The Tom Bearden

Help support the research


Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2004 11:57:15 -0600


Dear Anthony,


The requirement for an overunity COP EM power machine is that it must not symmetrically regauge itself, but instead must asymmetrically regauge itself. In that latter case, it takes on excess free regauging energy from the active vacuum environment.


Gauge freedom assures us (check it out in physics) that one can freely change the potentials of the equations describing a system, and at will, without requiring any work to be done. That means that we can freely change the potentials of an actual system, and thus the amount of potential energy it has, absolutely for free and at will. There is only a relatively small amount of information that has been published on the thermodynamics of regauging, gauge freedom, and regauged systems, but that thermodynamics is quite formidable, once one examines things such as source of the excess input energy, form of the excess input energy, and overall permissible COP of the regauged system.


Putting it in thermodynamic terms: The simple transmission/transfer of energy (energy flow) does not require work.  And all that is required to increase the magnitude of a potential (and the potential energy of that system being described by the equations) is to transfer in some additional energy in that same potential energy form. Work is only done when the FORM of the input energy must be changed.


Hence wherever there is an energy flow ongoing, a system can have this energy flow simply pour in the excess energy it needs to cover its losses and to be dissipated in (i.e., to power) its loads. If we do it asymmetrically, that is all that happens.


Thermodynamically this is now a system far from equilibrium in its energy exchange with its active environment, and such systems are permitted to perform five “magic” functions. Such a system can  (1) self-order, (2) self-oscillate or self-rotate, (3) output more energy (as powered loads, etc.) than what the operator alone inputs (the excess energy input obviously comes directly from the active environment, in that free energy transfer), (4) power itself and its load (all the energy comes directly from the active environment, and the operator need not pay for any extra energy input), and (5) exhibit negative entropy.


So obviously the trick is to (1) have an active environment that is exchanging energy with the system, and (2) have the system receive and accept extra energy from that environment. An extreme example is a windmill, which has a COP (useful work out divided by the energy input by the operator only) of COP = infinity even though its efficiency (useful work out divided by total energy input from all sources) is usually less than 50% and it wastes half or more of the total energy input that it receives from all sources. An electrical example is a common solar cell array, which may have an efficiency of only 20% and waste 80% of all its input solar energy, but it has a COP = infinity because the operator inputs zero energy and the external solar radiation environment inputs it all.


So no working machine will have efficiency greater than 100%, but if it receives excess energy from the environment, it can readily have COP>1.0 and thus output more real, useful work than the amount of energy input furnished by (and paid for by) the operator. The common home heat pump is a good example. Its overall efficiency is usually about 50%, and so again it wastes half of all the energy input to it, from all sources (operator and the atmospheric environment). But it receives so much energy from the atmosphere that it can still output (nominal conditions) from 3.0 to 4.0 times as much heat energy as the electrical energy input that the operator furnishes and pays for. So its COP = 3.0 to 4.0, while its efficiency is only about 50%.


That said, let us look for active environment and energy exchange with it, by such machines as the several magnetic power systems in question.


Every charge (either electrical, or magnetic – in which latter case we call it a “pole”) in the universe continuously absorbs EM energy in virtual state form, from its active exchange with its seething vacuum. Some of that virtual state energy is coherently integrated by the charge (we specified the exact process and the exact cohering mechanism) to successive excitation, until it reaches the quantum threshold in magnitude. At that point, the excited state abruptly decays, emitting a real photon at light speed. The continual iteration of this process means that the charge (or magnetic pole) continually emits real photons in all directions, thereby establishing the so-called “static fields”. They are not static at all, since the entire system of charge and its input and output is a nonequilibrium steady state (NESS) system. The emitted photons at light speed, in all directions, establish the associated EM fields and potentials in the macro world at light speed, and continually replenish them at light speed. Further, the macroscopic field intensities and potential intensities are deterministic, as a function of radial distance from the source charge.


Standard electrical engineering is aged and decrepit – even pathetic in light of modern physics. It assumes that the fields and potentials are indeed created by their associated source charges, but it also assumes the charges have no energy input at all, and thus freely create all that EM energy, those fields and potentials, and every joule of EM energy in the universe, right out of nothing at all. So our very archaic electrical engineering model shockingly assumes that every EM field, EM potential, and joule of EM energy in the universe is and has been freely created from nothing, in total violation of the conservation of energy law. Yet there is not a single textbook that points out these (and other) fallacious and terrible assumptions in the standard classical Maxwell-Heaviside EM model used by our electrical engineers.


The EE model also assumes a flat spacetime (falsified since 1916), an inert vacuum (falsified since at least 1930), and it also still assumes the sad old luminiferous material ether filling all space (falsified for more than a century, experimentally and theoretically). It does the latter by assuming a force field in massfree space, which is false. Force fields exist only in and on and of matter, being acted on by a force-free field that is simply a curvature of local spacetime, or alternately may be considered as a change in the local virtual particle flux of the vacuum in that region.


So in order to understand nonequilibrium steady state (NESS) thermodynamic systems receiving their excess energy from the vacuum, one must turn away from electrical engineering and go into modern physics theory. The active vacuum isn’t even modeled in electrical engineering, and neither is the curvature of spacetime.


In that respect (turning to modern physics), things are very much better indeed. Since 1957 and the award of the Nobel Prize to Lee and Yang for the prediction of broken symmetry, the asymmetry of opposite charges (any dipolarity) has been soundly and conclusively proven. In other words, it has been completely proven that any dipolarity already continuously extracts virtual state energy from the seething vacuum, and outputs (emits) real, observable EM energy at light speed in all directions. All the EM energy in every dipolar electrical circuit or dipolar magnetic circuit is in fact directly extracted from the local vacuum, not from the energy the operator inputs. At best, the operator’s energy input can only direct, switch, and time the resulting interactions induced in the varied assemblies extracting and pouring out energy from the vacuum.


So a permanent magnet, which is a dipolarity, continuously absorbs virtual state energy from its vacuum exchange, coherently integrates it to observable size, and then re-emits real, observable photons in all directions. Those associated “static” magnetic fields and potentials are thus continuously furnished and replenished as STEADY STATE DYNAMIC ENERGY FLOW SYSTEMS, and they are real EM energy flows since the entire dipolar system with its vacuum energy input and its real EM energy output is a nonequilibrium steady state (NESS) thermodynamic system.


That settles the issue of where ALL the magnetic energy in the circuit comes from.  Since EE contains no such active vacuum or curved spacetime environment, it erroneously assumes all that away. Hence it has never even solved the long-vexing problem of how the source charge establishes and produces its associated EM fields, potentials, and joules of flowing energy in its so-called “static” EM fields and potentials.


But we are all taught to use a closed current loop system or path, in all power systems we build. That’s hogwash, and it guarantees COP<1.0, regardless of the excess energy received from the vacuum. The closed current loop path system self-enforces Lorentz symmetrical regauging. That means that the system can receive all the excess energy one wishes from the vacuum, but it cannot directly USE any of it to power loads. It locks all that excess energy up as “stress” in the system due to forcibly making the forward and back emf equal and opposite in direction in an electrical system, while in a magnetic system making the forward and back mmf equal and opposite in direction.


So the standard circuits we usually build, are self-defeating insofar as making any practical use of  the excess energy so freely available as regauging energy from the active vacuum exchange. But there is no law of nature that requires symmetrical regauging. If we wish to use the excess free energy, we must use asymmetrical regauging.


Obviously, then, we have to “break” that closed current loop circuit, whether it’s electrical current in an electrical machine or magnetic flux flow in a magnetic circuit. We have to violate the closed current loop circuit’s symmetry between forward emf/mmf and back emf/mmf for at least a portion of the machine’s or circuit’s operational cycle.


Now that we know exactly what has to be done to get permissible electrical or magnetic COP>1.0, let us examine how to do it.


Check out the Takahashi motor I explained in my book, Energy from the Vacuum: Concepts and Principles, 2002, available from my website. Here you see a linear magnetic motor wrapped around almost to closing, so that the back mmf exists only across a very short distance. Common theory allows the rotor to be driven and accelerate all the way to that back mmf zone.


Takahashi simply placed a pole piece above and across that small back mmf zone, put a little coil on it, and kept a tiny trickle charge going in that coil. Then as the driving rotor came around and closed on that back mmf zone, the current in the coil was sharply broken by magneto-like switching, so that a large Lenz law effect is momentarily evoked. Things are arranged so that MOMENTARILY that pole piece develops a field in that back mmf zone that is FORWARD MMF in direction! So the rotating rotor accelerates right on through what had just been a back mmf zone, because it is momentarily a new forward mmf zone.


Voila! For just a little bit of electrical energy and switching that we pay for, the output of the rotary “linear” motor in a circle is sustained, and the overall COP can be COP>1.0 while perfectly obeying the laws of physics, laws of thermodynamics, and the conservation of energy law. The overall EFFICIENCY of the engine is still less than 100%, but its COP can be much greater than 1.0, or it can even be COP = infinity so that the operator himself need input no energy at all.


One of the inventions in question seems to use a similar variant, to momentarily override the back mmf region and for just that moment convert it nearly freely to a forward mmf region. That operational principle  is quite similar to that of  the Takahashi motor’s operation.


For the “all permanent magnet motor” systems, such a COP = infinity magnetic  motor is very similar to Howard Johnson’s work and the now-emerging field of spintronics. Check out exchange force in Feynman’s three volumes of sophomore physics, and then in good materials science texts. You will find that, when the exchange force in a magnetic material is suddenly evoked, it can momentarily be hundreds or even a thousand times stronger than the ordinary magnetic field force.


So for a permanent magnet self-powering motor, one arranges nonlinear magnetic assemblies on the stator (designed to evoke the exchange force at the exact time required, and in the exact direction desired, as the rotor magnet is passing). In short, let the stator magnet assembly attract the rotor magnet assembly in, and as the rotor travels in and on to the other side of the stator assembly where the forward mmf now would change to back mmf, the interaction on the stator magnet assembly evokes the exchange force to fire and momentarily convert that back mmf region to a strong forward mmf region.


If the exchange forces fire at precisely the proper time and in precisely the required direction, then the overall magnetic force field integrated as a line integral around the closed circle will not be zero!  Instead, it is a nonzero net driving force, because the net back mmf has been either eliminated or seriously reduced well below the net forward mmf.  And so the permanent magnet motor properly designed a la Johnson will indeed self-rotate and power its load simultaneously.


To borrow a phrase from Tesla, that this has completely been avoided by modern scientists and electrical engineers is one of the most “inexplicable aberrations of the scientific mind” ever recorded in history.


But that’s exactly how I think that the motors in question work. They work on proven principles already there in magnetic materials and in highly nonlinear electromagnetic theory. And they work totally in accord with the laws of physics, thermodynamics, and nonlinear materials. And they do completely obey the conservation of energy law, and all such systems still do exhibit an EFFICIENCY less than 100%.


In closing, we point out that there are some 200 or more known magnetic effects in materials, and only about half of them are well understood. Understanding of the other half ranges from “somewhat understood” to “not understood at all”.


If we can get the collective heads of the scientific community out of their long-held buried in the sand “ostrich position”, and turn those sharp young graduate students and post docs loose in this area with emphasis NOT on standard terribly flawed electrical engineering but on modern physics of the active vacuum and broken symmetry, then in two years there will never again be an energy crisis. All they have to do is turn them loose and give them a wee bit of funding – and not destroy their careers because they wish to do something besides normal electrical power engineering.


Sadly, the present scientific establishment “system” is determined to keep burning hydrocarbons, and to go into a new and massive nuclear power plant building cycle.  The powers that be who do not even recognize the severe foundations errors in the extant EE model have decreed we shall have fuel cells, practical or not, and dangerous or not. They decreed more oil wells, burning more dirty coal (check Wall Street Journal for today, 1 Apr. 04, on the article dealing with how many new coal-fired plants are now on the drawing board), and building more nuclear reactor power plants.


If you really want to turn those young grad students loose, point out to them the area of “negative resonance absorption of the medium” and see my explanation of it. For some time physicists have proven that in the UV and IR, one can use charged particles which self-oscillate at the frequency at which they are being fed the input energy, and the fed self-oscillating particulate medium will output some 18 times as much energy as one inputs by Poynting calculations. This has been known and shown experimentally for at least about 40 years.


Now IR is heat. Most of the extant power plants use some energy source of one kind or another to heat water, boil it, and make steam, and then use the steam to drive a steam turbine that powers the actual generator. Now imagine a new “converter” stage right there where the boiler is first heated. The converter uses insulating charged particles that self-resonate at IR frequencies. And so one puts in so much heat but outputs, say, 10 times as much heat from the converter (the excess energy is taken directly from the vacuum, via the dramatic change in reaction cross section that the self-resonant particles exhibit with a given intensity of EM field). That means that in properly modified EXISTING power plants, including nuclear power plants, one could use only one tenth as much input heat to produce the same output heating of the water in the boiler. Immediately, a substantial savings in fuel consumption, use of oil, use of nuclear fuel rods, and support distribution networks and transport costs, etc. It also dramatically decreases the detrimental pollution and degradation of the biosphere and our direct environment.


And it doesn’t end there. Now after applying the input converter, go to the output of the same boiler, where the steam comes out.  Run the heated steam into another set of converters with COP = 10, and bingo: now you have the steam being heated 10 times as much and output from those converters with much more energy freely extracted from the vacuum. So with the “fore-heater” and the “after-heater” installed, then for a given electrical power output one has reduced the primary hydrocarbon or nuclear derived heat input “energy source consumption” (whether hydrocarbons or nuclear fuel rods) by a factor of 100.


And that one, if developed and deployed, will eliminate our escalation of coal burning and dirtying the atmosphere. It will also eliminate much of our present dependence on foreign oil and gas. Less oil wells and pipelines and oil tankers and refineries and distribution systems are needed.  The overall economic impact would be quite significant.


And not a soul in the entire U.S. scientific establishment or academia is even interested.


Best wishes,

Tom Bearden


Dear Mr. Tom Bearden,
Thank you for all of the wonderful work you are engaged in to bring forth alternatives to the world's  currently inefficient energy devices and production.
Earlier today I sent this article below to your website. I have a friend who is interested in going to Japan to have a look at this device. Steven's has a Japanese friend, Jiro Kawamoto, a PhD in engineering,  that is involved in manufacturing in Japan who has offered to join Steven to have a look at Kohei Minato's devices.
(Jiro's company website is )
Question: Are you familiar with Kohei Minato's magnetic motor patents and his work in general?
Magnetic Motor Breakthrough
If you are, would you be kind enough to comment briefly and send any other info related to his work that you can easily send.?
The article on the magnetic motors is reproduced below. Keep scrolling
Thank You and Kindest Regards,