The Tom Bearden


Energy from the Vacuum
"Energy from the Vacuum - Concepts & Principles"
Order Now!

Help support the research


Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 22:07:03 -0600


The real problem in the area is DEVELOPMENT funding to get to that "finished demonstrator" stage that the large venture capital investors wish to see.

Once the inventor has a very stable and demonstrable, clearly overunity model, then he can raise the rest of the capital needed himself by several ways (e.g., a stock company) without the need for venture capital.

Also, most venture capitalists have no notion at all that such energy-from-the-vacuum (EFTV) systems completely violate electrical engineering. In other words, an electrical engineer knows nothing at all about EFTV systems, phenomena, requirements, etc. Yet most think that, hey, if it does exist, it has to be in the present electrical engineering textbooks and handbooks. It isn't.

The present situation of energy from the vacuum research is that various inventors are doing what they can, usually out of their own pockets. A very few have some backing. One or two have substantial backing -- e.g., Black Light Power.

The other problem is that heretofore there has been no such thing as a legitimate physics theory and model for extracting and using EM energy from the vacuum. This has been largely due to the horribly flawed old electrical engineering model taught in all our universities, and used to design all our electrical power systems.  The type of systems the EFTV researcher is trying to develop, unknown to him, is one of those asymmetric Maxwellian systems that Lorentz arbitrarily discarded from the theory in 1892, and that is still arbitrarily discarded today by all EE departments, professors, textbooks, and engineers.

Then to make matters worse, most venture capitalists bring with them their favored technical advisor -- almost certainly an electrical engineer! One tries to get them to bring and electrical measurements specialist, but also a physicist who knows quantum field theory.

So in the past, seeking financing has mostly been a comedy of errors. And then it is further compounded by the fact that there are indeed some con artists out there in the "free energy field" who are hustling a buck, and who try to do everything by trickstering.

So the things in the EFTV field that are necessary are: (1) development of the proper model(s). (2) understanding of all the odd phenomenology and fitting the model(s) to the phenomenology. (3) tying the entire thing (model, experiment, etc.) to forefront physics. Since it is NOT electrical engineering, to even get the field on the right track one either has to get that unusual type of electrical engineer that realizes his subject and model are archaic, obsolete, and horribly flawed -- having been put together in the 1880s before the discovery of the electron, before discovery of the nucleus, before the elimination of the material ether, and before most of modern physics (special relativity, general relativity, quantum mechanics, quantum field theory, quantum electrodynamics, particle physics, Yang-Mills theory, etc.) was even born.

It is NOT as simple as running down to Radio Shack and getting a kit of parts and whipping them together. If it were reasonably easy and simple, then those sharp young electrical engineers we have been producing for a century would have done it long ago.

Then, of course, the orthodox scientific community has also gone off the deep end entirely with the "skeptical" community. Perpetual motion, e.g., is simply Newton's first law of motion, and it has nothing to do with working machines, powering loads, etc. It simply means that, once you put something into a state of motion in space, it will perpetually continue in that state of motion until intervention occurs by an outside-induced force. Sophomore university students in solid state physics these days perform real perpetual motion experiments in their labs. Simply evoke a superconducting current in a closed superconducting loop, and it will run essentially forever. By the best material science we have, its half life expectancy is at least 10exp43 years. Since the age of the universe to date is only about 1.3 x 10exp10 years, then that current will run for many magnitudes of time longer than the age of the universe before it loses even half itself.

It is NOT as simple as reading or knowing electrical engineering, even to the PhD level. Indeed, the first requirement is to VIOLATE electrical engineering -- else one does not have an EFTV overunity COP system and will never have one.

Sadly, most of the electrical engineers still do not even know the precise difference between thermodynamic efficiency and coefficient of performance of a system! Most have no notion of the real history of the mutilation of the EM theory, and of Lorentz's emasculation of the Heaviside highly truncated subset of Maxwell's equations by symmetrizing them (thus throwing out all asymmetrical Maxwellian systems, which includes those that do develop COP>1.0 by use of some extra energy from the vacuum). They know nothing at all of Heaviside's giant curled component of energy flow in and around every circuit, in addition to the accounted Poynting energy flow. When both flows are accounted, any electrical circuit already is producing energy flow billions and billions of times greater in magnitude than the feeble little Poynting flow the EEs use. However, since this huge energy flow is curled, it is usually nondivergent, so usually does not interact with anything at all. Most will not even believe it if you point out the hard references, etc. The Heaviside energy flow component is there, and if one knows how to trick some of it into diverging after all, then one can get more Poynting energy out of a circuit than the operator himself inputs to it in the Poynting input fraction he made to the circuit. The additional output Poynting component is that extra component of the usually nondivergent Heaviside component that got diverged after all.

Negative energy EM fields (the so-called dark energy) and negative mass-energy Dirac sea holes and hole currents (the so-called dark matter) must also be incorporated into electrical engineering, since they occur in real overunity circuits etc. The astrophysicists will be quite surprised (astonished is the more fitting word) to find that dark energy and dark matter are readily evoked in circuits, and usable with some difficulty. Bedini has been using them in his circuits for some years now. Negative energy flow has some beautiful and marvelous characteristics, absolutely not experienced with positive energy flow. Yet negative energy is easily converted to positive energy! Dirac would be appalled, because he hated negative energy and largely scrubbed it out of his electron theory, by convincing everyone that a Dirac sea hole is a positron. (It isn't). As negative energy power systems are developed, eventually it will become possible to take a simple flashlight battery and power all the electrical loads of New York City.

Practical antigravity, e.g., comes from self-oscillation of the very powerful nuclear binding energy of atomic nuclei. Since the binding energy is negative energy, this means that powerful oscillations of negative energy EM fields -- of tremendous magnitude -- are generated. The result is that the negative energy density in immediate space, of the mind-staggering negative energy Heaviside component, provides repulsion of that negative energy power unit from positive matter such as the nearby earth. The Sweet device used this effect. Before his death, Heaviside did realize the gravitational implications of his energy flow curled component in some draft unpublished papers (they were published later, well after his death), but he seems not to have associated it with negative energy fields and potentials.

Anyway, what is desperately needed in the struggling EFTV field are the following as a matter of philanthropy:

(1) Funding of the correcting of the sad old archaic and flawed CEM/EE model and electrical engineering taught in all our universities. (2) Funding of some sharp young grad students and post docs to work in this EFTV area, and then allowing them to do so without destroying their careers, firing them, blacklisting them, etc. (3) Convincing or forcing the leadership of the scientific community (NAS, NSF, NAE, DoE, the national labs, the universities, etc.) to get with the program and get off the sad old "electric power systems are electrical engineering" kick. Until they enforce correcting the horrible old CEM/EE model, it will remain the keystone of almost everything having to do with electrical power, electric-powered transportation, etc. (4) Breaking the back of the huge cartels in science and industry -- such as the very powerful big nuclear power community -- that is forcing the entire government and research community into extracting another trillion dollars from the taxpayer to build hundreds of new pebble-bed reactor nuclear power plants, etc. And finally, (5) Some developmental funding of individual experimental researchers in this area who already have achieved at least prototype working systems.

At least one forward step is now being taken: the X-Prize Foundation is setting up substantial cash prizes in the energy, transportation, and medical areas, so perhaps eventually that or some similar large foundation will also go for funding the five areas listed above.

Anyway, thanks very much for introducing our work to philanthropist Dan Friedlander. It is very much appreciated. In our own case, our group of five MEG inventors is rebuilding another MEG demonstrator, which will require us some little time because of our present severely limited resources. When we have the demonstrator rebuilt successfully and have it adjusted and working properly, then we will be set to again seek funding for finishing the hard year of Engineering Development needed to finish and produce and market the MEG.

Very best wishes,

Tom Bearden