back to school is to eventually be
able to find a way to reverse the human aging process, which I
believe is the most horrible and cruel disease on this planet.
But if your information is correct, and we can simply reverse
aging and disease with some type of ZPE energy, then perhaps I
should major in physics instead of biology? To have a better
understanding of this, what would be the most appropriate major?
Honestly, I have not yet grasped that concept. I just do not
understand how applying some type of "energy" could reverse
damage or modify purely biological functions. But if it is true,
then basically your website paints the picture of a glorious
utopia where energy is free and all disease and aging is a thing
of the past.
And if this is all true (you have basically proven your point
about ZPE, the biological aspect is just a little harder to
grasp) then probably every extraterrestrial species is laughing
at or on the other hand crying over us right now.
Again, thank you for your response. I hope you will consider
writing up some kind of paper explaining the basic concepts
behind magnetism, electricity, and power generation and then
introducing the truth about vacuum energy. Such a paper would be
*very* useful in sharing with others about this concept.
Take care and God Bless you. I hope you and your family have a