The Tom Bearden

Help support the research


Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 18:38:13 -0500

Dear Jurgen,  

There are some 20,000 papers in the physics literature dealing with the Aharonov-Bohm effect.  Look up the term in the 3-volume sophomore physics book by Richard Feynman, e.g., and read the section on it. Or look it up in any good dictionary of physics, easily available at any university library (as are many hundreds of papers on the AB effect).  

Or just do a Google search on the web. You will be able to find lots of papers in pdf file format that can be freely downloaded from the web itself. Or go to Michael Berry's website in England; there are many papers there available for downloading, from one of the masters of the field.  After the furor erupted over the AB effect, later Berry extended the Aharonov-Bohm effect to what is called the "Berry Phase" which has adiabatic conditions attached.  Then shortly thereafter Aharonov and Anandan came back in and extended the theory yet again, removing the adiabatic condition, into what today is called "geometric phase" -- the most general term for this class of effects.  Basically a gadget exhibiting the AB effect in a cyclic process, will not return to the same state it had initially.  When it completes a cycle, Its state will have a phase difference from the initial state at the beginning of the cycle, geometrically.  Hence the present general term "geometric phase".  

A formal definition of the AB effect is: "The phase shift of an electron wave function resulting in an alteration in the interference pattern of a double slit electron diffraction experiment in the presence of a potential magnetic field even if the magnetic field is shielded so that diffracted electrons do not pass through it."  In simple terms, what this says is that, when the AB effect occurs, somewhere there is a B-field that is "shielded" and thus localized and contained in that region, and if it were not shielded then the B-field would be at the spatial point of interest and would affect electrons (move them).  In potential theory, when the B-field (curl or swirl of the magnetic vector potential) is shielded and localized in that fashion, then in the space where the B-field would ordinarily be but now is not present, there appears a "field-free" and "swirl-free" or "curl-free" A-potential.  This potential does affect the electrons there, even though there rigorously is no "magnetic field B" there at all.  

A simple toroid coil can demonstrate the effect, as can a long solenoid coil (such that it can to first order be approximated to be of infinite length).  The toroid will hold in the B-field inside its coils, but the uncurled A-potential will also appear outside the coil and it WILL affect and move electrons.  Move the electrons is an external circuit or device, and one has "power" generated from the A-potential alone. If you are paying for the confined B-field, you still are not ahead.  But if you are not paying for that B-field or for that A-potential, you've got that basic "electron-moving A-potential energy" for free.  

So look up what a perfect toroid coil does with respect to the B-field and the A-potential.  Take a clue from that.  In the toroid you have to pay for the energy by furnishing the input voltage and amperage.  We get the same effect ion the core material as is obtained in the toroid coil, but without paying for it at all, by simply taking the B-field of a permanent magnet as our "insertion of magnetic B-field (curled or swirling) energy" into the localizing core material.  

In simple terms, we build a gadget that likes to "localize B-fields" inside its core.  So we give it a lot of free B-field and say, "Here you are, you beast, just go ahead and eat that B-field".  And it does.  But when it does, nature also changes the energy in the curved spacetime surrounding the localization area (the core) to uncurled A-potential energy.  For free.  You then learn how to utilize that free energy to move the electrons in your output coil and circuit.  And that's about as simply as it can be put. It is also exact.  

There is no substitute in science for reading the literature.  It is not up to me to convince other experimenters of anything; they can "believe" what they wish.  It is not a matter of "belief" anyway, but a matter of what we did and what we use, and what physics has to say about it.  If one does not understand the difference between a curl-free magnetic vector potential A, and a curled magnetic vector potential A, then  one will never understand the MEG and its operation. If one is seriously and technically interested in how the energy is taken from the local vacuum by the MEG, there are two papers in higher group symmetry electrodynamics on the MEG that have been published by the AIAS in Foundations of Physics Letters (vigorously refereed).  Those very technically explain the process by which the energy is taken from the vacuum.   

If it was simple electromagnetics or ordinary electrical engineering, it would not have taken us 10 years to do it with three Ph.D's and two experienced engineers working on it.  But then it would also have been done 50 years ago by the sharp young graduate students and post doctoral scientists at all the universities.  The active part of it, however, is pure quantum mechanics.  

We point out that the AB effect is not usually covered in electrical engineering, since it's a quantum mechanics effect.  So if one just is applying electrical engineering techniques or classical electrodynamics theory, one is in the wrong ballpark; the ballgame is not being played there.    

In addition to the AB effect, nonlinear oscillation theory is also involved.  Nonlinear oscillation theory is quite different from sine wave oscillation (linear oscillation theory) familiar in many areas.  Control of nonlinear oscillations is another specialist area all its own, particularly with respect to chaotic oscillations.  The MEG certainly looks simple sitting on the bench, but I assure you it is a very complex and highly nonlinear device, using nonlinear oscillations (and control of nonlinear oscillations).  

Most of the fellows attempting to build the MEG seem strongly determined to build an ordinary transformer.  If they do that, and do not use the AB effect, they will build a very efficient transformer, which runs very cool, handles higher frequencies that usual transformers using more ordinary cores, and it will not provide overunity operation at all.  There are already thousands of such ordinary transformers out there in the field, using that class of core materials, and none of them are running at overunity because they are not using the AB effect.  

Finally, we do sympathize with the MEG builder's group, but they must also realize that, as long as we are still in the throes of the patenting process involving our intellectual property rights protection procedures, we cannot just give them a complete prescription for building the MEG.  We still have a second patent document in process and will be preparing and submitting two more.  

We did tell you the "big secret" when we told you we use the AB effect.  The AB effect, however, is accomplished by the core material itself.  What that does is localize the B-field (and its flux) directly inside the core.  ALMOST NONE of the magnetic B-field of the permanent magnet appears in the surrounding space; almost all of it is sucked into the core itself and held there.  In that case, outside the core material there appears the curl-free magnetic vector potential A, because the local spacetime  outside the core is still curved (which means it must contain excess energy) by the magnetic dipole.  Hence if a natural process withdraws the "curled" or "swirling" magnetic energy from that external space, nature fills that same space back with uncurled (nonswirling) magnetic energy --- which is what is called the curl-free or field-free magnetic vector potential A.  

Anything not doing that function from the getgo, is not a MEG at all but just a normal transformer which will give COP<1.0.  

When our patent process is completed so that the proper protection is assured, then we will publish more precisely how to build the MEG.  We have already released sufficient information that skilled electrical physicists knowledgeable in the AB effect and curl-free A-potential effects can replicate a version of the unit with little difficulty.  

My forthcoming book, Energy from the Vacuum: Concepts and Principles,  will also have yet a bit more information on it, as well as some unusual information on other subjects such as what is required to close-loop a COP>1.0 EM system and why it's such a tiger. Ways to tame the tiger and do the close-looping are also covered.  The book will have close to 1,000 pages and should be on the market within 60 days.  

Best wishes,

Tom Bearden

Subject: Aharanov-Bohm Effect
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 23:43:16 +0200

Question for Mr. Tom Bearden
Mister Bearden,
I have read a lot of your papers and follow the yahoo MEG-builders group seriously.

Within this group there is serious doubt about the MEG using the Aharanov-Bohm effect.

However you very seriously keep telling that the MEG does use the AB-effect.

Since I very much believe that where two parties disagree, it's usually because they don't use the same definitions.

To clear things up I would very much appreciate if you could exactly explain to me what you mean by the AB-effect as used in the MEG.

How would you define it?
Much regards, good health and success,

J. van O