The Tom Bearden

Help support the research


Subject: RE: Videos's transcript
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 15:26:40 -0500


Dear Jean and Bernadette,


I don't have the rights to any of those videos and therefore to any of their content.  I believe they are owned by Yin Gazda, whose whereabouts is unknown to me at present.  She filmed my small part in it here at my home.


Your best bet would be to locate Yin Gazda (perhaps Jean-Louis Naudin may know where she is) and get the permission from her.  She holds the rights to the video and its contents.


Attached is a very nice article in French, by Marc Hermans, which I found on the Internet in a document search about a month ago.  You might wish to contact Marc Hermans and obtain his permission to post the article on your site, or you could put in a link to it.  A simple google search should turn up Marc Hermans and his website easily.


One cannot describe the overunity EM power systems unless one uses a higher group symmetry electrodynamics.  The standard electrical engineering model taught in university does not even model the proven active vacuum and its exchange with the system, nor the broken symmetry of the source dipole in its exchange with the vacuum. So electrical engineers (1) have no model that includes those Maxwell systems far from equilibrium in their energetic exchange with the vacuum, and (2) thus use a model which arbitrarily excludes such permissible systems.


This means that there is not now, nor has there ever been, a single electrical engineering department, electrical engineering professor, or electrical engineering textbook that even recognized and taught what actually powers every EM circuit and every power line.  The basis for that startling statement has been proven in particle physics since 1957, and certified by the Nobel Prize awarded to Lee and Yang for the discovery of broken symmetry (such as the broken symmetry of the opposite charges on the ends of a dipole).  Generators and batteries do not power circuits; instead, they make their own internal source dipole and nothing else.  Once that dipole is formed between the terminals, it will FREELY and CONTINUOUSLY absorb unusable EM energy from the seething vacuum, transduce that absorbed "virtual" energy into real EM energy, and pour out that EM energy from the terminals (of the battery or generator) unceasingly, so long as that dipole exists and is not destroyed.


That is rigorously proven in particle physics.  Electrical engineers and electrical engineering departments don't even know it, and have not read the physics literature.  They do not even model the vacuum, much less the dipole's broken symmetry in it.  Their model is more than a century old, and very seriously flawed.  But continuing to use it guarantees that the power meter stays on your house and your automobile keeps pumping gas, and those huge power plants keep burning those hydrocarbons, damming those rivers, building those big nuclear heaters (to make steam to run the steam turbines that crank the shaft of the generators) called nuclear power plants.


All the hydrocarbons ever burned, nuclear fuel rods ever consumed, dams ever built, and windmills ever built, have not directly added a single watt to the power line.  Never have, never will.  All that does is allow the generator to continually remake and restore the dipole, that our engineers deliberately design the external circuit to destroy faster than it powers the loads.


The problem is the total and absolute failure of the scientific community to modernize itself in electrical power technology and science.


COP>1.0 systems, including self-powering systems, are indeed permissible in the original 1865 Maxwell theory and even in Heaviside's 1880's severe truncation of it to a vector theory.  However, such systems were then arbitrarily excluded by Lorentz in the 1880s in order to get simpler equations that could usually be solved without using numerical methods.


The arbitrary discarding of COP>1.0 Maxwellian systems from the Maxwell-Heaviside equations is done by (1) the standard arbitrary Lorentz regauging of the MH equations (just to give new and simpler equations much easier to solve), and (2) the use of the closed-current-loop circuit which self-enforces that Lorentz condition and hence self-enforces COP<1.0.


That the scientific community has not long ago recognized this and corrected it, is -- to use Tesla's phrase -- "one of the most inexplicable aberrations of the scientific mind that has ever been recorded in history."  At first we could excuse the leaders of the scientific community, but after more than 100 years of such total ignorance it is no longer scientifically excusable, but just plain stupid.


The problem lies in the totally inadequate preparation of electrical engineers, their professors, and the EE departments at university, by using an electrodynamics  model that is archaic, obsolete, and more than a century old.  It is also 45 years out of date with respect to what is already discovered and proven in particle physics.  There are far better systems of higher group symmetry electrodynamics long since developed and used in particle physics.  The Maxwell-Heaviside-Lorentz model breaks down there, because it does not adequately describe nature.  In fact, it is a purely material fluid flow model, still assuming a material ether more than a century after the Michelson-Morley experiments falsified that material ether. 


Present electrical engineering shows no signs of changing its archaic and incomplete EM model, hence the continuing arbitrary exclusion of permissible Maxwellian COP>1.0 systems which always were and are included in the Maxwell-Heaviside theory prior to Lorentz's arbitrary regauging in the 1880s.


Simply ask an electrical engineer what Lorentz regauging does with respect to the systems now being described. He cannot even answer the question.  The regauging assumes that the system will change its potential energy twice (which means it has to receive or give up energy to its environment, the local vacuum), but only in such a carefully selected manner that the two new and free force fields that appear are equal and opposite. Hence it assumes the system designer will be so stupid that he will accept vacuum energy in his system only by completely "locking it up" as additional stress energy (a stress potential) so it can do no EXTERNAL work (that requires a net force field) but only INTERNAL work to stress the system.  Further, this increase in energy from the vacuum in this peculiar form, represents a rotation of the system itself away from the laboratory frame.  In other words, it assumes that the free vacuum energy received and locked up is only used to rotate the system out of the lab frame in a special relativistic manner.


The neat little thing that the electrical engineers use to do all that "dirty work" is to ubiquitously use the closed current loop circuit where all the spent electrons in the external circuit are passed right back through the source dipole inside the generator or battery.  It is simple to show that this then takes half the EM energy collected in the external circuit, from the flow of energy poured out of the terminals by that source dipole once made, and use it to directly destroy the source dipole and cut off the free "EM energy from the vacuum" that is pouring out of the terminals and filling space around the circuit.  The other half of the "caught" Poynting energy is used to power the losses and the loads, which means less than half powers the loads.  In turn, this means that the stupid circuit destroys its own source dipole (and the free flow of EM energy from the vacuum) faster than it can power its loads.  Hence that circuit self-enforces the Lorentz condition and COP<1.0.


Since it continuously destroys the source dipole -- and hence its extraction and radiation of EM energy freely from the vacuum --- this insane circuit and system universally built by our power engineers guarantees the continuing burning of those hydrocarbons, consumption of fuel rods, building of dams to run hydroturbines to crank the generator shaft, building of windmills to crank the generator shaft, etc. --- all to do nothing but to continuously restore the source dipoles that our own engineers fiendishly design the power system to destroy faster than it powers the load.


That is what our great scientific groups, academies, and leaders have foisted upon us for more than a century.  That is what is polluting and destroying the planet, increasing global warming, destroying species, and killing lots of people every year by the pollution of their lungs and air, and the poisoning of their environment.


The environmentalists are asleep, because they turn to the same scientific community that has created this monster of a problem, for their scientific advice on how to solve it!  Those responsible for the problem, and continuing to be responsible for it, are never going to be responsible for the solution!


Sadly, most electrical engineers have never even read the original literature, to see how their science and model were sharply curtailed by purely arbitrary decision.  Most have no idea what changes to a system are represented by Lorentz regauging, and most never even thought about it.  Most have absolutely no notion of the difference between Heaviside's energy flow theory and Poynting's theory, or that Poynting assumed from the beginning only that small amount of the available giant energy flow,  surrounding ever circuit, that gets intercepted and captured by the circuit and used to power loads (and destroy dipoles).  None of them are aware that the remaining Heaviside energy flow component that is just wasted, is often 10exp13 times as great in magnitude as the silly little Poynting component that gets captured and enters the circuit and is used. 


There again, no one in the 1880s had the foggiest notion of where on earth such a startling amount of energy pouring from the terminals of every generator and battery could possibly be coming from.  The electron, atom, and nucleus had not been discovered, and particle physics was largely unborn.  Special and general relativity, quantum mechanics, and quantum electrodynamics did not yet exist.  So there was no knowledge of the seething and active vacuum, or its energetic interaction with every charge.  A "charge" was nothing but a "piece of electric fluid", and the EM theory was a purely material fluid flow theory.


Nobel Prize winners such as Feynman, and great physicists such as Wheeler, have pointed out the strange inadequacies and errors in the foundations of that hoary old electrodynamics.  Little attention has been paid, and even today the National Academy of Sciences and the National Science Foundations flatly do not recognize that the greatest barrier to scientific progress is indeed those terrible errors and shortcomings in the classical EM theory.  They have absolutely no program to correct it.  They have thereby failed the nation in a serious way, since several foreign nations have indeed secretly corrected those flaws, gone to much better systems of electrodynamics, and designed and deployed (and even occasionally used) weapons that our own scientists cannot and do not even recognize or understand.


We pay the electric power company not for its scientific and technical ability, but for it to have a giant sumo wrestling match inside its generators and lose, so the power companies can continue supporting the great energy barons by their ever increasing thirst for hydrocarbons, nuclear fuel cells, etc.


Far better systems of electrodynamics have been developed and used in particle physics for some time.  The proof that the broken symmetry of the source dipole extracts from the vacuum all the EM energy used in a circuit, has been in particle physics for 45 years.  Sadly, the EEs still don't know it, and still do not understand just what the broken symmetry of the dipole means in their circuits.


Best wishes,


Tom Bearden


Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2002 2:12 PM
Subject: Videos's transcript


Dear Mr Bearden

First, many thanks ! we were not waiting for any answer from you so we are very honoured for your so quick and interesting answer.

We don't want to bother you with additional mails but would you look at this one ?

Could you allow us to release on our website the whole faithfull french transcript of your interventions from the 3 videos TF1 Entreprises EDV 54, (1992) Royal Atlantis Film Gmbh by Yin Gazda (our transcript is in the attached document)

Why are we asking you for that ?

Because, here, in France, owing to these videos, many persons had shown some interest for free energy and specially for your work. And now, these 3 videos are exhausted (already since 1998)

Nine or ten years ago, we had made this transcript. Further, meeting Jean-Louis, we have known that he also did it  - what a stroke of luck…!

Hence, we think that this document is certainly useful for the french readers to have, through our webpages, the chance to get this important text (as we think so).

It is particularly important at the present time with the MEG patent's news !

We want to include some pictures to illustrate this 15 pages text (or less if not illustrated), so would you also give us your authorization to include 2 pictures from your website ?



Awaiting your reply, yours sincerely.

Jean et Bernadette Soarès

PS : would you excuse us for some remaining mistakes in this mail

Bernadette et Jean Soarès
site web :