The Tom Bearden

Help support the research


Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 12:51:07 -0500
Dear Jurgen,
Then the doubters need to reflect on what is already known macroscopically about a toroidal coil.   It very happily violates that "fuzzyness" as is easily demonstrated in the lab, by localizing the B-field and its energy inside the coils themselves, while forming that uncurled A-potential outside the coil.  Simple do some research on what is already known and proven about toroidal coils. Now note that the toroid already violates that ASSUMED fuzzy statistics, and it does it in the "big" macroscopic world.  Those opposed to the AB effect in the MEG effectively are assuming that no toroid can do what it demonstrates every day, at any time, without fail.
In science, a single replicable experiment can invalidate any amount of theory opposed to it.  No amount of theory, regardless of how elegant, can invalidate a single replicable experiment.  The toroid is such an experiment, totally negating the premise that the AB effect cannot be obtained and utilized macroscopically as in the MEG.  If we continue to advocate theory already experimentally refuted and well known to be refuted, we then advocate dogma and totally abandon the scientific method.  In science, the experimental result is supposed to be the dominant judge.  We are supposed to look for changes in the accepted theory, if there exists experimental results refuting it.
Those who advocate the "fuzziness continues and there is no real order at the micro level; all is random there" are ignoring the stubborn problem of the "missing chaos" in quantum mechanics.  Quite simply, QM interpreted purely statistically and without coherent ordering (the "missing chaos" or "missing hidden order") does predict that the macroscopic world we so easily observe and live in, does not exist.  This is also a known problem in quantum mechanics (again, one can check the literature on it; it's fairly well discussed although a bit off the beaten path).  That is why some of the leading QM scientists have come up with alternative theories to replace the Bohr interpretation. E.g., my favorite is Bohm's hidden variable theory, because it is (at least in principle) engineerable.
Further, there is also a  little problem in the "fuzziness" statistics due to some very nice proofs that the second law of thermodynamics --- which is in fact based on statistical mechanics and similar statistics to that "fuzziness" --- already permits reversibility and thus total violation of the second law of thermodynamics for the microscopic case (single fundamental charge, single atom or molecule, and even for a few molecules).  That has been known for a very long time, and is recognized and accepted.
Two additional things have changed to further negate that ASSUMED extension of fuzziness from the microscopic into the macroscopic world -- in short, to negate any absoluteness of the second law of thermodynamics.
First, some extraordinarily important work has been done by Prof. Denis Evans et al. at the Australian National University, with a recent paper just published in Physical Review Letters in July of this year.  The second law of thermodynamics has long been known and recognized not to apply to microscopic things, such as a single charged particle, an atom or a molecule, or even a group of a few molecules.  But the conventional dogma has maintained that the second law has absolute application from there up, including for the entire macroscopic world.  That assumption is now totally falsified, in two steps.
Evans et al. have rigorously and EXPERIMENTALLY extended the violation of the second law to micron-sized entities and for up to two seconds --- profoundly affecting what we've all been told for so long is absolutely prohibited in nature.   The key word here is "absolutely".  Nature will permit you to do anything you are clever enough to discover how to do (in other words, if you can discover her mechanism for it).
Note that in the modern physics view an "isolated charge" is actually a dipolarity.  The "bare charge" (which is infinite, by the way) is surrounded (clustered around) by virtual charges of opposite sign in the vacuum, producing a well-known polarization of the vacuum and a dipolarity.  The virtual charge "shielding" or partially hiding the inner "bare charge" is also infinite in magnitude. However, the difference in the two infinite charges yields the finite and conventional value of the charge -- the value printed in all the handbooks and textbooks. All that is well known in quantum field theory, to which those not liking such a startling thing are referred.  For a really readable account, check out Nobelist Weinberg's book, Dreams of a Final Theory.  Here's a direct quotation:

"[The total energy of the atom] depends on the bare mass and bare charge of the electron, the mass and charge that appear in the equations of the theory before we start worrying about photon emissions and reabsorptions.  But free electrons as well as electrons in atoms are always emitting and reabsorbing photons that affect the electron's mass and electric charge, and so the bare mass and charge are not the same as the measured electron mass and charge that are listed in tables of elementary particles.  In fact, in order to account for the observed values (which of course are finite) of the mass and charge of the electron, the bare mass and charge must themselves be infinite.  The total energy of the atom is thus the sum of two terms, both infinite: the bare energy that is infinite because it depends on the infinite bare mass and charge, and the energy shift … that is infinite because it receives contributions from virtual photons of unlimited energy."  [Steven Weinberg, Dreams of a Final Theory, Vintage Books, Random House, 1993, p. 109-110.].

So a single charge already involves a dipolarization and also infinite, inexhaustible energy.
I added my proposed solution to the source charge problem, based very solidly on the proven broken symmetry of opposite charges and on the award of the Nobel Prize to Lee and Yang in 1957.  We now have the case where electrodynamics --- all of it, to any macroscopic size whatsoever including across the entire universe -- violates the second law of thermodynamics.  All charges exhibit (easily shown experimentally and reluctantly recognized but kept well-hidden from the young grad students and post docs) giant negentropy, continuously pouring out real observable EM energy in all directions freely, and without any observable EM energy input at all.  That's known as the "source charge problem" when it is even discussed.  Conventional wisdom implicitly assumes that every charge in the universe freely creates EM energy out of nothing, continuously, pouring it out in all directions continuously at the speed of light, thereby establishing its associated fields and potentials and their energy across the universe.  In other words, the experimenter and the electrodynamicist must explain and incorporate the mechanism that inputs the energy to the charge, or else they are guilty of assuming the destruction of the conservation of energy law by every charge in the universe.  Electrical engineering does just that, as also does classical electrodynamics.
Thermodynamics already recognizes that the tiny charge can violate the second law (law of increasing entropy and disorder), but adamantly prohibits the precisely correlated giant macroscopic organization and ordering of the resulting EM fields and potentials and their energy.  Yet the associated fields and potentials and their energy are perfectly ordered, and are easily and universally and experimentally demonstrated to be so ordered, even across the entire universe.  It's a standard assumption in all classical EM and electrical engineering also.  The fields and potentials are precisely ordered in magnitude at each point in space as a function of the radial distance of that point from the source charge, and they are precisely ordered in direction for the vector fields and the vector potentials at each point also.  All electrical engineers have formulas assuming precisely that, and allowing the calculation of the point-magnitude (actually, the point-intensity) of the field and potential from a source charge.
Since all EM fields and potentials and their energy comes from their related source charges, and are very precisely correlated -- including across the entire universe --- with the giant negentropy of that source charge, then here we have the fact that all EM charges violate the second law.  All EM fields and potentials --- because of their precise ordering and negentropy, precisely correlated to that source charge --- also violate the second law in the "big world" including reaching across the entire universe, etc.
In short, electrodynamics itself shoots that ASSUMED fuzzy statistics holding in the macro universe inviolable, right in the foot.  The assumption that the A-potential cannot be correlated and perfectly ordered in the macroworld is refuted by direct experiment, and in fact by the mere existence of electrodynamics in the macroscopic world.
All electrodynamics thus is resoundingly based on, and constitutes a shocking and total experimental demonstration of, complete violation at any macroscopic size level desired of the second law of thermodynamics.  The second law is therefore revealed as only a useful rule approximating a great many systems, but having no absolute content at all.  It was always a real piece of dogma.  We have a paper on our website dealing with that curtailment of the second law, and citing all the references, experiments, etc.
You see, the great advocates of "universal entropy" had one thing missing right in front of their noses all along.  You first have to have some order (some energy), before you have ANYTHING TO DISORDER IN THE FIRST PLACE, and before you can have "continuous disordering".  In short, the very concept of entropy is based on the implicit assumption that negentropy has first occurred, and in at least the same degree as the total disordering that will occur.  If one assumes continuous disordering in the universe, one has also implicitly assumed continual re-ordering preceding it.  The charge sits there and specifically demonstrates the prior ordering and giant negentropy, and continuous emission of energy (ordering), PRIOR to even having any EM field energy and potential energy to disorder.
With the source charge problem solution taken from particle physics (Nobel Prize awarded to Lee and Yang in 1957, after Wu et al. proved broken symmetry predicted by Lee and Yang), we now can easily prove the giant and continuous negentropy of every charge in the universe, and prove that every EM field, potential, and its energy is as a result of this giant negentropy. It is also easily demonstrated experimentally.  So electrodynamics itself -- by its fundamental macroscopic ordering and its very existence -- completely overturns any absoluteness assigned to the hoary old second law of thermodynamics. 
So the AB effect is not just microscopic, but easily applies to any level macroscopic reality one wishes to apply it to.  Again, the known performance of the toroid coil has proven it for decades.
The work by Dr. Denis Evans et al. also strongly establishes a solid basis for my Time-Reversal Zone approach to cold fusion.  In the book, I give the exact nuclear reactions that generate the excess deuterium, tritium, and alpha particles in so many successful cold fusion experiments. I also explain the highly anomalous instrument phenomenology long experienced and verified at U.S. Naval Research facilities at China Lake.
Violation of the second law allows "reactions" to run backwards, and Evans et al have already strongly warned that this profoundly affects chemistry and physical materials science. The orthodox theory does not have any mechanism available to generate the "flow of time" --- more accurately, the propagation of a mass or charge through time.  We discovered that one in 1971 while finishing the MSNE at Georgia Tech.  Once the mechanism generating the "forward flow" or "entropic flow" is understood, then the mechanism for reversing it to provide "reversed reaction flows" and therefore "negentropic flows" is obvious.  In the book we give the mechanism to create that momentary little zone in solutions where the time-flow mechanism (and a host of other reaction mechanisms) are reversed (violate the second law permissibly, way under the umbrella proven to exist by Evans et al.).  In that momentary time-reversal zone (reaction reversed zone), one of the reactions that is reversed is the reaction governing the attraction or repulsion of charges.  In that TRZ, like charges attract and unlike charges repel momentarily.  The Coulomb barrier -- which is the only thing that has ever prevented easy chemical transmutation of elements -- is reversed and becomes the Coulomb attractor.  Two H+ ions (two protons) e.g. are now attracted to each other, so strongly that each enters the weakened strong force region of the other, forming a quasi-nucleus (the two held together by the strong force, even though its weakened).  Then as the remaining outside ions in the solution move to decay the TRZ, the TRZ decays, so that the quasi-nucleus becomes increasing an excited state.  However, the strong force because of its exponential form recovers much more rapidly than does the EM force, so the quasi-nucleus "tightens" as the full strong force resumes, causing a quark (gluon forces were weakened also, which was what weakened the strong force in the first place) in one proton to flip, converting it to a neutron. So the preferred decay method during decay of the TRZ is by quark flipping.  The result was the formation of a deuterium ion.  Two deuterium ions attracted together in a TRZ easily make a quasi-nucleus of an isobar of an alpha particle. As the TRZ decays, this readily tightens into an He(4) ion, thus producing an alpha particle. There are other reactions also, but as can be seen, use of TRZs in a solution is permitted by thermodynamics (because of the proven violations of the second law at that level) and a dramatically new class of hundreds and hundreds of nuclear transformation reactions become feasible and possible.
The point is that macroscopic ordering and giant negentropy is already exhibited to any size desired in electrodynamics, and that means it can also be used in chemistry and chemical solutions, and in physical electrical circuits.  This very firmly implies that overunity systems can indeed be built by using and applying that permissible and demonstrated macroscopic correlation to the microscopic violation of the second law, as represented by the AB effect.
That is all the time I have available to devote to the subject.  The rest can be gathered from just reading the literature in those areas specifically addressed.
Best wishes,
Tom Bearden

Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 10:57:33 +0200

Mister Bearden,
Thanks for your fast and elaborate response.
Next to the original article from aharanov and bohm I have also read:
"Quantum interference and the Aharanov-Bohm effect" by Y. Imry and R. Webb

They talk about the scattering of electrons fuzzing up the measurability of the AB-effect.

This scattering would occur less in very thin wires at very low temperature.
However the MEG operates as far I we know with normal wire and normal temperature.

This is the major reason why people cannot believe the AB-effect is used.
Do you have other ways to prevent this scattering?

Is the MEG's major AB-effect oriented on particles other than electrons?
What are we missing?
Hope you can answer this.
Thanks anyway.

Jürgen van O