What We Have to Get Across to Our Electrical Engineering Profession:
       
      To the EE Departments, Professors, Students, Curricula, and Textbooks 
       
      Tom Bearden 
      May 26, 2007 
      Copyright 2007 
        
        
     The Real “Energy Problem”  
        
      What we have to get across to the up and coming young electrical engineers 
      is that the symmetrization of the Heaviside equations by Lorentz in 1892 
      arbitrarily discarded – from the Heaviside EE model – all of nature’s 
      asymmetrical Maxwellian systems. Nature did not and does not discard these 
      asymmetric Maxwellian systems! Lorentz did it more than a century ago, and 
      since then every EE has been trained and indoctrinated to consider only 
      symmetrical Maxwellian systems. Note that this profound curtailment was 
      done just as electrical engineering as a profession was beginning a bit 
      here and a bit there. So this abomination has been directly inflicted on 
      almost every electrical engineer since the beginning of electrical 
      engineering itself. 
        
        
     Producing a Steady, Free Flow of Real, Usable EM 
      Energy Is Ridiculously Simple 
        
      One can easily evoke a continual free flow of real, usable EM energy – 
      anytime, anyplace – via a very simple and cheap gadget. The energy will 
      flow forever if one just leaves the gadget alone. 
        
      Here’s one way to do it. 
        
      Simply lay an electret on a permanent magnet so the E-field of the 
      electret is at right angles to the H-field of the magnet. By the standard 
      Poynting energy flow theory used in all the EE texts, that silly thing 
      will steadily pour out a real, observable, free flow of Poynting energy S, 
      given by the standard little formula S = E X H. So long as that gadget 
      persists, it will freely pour out real, usable EM energy from now till the 
      end of time. 
        
      So our “world energy” problem is not how to get all the free EM energy we 
      want for our use; that is simple. The problem is then how to intercept, 
      collect, and use some of that freely flowing energy to power our loads. In 
      short, we can easily get an unending, steady, free EM energy wind. All we 
      have to do is learn how to properly build a “windmill powered” power 
      system to use it. 
        
      So what we have to do to use that free flow of energy from that silly 
      gadget to power loads for us – freely! – is learn how to build a proper 
      “intercept and collection” EM circuit that (1) intercepts and collects 
      part of that free “EM energy wind”, and then (2) dissipates that freely 
      collected energy asymmetrically in the load, completely separately from 
      the gadget providing the free EM wind, with none of the collected free EM 
      energy being used to destroy the gadget itself or its dipolarities. 
        
      In short, we can produce an unending “free EM energy wind” anywhere we 
      wish to, for a few dollars and in a few moments. But we have never been 
      taught the proper way to build the “windmill” – the interception, 
      collection, and load-powering system to extract and properly use energy 
      from that free EM energy wind. 
        
        
     Our Engineers Have Deliberately Been Taught to Build 
      Only the Wrong Kind of “Windmill” 
        
      Notice how – since 1782 – we have been taught to build a normal magnetic 
      motor having permanent magnets in it. 
        
      First, we deliberately build and use only permanent magnets that have 
      symmetrical fields. This means that, for a simple bar magnet with poles 
      near the ends, the magnetic field on the left is equal and opposite to the 
      magnetic field on the right. That is a “symmetrical-field” magnet. 
        
      Now look at a single stator N pole of a magnet facing the rotor, with an 
      S-pole of a magnet on the rotor and facing the stator. When the rotor 
      S-pole is rotating so that it is approaching the stator N-pole, the rotor 
      is accelerating (because of the attracting force of the incumbent fields 
      of the magnets). So the angular momentum of the rotor shaft and its 
      attached flywheel is being freely increased. This adds real mechanical 
      rotary energy freely to the flywheel and the mechanical energy temporarily 
      stored in it.  
        
      But then when the rotor S passes the stator N and is now departing on the 
      other side of the stator N, then the drag back force between stator N and 
      rotor S is equal and opposite to what it was on the “approaching” phase. 
      So on the departing phase, the flywheel is now being continually slowed, 
      and all that excess free energy stored up in the flywheel during the 
      approaching part of the cycle is now freely taken back again, because of 
      the symmetry of that stator magnet’s magnetic field.. 
        
      The result is that we continually produce a negative entropy operation 
      (the flywheel freely accelerating on that approach part of the cycle) and 
      then stupidly produce an equal positive entropy operation (the flywheel 
      decelerating on that departing part of the cycle). So all the free energy 
      received is just as freely taken back, if we use a stator magnet with a 
      symmetrical magnetic field. The net mechanical energy gain is zero. 
       
       
        
     Breaking the Field Symmetry Easily Provides 
      Self-Powering  
        
      To power that symmetrized motor, we must break that stator magnet’s field 
      symmetry! So we are taught to separately furnish and put in some external 
      energy (and pay for it) to a coil, say, that is located beside that rotor 
      N just on the “departing” side. And just as the rotor enters the “payback” 
      zone (the departing side), we suddenly activate this coil to produce an 
      S-pole, thereby killing that part of the permanent magnet’s field that 
      would be producing the “drag back” and “pay back” portion of the cycle.
       
        
      Well, that paid input we make obviously breaks the symmetry of the net 
      magnetic field of the stator magnet, so as to zero out the payback field.  
      In that case, now there is no payback zone (and in fact, there can even be 
      an additional accelerating zone in what was formerly the decelerating 
      zone!).  
        
      And that eliminates the “payback” zone of the free energy received via the 
      magnetic fields. Thus there is a net acceleration of the flywheel on each 
      complete rotation. In short, now the flywheel receives and stores 
      additional free mechanical energy on each rotation of the shaft. 
        
      Well, we can then add a “drag” load to the end of the motor shaft, to 
      continually soak up and remove that excess acceleration energy being input 
      to the flywheel. In that way, the power we are inputting to adroitly 
      destroy the symmetry of the net magnetic field in the payback zone 
      produces a situation where the asymmetric fields power the loads. 
        
      We pay to break the symmetry of the permanent magnet field zone; we do not 
      pay to power the system! Once we break the symmetry of that stator 
      magnet’s field, then the asymmetric magnetic fields power the motor freely 
      and independently of the energy that we ourselves input to the coil. 
        
        
     The Choice: Either Pay for the Symmetry-Breaking 
      Energy Ourselves or Get Something Else to Do It Freely 
        
      Well, we can just continue to pay for that symmetry-breaking effect 
      ourselves if we wish to! The motor doesn’t care, just so long as its 
      internal magnetic field symmetry gets broken. Given its field-asymmetry, 
      the asymmetric fields of the motor’s permanent magnets will themselves 
      power the motor and its load, taking the necessary input energy from the 
      seething virtual state vacuum via the broken symmetry of the magnetic 
      fields. 
        
      The magnetic fields in that motor could care less what makes the 
      asymmetry, as long as it’s at the correct time and in the correct place. 
      Anything that properly and freely furnishes that necessary asymmetrizing 
      energy, will then allow the asymmetric fields of the magnets themselves to 
      power the motor and its load. 
        
      We accent most strongly: We normally and foolishly pay to break the 
      symmetry. We do not pay to power the system! Once the symmetry is broken, 
      the now-asymmetric system powers itself. 
        
        
     Getting the Broken Symmetry In the Magnetic Field 
      for Free 
        
      We’ve all been taught we have to continually pay for breaking that 
      magnetic field symmetry in that motor, and that is a blatant lie. It’s 
      been a blatant lie ever since Lorentz arbitrarily forced it upon us in 
      1892. Here’s how not to have to pay for it! 
        
      First, using nanocrystalline technology, technologists now can readily 
      produce a nonlinear permanent magnet that has an asymmetric field left and 
      right. That is, the magnetic field of the bar magnet can now be much 
      stronger on the right side, say, than on the left side. Again, the motor 
      does not care what gives the broken symmetry, so long as it gets it. 
        
      So suppose we have deliberately made and used such anisotropic permanent 
      magnets with asymmetrical magnetic fields. Suppose now that our N-pole on 
      the stator is part of an asymmetric permanent magnet, so that the stator 
      magnetic field on the “rotor approaching” side of the stator N is much 
      stronger than the stator magnetic field on the “rotor departing” side of 
      the stator N.  For simplicity in understanding the operation of the 
      broken symmetry, let the rotor S magnetic field still be symmetrical. 
        
      Voila! Now the acceleration of the flywheel occurs normally during the 
      incoming rotor S’s approach to the stator N. But when the rotor S is 
      departing the stator N, the decelerating magnetic field is now materially 
      lessened, and so the drag-back (deceleration) of the flywheel in the 
      pay-back zone is less than the acceleration of the flywheel that occurred 
      in the acceleration zone. 
        
      So for every rotation, there is now a perfectly free, net acceleration 
      (speedup) of the flywheel’s rotation with every cycle.  
        
      And now we can add a “drag” load to the shaft of the motor, to soak up 
      that excess acceleration energy as it is produced. 
        
      That motor and matched load combination will “self-power” itself and its 
      load, and it will do it freely from now till the end of time if something 
      does not change or break. 
        
        
     A Little Deeper Understanding of Broken Symmetry 
        
      Broken symmetry was predicted by Lee and Yang in the 1950s, and it was 
      resoundingly proven by Wu and her colleagues in Feb. 1957. This was so 
      astounding a revolution in physics that, with unprecedented speed, the 
      Nobel Committee awarded the Nobel Prize in Dec. 1957 to Lee and Yang in 
      the same year of Wu et al.’s experimental proof. 
        
      The point is, what we call a “static” magnetic field is actually a 
      continual free outflow of real, observable, usable EM energy, extracted 
      from the virtual state vacuum by the broken symmetry of the magnetic 
      dipole itself. 
        
      And what powers a magnetic motor is the broken symmetry of the internal 
      magnetic field of the magnets– not the energy we input to produce that 
      broken symmetry itself. 
        
      Since the energy from all magnetic fields (and electric fields as well) 
      comes directly from the local virtual state vacuum, extracted and output 
      in observable form by the source dipole’s broken symmetry. Lee in fact 
      directly pointed out the relationship between any broken symmetry and 
      something virtual having become observable. 
        
      Quoting Van Flandern’s beautiful analogy of a static field as composed of 
      individual parts in constant motion: 
      
          
         “To retain causality, we must distinguish two distinct meanings of the 
        term ‘static’. One meaning is unchanging in the sense of no moving 
        parts. The other meaning is sameness from moment to moment by continual 
        replacement of all moving parts. We can visualize this difference by 
        thinking of a waterfall. A frozen waterfall is static in the first 
        sense, and a flowing waterfall is static in the second sense. Both are 
        essentially the same at every moment, yet the latter has moving parts 
        capable of transferring momentum, and is made of entities that 
        propagate. …So are … fields for a rigid, stationary source frozen, or 
        are they continually regenerated? Causality seems to require the 
        latter.” [Tom Van Flandern, “The speed of gravity – What the experiments 
        say,” Physics Letters A, Vol. 250, Dec. 21, 1998, p. 8-9]. 
       
        
      Classical electrodynamics and electrical engineering simply ignore what 
      their own Poynting theory already tells us about crossed “static” fields. 
      Quoting Buchwald: 
      
          
        "[Poynting's result] implies that a charged capacitor in a constant 
        magnetic field which is not parallel to the electric field is the seat 
        of energy flows even though all macroscopic phenomena are static." [Jed 
        Z. Buchwald, From Maxwell to Microphysics, University of Chicago Press, 
        Chicago and London, 1985, p. 44]. 
       
       
      So the macroscopic magnetic field may appear to be static, but it is 
      internally comprised of photons in continual motion at the speed of light. 
      A static EM field is like Van Flandern’s non-frozen waterfall, not at all 
      like a frozen waterfall as our electrical engineers are led to falsely 
      believe! 
        
      The dipole’s broken symmetry means that the dipole is continually 
      absorbing virtual energy from the seething virtual state vacuum, 
      converting it to observable photons, and then continually pouring out 
      these observable photons in all directions. Quoting Nobelist Lee: 
      
          
        “…the violation of symmetry arises whenever what was thought to be a 
        non-observable turns out to be actually an observable.” [T. D. Lee, 
        Particle Physics and Introduction to Field Theory, Harwood Academy 
        Publishers, Chur, New York, and London, 1981, p. 181.] 
       
      We ourselves do not have to figure out how to “extract all the usable 
      EM energy we wish, directly from the vacuum”. All usable, observable EM 
      energy – and the energy in every EM field – is already freely extracted 
      from the virtual state vacuum by the asymmetry of the source dipole. 
        
      Note that the hoary, archaic old EE model does not deal with the virtual 
      state energetic vacuum at all, but just assumes that the medium is inert 
      and totally inactive. That has been falsified for more than a century; 
      even Nikola Tesla knew the medium was active and could furnish our EM 
      energy freely, and Tesla was hell-bent on giving us free energy from the 
      vacuum! Quoting Tesla: 
      
          
        "Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by a power 
        obtainable at any point in the universe. This idea is not novel... We 
        find it in the delightful myth of Antheus, who derives power from the 
        earth; we find it among the subtle speculations of one of your splendid 
        mathematicians...Throughout space there is energy. Is this energy static 
        or kinetic? If static our hopes are in vain; if kinetic – and this we 
        know it is, for certain – then it is a mere question of time when men 
        will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheelwork of 
        nature." [Nikola Tesla, in a speech in New York to the American 
        Institute of Electrical Engineers, 1891. Quoted from back cover of his 
        biography, Margaret Cheney, Tesla: Man Out of Time]. 
          
        “Electric power is everywhere present in unlimited quantities and can 
        drive the world's machinery without the need of coal, oil, gas, or any 
        other of the common fuels." [Nikola Tesla]. 
          
        “We have to evolve means for obtaining energy from stores which are 
        forever inexhaustible, to perfect methods which do not imply consumption 
        and waste of any material whatever. I now feel sure that the realization 
        of that idea is not far off. ...the possibilities of the development I 
        refer to, namely, that of the operation of engines on any point of the 
        earth by the energy of the medium...” [Nikola Tesla, during an address 
        in 1897 commemorating his installation of generators at Niagara Falls.]. 
          
        "Whatever our resources of primary energy may be in the future, we must, 
        to be rational, obtain it without consumption of any material." [Nikola 
        Tesla, 1900]. 
       
       
        
     With the Development of Nanocrystalline Technology, 
      Magnets with Asymmetric Fields Can Easily Be Made 
        
      It is perfectly feasible to produce an asymmetric permanent magnet 
      interception and collection – and dissipation – system that will 
      self-power itself and its loads, where the nonlinear magnets themselves 
      furnish the required broken symmetry of their magnetic fields. The trick 
      is to nonlinearly assemble nanocrystalline material into a permanent 
      magnet so that the magnet itself has an asymmetrical magnetic field 
      already. Obviously, in that case we have already paid once for the 
      asymmetry when we built the magnet itself, and we never have to pay for it 
      again. In short, instead of getting a temporary broken symmetry as our EEs 
      are trained to do and pay for, we get a permanent broken symmetry that we 
      only pay for once. 
        
        
     The Marvelous and Highly Beneficial Results 
        
      This allows the direct entry into self-powering motors and 
      motor-generators, etc. It ushers in a great new era in electrical power, 
      cleaning up the biosphere (no harmful emissions to poison the biosphere!), 
      and dramatically reduce global warming (no CO2 emissions, etc.). 
        
      And it will directly reduce the dependence of Western Civilization upon 
      oil, gas, and other energy fuels that is now threatening to eventually 
      collapse our economy and perhaps even destroy Western Civilization itself. 
        
      However, for more than a century our electrical engineers have been 
      inanely taught to use only symmetrical-field permanent magnets, and then 
      pay every time they wish to get a broken symmetry condition in those 
      fields, over and over. 
        
      It’s just that, since Lorentz’s 1892 inane and arbitrary symmetrization of 
      the Heaviside equations, all our electrical engineers have been taught and 
      brainwashed with self-symmetrizing systems only! Such systems have some 
      internal losses, and so they self-enforce COP<1.0 – thereby forcing us to 
      keep burning all that oil, coal, gas, etc. and consuming those nuclear 
      fuel rods. 
        
      We just have to go back and learn how to build up asymmetrical Maxwellian 
      systems that are permitted to self-power themselves and their loads, by 
      using energy from the vacuum. Note that, since a static EM field is 
      actually a nonequilibrium steady state (NESS) system, then systems 
      properly using these NESS systems are allowed (by standard nonequilibrium 
      thermodynamics) to do five magic things. Such a system can (1) self-order, 
      (2) self-rotate or self-oscillate, (3) output more energy or work than the 
      amount of energy one inputs (the external active environment inputs the 
      excess energy input that is necessary), (4) power itself and its loads 
      simultaneously (all the input energy is freely received from the external 
      active environment), and (5) exhibit negative entropy production. 
        
      Such NESS systems were clearly included in Maxwell’s original theory, and 
      they clearly exist in nature. Using the deliberate nonlinear permanent 
      magnet with asymmetric fields, we can easily build and use some of these 
      asymmetrical Maxwellian systems for self-powering. 
        
      It’s just that such asymmetrical Maxwellian systems have been arbitrarily 
      and deliberately discarded from modern electrical engineering, so as to 
      prevent our engineers from producing systems freely taking their input 
      energy from the active medium (the seething virtual state vacuum) and 
      using it via the broken symmetry of the source dipoles used in the system.
  |