The Tom Bearden

Help support the research

Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 16:47:47 -0500

Thanks M****!  Enjoyed your comments.

Interesting that you mentioned the Berry phase (a further generalization of the Aharonov-Bohm effect).  The Berry phase is even further generalized by the later Aharonov-Anandan geometric phase.

Whenever the magnetic field B is localized, then the AB effect results, wherein outside the localization zone there appears an uncurled A-potential. That is EXCESS ENERGY (from the second curvature of spacetime there, due to the change in energy density of the space).  If one also extracts energy from that now-activated external environment (outside the B-localization zone), one does indeed obtain excess energy.

Further, if a system produces that activated environment, and uses means to receive extra energy from it, rigorously that makes the resulting system a nonequilibrium steady state (NESS) dissipative system.  In the thermodynamics of such systems, they are permitted to do any of five magic things: (1) self-order, (2) self-oscillate or self-rotate, (3) output more energy than the operator inputs (the excess is freely received from the active environment), (4) power itself and its load simultaneously (all the energy input is freely received from the external active environment, analogously to a windmill in a wind), and (5) exhibit negative entropy. Such a system is theoretically permitted to exhibit negative entropy, with the entropy further decreasing toward negative infinity as time passes (Evans and Rondoni, "Comments on the Entropy of Nonequilibrium Steady States," J. Stat. Phys., 109(3-4), Nov. 2002, p. 895-920.)  The authors were so taken aback by this that they posited that no real system could exhibit such entropy.  Actually every charge in the universe already exhibits that exact form of negative entropy, as we essentially showed in our solution to the problem of the source charge and its associated fields.

Increasingly the second law of thermodynamics is being falsified to greater and greater magnitude levels, and for greater lengths of time.  The latest paper by Wang et al. [G. M. Wang, E. M. Sevick, Emil Mittag, Debra J. Searles, and Denis J. Evans, "Experimental Demonstration of Violations of the Second Law of Thermodynamics for Small Systems and Short Time Scales," Phys. Rev. Lett., 89(5), 29 July 2002, 050601] experimentally proves such violation from statistical fluctuation alone, where the violation (reactions run backwards) is for a cubic micron level and for up to two seconds.  In water, e.g., a cubic micron has some 30 billion ions and molecules.  So in a situation where the "reactions run backwards" for 30 billion ions etc., that is not a trivial thing for the chemistry!.  It presages a profound impact on chemistry etc.

E.g., this justifies my earlier assumption of the formation of little "reversal zones" in electrolyte solutions, where reactions are reversed. Using that as a given, by examining the case when like charges attract and unlike charges repel (reversal of the normal law of attraction and repulsion of charges), then one gets a number of new nuclear reactions.  The coulomb barrier (the only thing making high energy necessary for transmutation anyway; the standard method is to use sheer brute energy and momentum to drive the charge against a like charge so closely that each enters the strong force region of the other.  With the Coulomb barrier suddenly and momentarily a coulomb attractor, they attract in there automatically! Remember, this is a negative entropy zone, proven experimentally now by Wang et al.

So e.g. take two D+ ions in such a temporary zone.  Some of them (statistically) will attract together into a quasi-nucleus of helium 4.  As we already know from hot fusion, most of the quasi-nuclei formed will then decay by quasi-fission, just separating again.  However, hot fusion also knows and proves that some of them will be deeper into the strong force region, and so will go ahead and "tighten" into a full nucleus of He4 --- which is an alpha particle.  In cold fusion using deuterated electrolyte to increase that probability, guess what one of the standard anomalous products is: alpha particles.

We also wrote several other reactions that would occur, and that fitted the results of the cold fusion experiments exactly.  Absolutely no one was interested in hearing about "reversal zones" etc. (which I called "time reversal zones").  There is a mechanism that actually generates the flow of time (I uncovered that in 1972 while at Georgia Tech and finishing my MS in nuclear engineering).  The mechanism is engineerable, and the cold fusion process is one way of engineering it to get time-reversal locally.   That is not time travel; the rest of the electrolyte outside the reversal zone goes on in forward time. Only the entities in the "reversal zone" now proven by experimental test of the fluctuation theorem, will be temporarily time-reversed.  And that can temporarily reverse the law of attraction and repulsion of fundamental particles.

I also explained the mysterious activation of Geiger counter readings in the China Lake electrolyte experiments, in the absence of nuclear radiation.

So anyway, I devoted one chapter of my book, Energy from the Vacuum, to cold fusion.

The greatest sleeping revolution in physics, chemistry, electrodynamics, and electrodynamics is Michael Leyton's hierarchies of symmetry [Michael Leyton, A Generative Theory of Shape, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2001].  I've fitted it to my proposed solution to the source charge problem, and it generates all the symmetries and asymmetries and their levels, exactly.  Leyton extended Klein geometry (which is a subset of Leyton's object-oriented geometry) and group-theoretic methods.  The new, extended geometry and extended group theoretic methods produce the hierarchies of symmetry.  In conventional theory, a broken symmetry at one level lowers the overall symmetry, and the information of that level of symmetry that was broken is lost.  In Leyton's geometry, a broken symmetry at one level also generates a new symmetry at a higher level, with a layer overlaying the lower level symmetries and asymmetries so that all the information is retained.  That of course is a negative entropy operation.  Leyton in fact has introduced us to the self-organizing universe.

That also solves the main problem of thermodynamics: its asymmetry.  E.g., if the second law were accurate, then once one starts with some ordered and available energy, in the subsequent interactions the entropy can only remain the same or increase.  Now that is not true; the entropy can also decrease and there is an actual negative entropy mechanism that consumes entropy at one level and produces available ordered energy at the next higher level. Note that energy is conserved; entropy ultimately refers to energy that is unavailable and often disordered as well, whereas negative entropy refers to the regaining of control and availability of the energy.  Leyton has shown there are processes which do consume positive entropy and produce negative entropy -- i.e., change the appropriate form of the energy.

The source charge is a ubiquitous example.  It consumes the positive entropy of its absorbed virtual photon flux of the vacuum (the photons in the virtual photon gas of the vacuum, that it continually absorbs).  These photons once absorbed just become a little delta in the unitary (integrated) mass of the charged particle, by E/(c^2) = delta m.  Successive delta m's from such absorption eventually raise the delta m (integrated) or "mass-energy excitation" to enough mass-energy to make an observable photon. Whereupon the excited mass decays by emitting an observable photon (organized available energy).

That is precisely how the static source charge continuously emits real observable photons, to create and continuously replenish its "static fields" and potentials, spreading at the speed of light from the formation of the charge.  And without any OBSERVABLE energy input.  Classical Maxwell-Heaviside EM and electrical engineering assume that the vacuum is inert (no virtual photon gas, no virtual energy absorbed by the source charge) and the spacetime is flat (which means that even the mass of the source charge could not exist, nor could its fields and potentials, since these assume a change in the energy density of space.).

So the electrical engineering departments are unwittingly guilty of teaching an EM model that assumes the complete violation of the conservation of energy law, and that also assumes conditions that require the vanishing of both the source charge and its associated EM fields and potentials.  In short, the EE model is an oxymoron, implicitly assuming its own self-contradiction.

Once a higher group symmetry electrodynamics model is employed, however, then the virtual photon gas and the active vacuum and the curvature of spacetime can exist.  Conservation of energy is saved, but a new means of energy conservation between the virtual state and the observable state then exists.  That requires of course a broken symmetry as discovered by Lee and Yang and proven by Wu et al. in 1957. The broken symmetry means that "something virtual has become observable", to quote Lee.  And indeed it has. Via a negative entropy process, where the unity of the mass of the virtual particle results in the coherent integration of absorbed virtual (subquantal)  EM energy into re-emitted real observable EM energy (real observable photons).

Now you can see why the lowly charge already is a perfect example of the startling NESS capability shown theoretically by Evans and Rondoni.

I've been working on the thermodynamics of legitimate overunity systems for about 6 months now, and have about two or three more months to go. But the thermodynamics is solid.

Hope things go well with you and all your projects.

Best wishes,

Tom Bearden

Hi Tom --       

Before I get to the main subject of this e-mail, I understand that you graduated from Georgia Tech.  I got my MS in chemical engineering from West Virginia University in 1973.  Back then most of what I was doing was solving heat/mass/momentum models on the IBM 360.  I frequently used IBM's CSMP and Lehigh University's LEANS-III software to solve sets of differential equations (particularly those involving process-control, from regulating temperature and product purity to air-to-air missile "pursuit curves").       

One of my closest friends as well as an advisor to my thesis was Larry R. Padgett, also a Georgia Tech grad who was completing his PhD chem.eng. studies at WVU while working at their computer center. Larry had worked at Union Carbide's South Charleston (WV) Tech Center before getting layed-off.  (I actually went to work there in 1974.) I'm guessing that puts him at Georgia Tech in the mid-60's.  Don't know if you ever ran across him.  Back then he had a bad stuttering problem which caused his mathematical adeptness (particularly at globabl optimization systems) to be overlooked.  He frequently used another professor to present his papers at symposiums.       

And I also learned about the high regard of Georgia Tech from a contract bid the DoD gave to them in the late 70's to develop a means to thwart monopulse radar SAMs.  (Since the jamming electronics couldn't be developed to switch fast enough to transmitter, they developed a towed decoy which I think is still in use today.  It must be used on non-manuevering jets like bombers ... maybe it provides ECM/ECCM protection for the entire airborne squadron much likes the AEGIS ships do for a carrier battle group.)        

Both you and Larry Maurer have taken your licks from the mainstreamers whose math-theories seem to be in vogue. 


Best Wishes --

-- Mark