What We Have to Get Across to Our Electrical Engineering Profession:
To the EE Departments, Professors, Students, Curricula, and Textbooks
May 26, 2007
The Real “Energy Problem”
What we have to get across to the up and coming young electrical engineers
is that the symmetrization of the Heaviside equations by Lorentz in 1892
arbitrarily discarded – from the Heaviside EE model – all of nature’s
asymmetrical Maxwellian systems. Nature did not and does not discard these
asymmetric Maxwellian systems! Lorentz did it more than a century ago, and
since then every EE has been trained and indoctrinated to consider only
symmetrical Maxwellian systems. Note that this profound curtailment was
done just as electrical engineering as a profession was beginning a bit
here and a bit there. So this abomination has been directly inflicted on
almost every electrical engineer since the beginning of electrical
Producing a Steady, Free Flow of Real, Usable EM
Energy Is Ridiculously Simple
One can easily evoke a continual free flow of real, usable EM energy –
anytime, anyplace – via a very simple and cheap gadget. The energy will
flow forever if one just leaves the gadget alone.
Here’s one way to do it.
Simply lay an electret on a permanent magnet so the E-field of the
electret is at right angles to the H-field of the magnet. By the standard
Poynting energy flow theory used in all the EE texts, that silly thing
will steadily pour out a real, observable, free flow of Poynting energy S,
given by the standard little formula S = E X H. So long as that gadget
persists, it will freely pour out real, usable EM energy from now till the
end of time.
So our “world energy” problem is not how to get all the free EM energy we
want for our use; that is simple. The problem is then how to intercept,
collect, and use some of that freely flowing energy to power our loads. In
short, we can easily get an unending, steady, free EM energy wind. All we
have to do is learn how to properly build a “windmill powered” power
system to use it.
So what we have to do to use that free flow of energy from that silly
gadget to power loads for us – freely! – is learn how to build a proper
“intercept and collection” EM circuit that (1) intercepts and collects
part of that free “EM energy wind”, and then (2) dissipates that freely
collected energy asymmetrically in the load, completely separately from
the gadget providing the free EM wind, with none of the collected free EM
energy being used to destroy the gadget itself or its dipolarities.
In short, we can produce an unending “free EM energy wind” anywhere we
wish to, for a few dollars and in a few moments. But we have never been
taught the proper way to build the “windmill” – the interception,
collection, and load-powering system to extract and properly use energy
from that free EM energy wind.
Our Engineers Have Deliberately Been Taught to Build
Only the Wrong Kind of “Windmill”
Notice how – since 1782 – we have been taught to build a normal magnetic
motor having permanent magnets in it.
First, we deliberately build and use only permanent magnets that have
symmetrical fields. This means that, for a simple bar magnet with poles
near the ends, the magnetic field on the left is equal and opposite to the
magnetic field on the right. That is a “symmetrical-field” magnet.
Now look at a single stator N pole of a magnet facing the rotor, with an
S-pole of a magnet on the rotor and facing the stator. When the rotor
S-pole is rotating so that it is approaching the stator N-pole, the rotor
is accelerating (because of the attracting force of the incumbent fields
of the magnets). So the angular momentum of the rotor shaft and its
attached flywheel is being freely increased. This adds real mechanical
rotary energy freely to the flywheel and the mechanical energy temporarily
stored in it.
But then when the rotor S passes the stator N and is now departing on the
other side of the stator N, then the drag back force between stator N and
rotor S is equal and opposite to what it was on the “approaching” phase.
So on the departing phase, the flywheel is now being continually slowed,
and all that excess free energy stored up in the flywheel during the
approaching part of the cycle is now freely taken back again, because of
the symmetry of that stator magnet’s magnetic field..
The result is that we continually produce a negative entropy operation
(the flywheel freely accelerating on that approach part of the cycle) and
then stupidly produce an equal positive entropy operation (the flywheel
decelerating on that departing part of the cycle). So all the free energy
received is just as freely taken back, if we use a stator magnet with a
symmetrical magnetic field. The net mechanical energy gain is zero.
Breaking the Field Symmetry Easily Provides
To power that symmetrized motor, we must break that stator magnet’s field
symmetry! So we are taught to separately furnish and put in some external
energy (and pay for it) to a coil, say, that is located beside that rotor
N just on the “departing” side. And just as the rotor enters the “payback”
zone (the departing side), we suddenly activate this coil to produce an
S-pole, thereby killing that part of the permanent magnet’s field that
would be producing the “drag back” and “pay back” portion of the cycle.
Well, that paid input we make obviously breaks the symmetry of the net
magnetic field of the stator magnet, so as to zero out the payback field.
In that case, now there is no payback zone (and in fact, there can even be
an additional accelerating zone in what was formerly the decelerating
And that eliminates the “payback” zone of the free energy received via the
magnetic fields. Thus there is a net acceleration of the flywheel on each
complete rotation. In short, now the flywheel receives and stores
additional free mechanical energy on each rotation of the shaft.
Well, we can then add a “drag” load to the end of the motor shaft, to
continually soak up and remove that excess acceleration energy being input
to the flywheel. In that way, the power we are inputting to adroitly
destroy the symmetry of the net magnetic field in the payback zone
produces a situation where the asymmetric fields power the loads.
We pay to break the symmetry of the permanent magnet field zone; we do not
pay to power the system! Once we break the symmetry of that stator
magnet’s field, then the asymmetric magnetic fields power the motor freely
and independently of the energy that we ourselves input to the coil.
The Choice: Either Pay for the Symmetry-Breaking
Energy Ourselves or Get Something Else to Do It Freely
Well, we can just continue to pay for that symmetry-breaking effect
ourselves if we wish to! The motor doesn’t care, just so long as its
internal magnetic field symmetry gets broken. Given its field-asymmetry,
the asymmetric fields of the motor’s permanent magnets will themselves
power the motor and its load, taking the necessary input energy from the
seething virtual state vacuum via the broken symmetry of the magnetic
The magnetic fields in that motor could care less what makes the
asymmetry, as long as it’s at the correct time and in the correct place.
Anything that properly and freely furnishes that necessary asymmetrizing
energy, will then allow the asymmetric fields of the magnets themselves to
power the motor and its load.
We accent most strongly: We normally and foolishly pay to break the
symmetry. We do not pay to power the system! Once the symmetry is broken,
the now-asymmetric system powers itself.
Getting the Broken Symmetry In the Magnetic Field
We’ve all been taught we have to continually pay for breaking that
magnetic field symmetry in that motor, and that is a blatant lie. It’s
been a blatant lie ever since Lorentz arbitrarily forced it upon us in
1892. Here’s how not to have to pay for it!
First, using nanocrystalline technology, technologists now can readily
produce a nonlinear permanent magnet that has an asymmetric field left and
right. That is, the magnetic field of the bar magnet can now be much
stronger on the right side, say, than on the left side. Again, the motor
does not care what gives the broken symmetry, so long as it gets it.
So suppose we have deliberately made and used such anisotropic permanent
magnets with asymmetrical magnetic fields. Suppose now that our N-pole on
the stator is part of an asymmetric permanent magnet, so that the stator
magnetic field on the “rotor approaching” side of the stator N is much
stronger than the stator magnetic field on the “rotor departing” side of
the stator N. For simplicity in understanding the operation of the
broken symmetry, let the rotor S magnetic field still be symmetrical.
Voila! Now the acceleration of the flywheel occurs normally during the
incoming rotor S’s approach to the stator N. But when the rotor S is
departing the stator N, the decelerating magnetic field is now materially
lessened, and so the drag-back (deceleration) of the flywheel in the
pay-back zone is less than the acceleration of the flywheel that occurred
in the acceleration zone.
So for every rotation, there is now a perfectly free, net acceleration
(speedup) of the flywheel’s rotation with every cycle.
And now we can add a “drag” load to the shaft of the motor, to soak up
that excess acceleration energy as it is produced.
That motor and matched load combination will “self-power” itself and its
load, and it will do it freely from now till the end of time if something
does not change or break.
A Little Deeper Understanding of Broken Symmetry
Broken symmetry was predicted by Lee and Yang in the 1950s, and it was
resoundingly proven by Wu and her colleagues in Feb. 1957. This was so
astounding a revolution in physics that, with unprecedented speed, the
Nobel Committee awarded the Nobel Prize in Dec. 1957 to Lee and Yang in
the same year of Wu et al.’s experimental proof.
The point is, what we call a “static” magnetic field is actually a
continual free outflow of real, observable, usable EM energy, extracted
from the virtual state vacuum by the broken symmetry of the magnetic
And what powers a magnetic motor is the broken symmetry of the internal
magnetic field of the magnets– not the energy we input to produce that
broken symmetry itself.
Since the energy from all magnetic fields (and electric fields as well)
comes directly from the local virtual state vacuum, extracted and output
in observable form by the source dipole’s broken symmetry. Lee in fact
directly pointed out the relationship between any broken symmetry and
something virtual having become observable.
Quoting Van Flandern’s beautiful analogy of a static field as composed of
individual parts in constant motion:
“To retain causality, we must distinguish two distinct meanings of the
term ‘static’. One meaning is unchanging in the sense of no moving
parts. The other meaning is sameness from moment to moment by continual
replacement of all moving parts. We can visualize this difference by
thinking of a waterfall. A frozen waterfall is static in the first
sense, and a flowing waterfall is static in the second sense. Both are
essentially the same at every moment, yet the latter has moving parts
capable of transferring momentum, and is made of entities that
propagate. …So are … fields for a rigid, stationary source frozen, or
are they continually regenerated? Causality seems to require the
latter.” [Tom Van Flandern, “The speed of gravity – What the experiments
say,” Physics Letters A, Vol. 250, Dec. 21, 1998, p. 8-9].
Classical electrodynamics and electrical engineering simply ignore what
their own Poynting theory already tells us about crossed “static” fields.
"[Poynting's result] implies that a charged capacitor in a constant
magnetic field which is not parallel to the electric field is the seat
of energy flows even though all macroscopic phenomena are static." [Jed
Z. Buchwald, From Maxwell to Microphysics, University of Chicago Press,
Chicago and London, 1985, p. 44].
So the macroscopic magnetic field may appear to be static, but it is
internally comprised of photons in continual motion at the speed of light.
A static EM field is like Van Flandern’s non-frozen waterfall, not at all
like a frozen waterfall as our electrical engineers are led to falsely
The dipole’s broken symmetry means that the dipole is continually
absorbing virtual energy from the seething virtual state vacuum,
converting it to observable photons, and then continually pouring out
these observable photons in all directions. Quoting Nobelist Lee:
“…the violation of symmetry arises whenever what was thought to be a
non-observable turns out to be actually an observable.” [T. D. Lee,
Particle Physics and Introduction to Field Theory, Harwood Academy
Publishers, Chur, New York, and London, 1981, p. 181.]
We ourselves do not have to figure out how to “extract all the usable
EM energy we wish, directly from the vacuum”. All usable, observable EM
energy – and the energy in every EM field – is already freely extracted
from the virtual state vacuum by the asymmetry of the source dipole.
Note that the hoary, archaic old EE model does not deal with the virtual
state energetic vacuum at all, but just assumes that the medium is inert
and totally inactive. That has been falsified for more than a century;
even Nikola Tesla knew the medium was active and could furnish our EM
energy freely, and Tesla was hell-bent on giving us free energy from the
vacuum! Quoting Tesla:
"Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by a power
obtainable at any point in the universe. This idea is not novel... We
find it in the delightful myth of Antheus, who derives power from the
earth; we find it among the subtle speculations of one of your splendid
mathematicians...Throughout space there is energy. Is this energy static
or kinetic? If static our hopes are in vain; if kinetic – and this we
know it is, for certain – then it is a mere question of time when men
will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheelwork of
nature." [Nikola Tesla, in a speech in New York to the American
Institute of Electrical Engineers, 1891. Quoted from back cover of his
biography, Margaret Cheney, Tesla: Man Out of Time].
“Electric power is everywhere present in unlimited quantities and can
drive the world's machinery without the need of coal, oil, gas, or any
other of the common fuels." [Nikola Tesla].
“We have to evolve means for obtaining energy from stores which are
forever inexhaustible, to perfect methods which do not imply consumption
and waste of any material whatever. I now feel sure that the realization
of that idea is not far off. ...the possibilities of the development I
refer to, namely, that of the operation of engines on any point of the
earth by the energy of the medium...” [Nikola Tesla, during an address
in 1897 commemorating his installation of generators at Niagara Falls.].
"Whatever our resources of primary energy may be in the future, we must,
to be rational, obtain it without consumption of any material." [Nikola
With the Development of Nanocrystalline Technology,
Magnets with Asymmetric Fields Can Easily Be Made
It is perfectly feasible to produce an asymmetric permanent magnet
interception and collection – and dissipation – system that will
self-power itself and its loads, where the nonlinear magnets themselves
furnish the required broken symmetry of their magnetic fields. The trick
is to nonlinearly assemble nanocrystalline material into a permanent
magnet so that the magnet itself has an asymmetrical magnetic field
already. Obviously, in that case we have already paid once for the
asymmetry when we built the magnet itself, and we never have to pay for it
again. In short, instead of getting a temporary broken symmetry as our EEs
are trained to do and pay for, we get a permanent broken symmetry that we
only pay for once.
The Marvelous and Highly Beneficial Results
This allows the direct entry into self-powering motors and
motor-generators, etc. It ushers in a great new era in electrical power,
cleaning up the biosphere (no harmful emissions to poison the biosphere!),
and dramatically reduce global warming (no CO2 emissions, etc.).
And it will directly reduce the dependence of Western Civilization upon
oil, gas, and other energy fuels that is now threatening to eventually
collapse our economy and perhaps even destroy Western Civilization itself.
However, for more than a century our electrical engineers have been
inanely taught to use only symmetrical-field permanent magnets, and then
pay every time they wish to get a broken symmetry condition in those
fields, over and over.
It’s just that, since Lorentz’s 1892 inane and arbitrary symmetrization of
the Heaviside equations, all our electrical engineers have been taught and
brainwashed with self-symmetrizing systems only! Such systems have some
internal losses, and so they self-enforce COP<1.0 – thereby forcing us to
keep burning all that oil, coal, gas, etc. and consuming those nuclear
We just have to go back and learn how to build up asymmetrical Maxwellian
systems that are permitted to self-power themselves and their loads, by
using energy from the vacuum. Note that, since a static EM field is
actually a nonequilibrium steady state (NESS) system, then systems
properly using these NESS systems are allowed (by standard nonequilibrium
thermodynamics) to do five magic things. Such a system can (1) self-order,
(2) self-rotate or self-oscillate, (3) output more energy or work than the
amount of energy one inputs (the external active environment inputs the
excess energy input that is necessary), (4) power itself and its loads
simultaneously (all the input energy is freely received from the external
active environment), and (5) exhibit negative entropy production.
Such NESS systems were clearly included in Maxwell’s original theory, and
they clearly exist in nature. Using the deliberate nonlinear permanent
magnet with asymmetric fields, we can easily build and use some of these
asymmetrical Maxwellian systems for self-powering.
It’s just that such asymmetrical Maxwellian systems have been arbitrarily
and deliberately discarded from modern electrical engineering, so as to
prevent our engineers from producing systems freely taking their input
energy from the active medium (the seething virtual state vacuum) and
using it via the broken symmetry of the source dipoles used in the system.