| Subject: RE: Bearden's MEG
PATENT ?? Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 22:15:09 -0600
Dear Vlad,
The only thing
necessary to answer is item 7, and we will point out that we use a
scheme where the magnitude of the collected output energy depends on the
rate of change of the input energy, not the magnitude of the input
energy.
He has only read the
first patent since the second one is still processing; a continuance has
also been filed, and a second PPA is already filed, to be turned into a
second patent or change to the first. We now see two additional patent
applications to be filed, because of the rich physics that gets
invoked. So the first patent does not yet completely describe the MEG,
but only one part of it.
One does not get
overunity from an ordinary transformer. Yet a PART of the MEG has a
transformer function, altered so the output energy magnitude does not
depend on the input energy magnitude, but on the rise time and decay
time of the input signal pulses. But that's only part of it.
We have stated quite
clearly in several releases that the core material (covered in our
second patent) enforces the Aharonov-Bohm effect. It localizes and
holds the magnetic B-field of the permanent magnet -- and perturbations
-- inside the core itself. That effect is not in electrical engineering
and classical transformer theory at all, but it is in thousands of
papers in the hard physics literature. It's good physics, but not yet
included in electrical engineering. Yet the AB effect does appear in
the sophomore physics book that the electrical engineer studies. He is
just led to believe it has absolutely nothing to do with electrical
power systems. He is led to believe wrong.
By localizing ALL the
magnetic B-field flux from the permanent magnet in the core material, we
have all the normal magnetic B-field energy from the permanent magnet
handy in that core location to work with. In addition, nature freely
adds the curl-free magnetic vector potential A in the space outside the
core. So we have that ADDITIONAL A-potential energy --- freely
furnished by the vacuum itself --- to work with OUTSIDE THE CORE as well
as the normal magnetic field INSIDE THE CORE.
Don't worry; quantum
field theory already assumes a gauge freedom axiom, which further
assumes the ability to FREELY change the potential -- and therefore the
potential energy --- of any EM system at will. Without "paying" for
it. In the real world, one may have to pay a little switching and
gating costs, but ONE DOES NOT HAVE TO PAY FOR THE INPUT ENERGY ITSELF,
CONTRARY TO EVERYTHING THE ELECTRICAL POWER ENGINEER IS TAUGHT AND
IMBIBES WITH HIS MOTHER'S MILK, SO TO SPEAK (to borrow a phrase from
Einstein).
We then perturb both
the confined B-field and the external A-potential. Check it out, each
perturbation produces an electric field, proportional to the TIME RATE
OF CHANGE of the perturbation energy, NOT to the
magnitude of the
perturbation energy. The time rate of change of the electric fields
then produce magnetic fields, and so on as expected.
So we can make large
EM field outputs from small EM energy input, by simply adjusting the
input wave form's rise time and decay time.
We are able to use
both the perturbed B-field flux, as in a normal transformer, and the
additional perturbation fields produced outside the transformer. We can
easily increase the magnitude of the generated perturbation fields
without increasing the magnitude
of the input energy.
The usable output
energy then depends on how much of that greatly increased EM field
energy we then intercept and collect, from these greatly increased
PERTURBATION fields. Since the magnitudes of the perturbation fields do
not depend on the magnitude of the input energy, then the magnitude of
the collected field energy does not depend on the magnitude of the input
energy.
We run that by again:
In the MEG, the magnitude of the output energy does not depend on the
magnitude of the input energy. That's totally in violation of ordinary
transformer theory.
In short, we bypass an
ordinary transformer's necessity of dissipating as much energy in the
primary section as is dissipated in the secondary section. That's
because a large part of the secondary fields produced in the MEG do not
couple back to the input section, in violation of the operation of a
normal transformer. It is that "back coupling" of the secondary fields
into the primary circuit" that enforces such "energy flow conservation"
between primary and secondary in normal transformers.
In essence, we pay to
"switch" and "gate" some free energy flows provided from the vacuum
itself; we do not pay to furnish the energy in those flows! We have an
open system far from thermodynamic equilibrium in an active vacuum
environment. The vacuum freely furnishes that energy, and we trick it
into furnishing more to the MEG than it furnishes to a standard
transformer.
The AB effect that
tricks the vacuum into furnishing additional EM energy is not in the
classical EM model or conventional electrical engineering circuit
theory. Nonetheless, it is a fact of nature, as witnessed by quite a
few thousand physics papers. Something like 50,000 or so, in the full
generalization of the theory. This has been around since 1959; but its
potential for electrical power systems just was not noticed by
electrical engineers. Indeed, the AB effect itself was little noticed
by electrical engineers except as an idle curiosity.
If one wishes to
understand the MEG, one must go beyond U(1) electrodynamics and
classical electrical engineering, particularly classical power
engineering. And one must recognize that this first patent is just
that: the first of a string of them, with a second already filed. It
is the string that describes the full phenomenology, not just the first
patent alone.
If one is not familiar
with the AB effect, I strongly suggest one study the physics literature
dealing with it first, before seriously tackling understanding the MEG's
operation.
Apparently we were
just the first researchers to recognize that the AB effect had great
potential for power systems, and particularly for overunity systems of
several kinds. There are already several kinds of MEG, not just one,
depending on what is optimized etc.
Now we strongly call
attention to something else in conventional electrical engineering. If
one merely places a charged capacitor on top of a permanent magnet, so
that the E-field of the capacitor is at right angles to the H-field of
the magnet, that silly thing will sit there and pour out EM energy
indefinitely, perfectly freely, by the conventional Poynting equation S
= E X H which has been optimized. Now either one accepts that the
Poynting energy is indeed continuously pouring out and for free, or one
should go to all the universities and have them change and destroy the
Poynting energy flow theory in electrical engineering which would be
false.
That's how "difficult"
it is to get extra energy flow from the vacuum. It's a piece of cake,
and can be done for a dollar -- anywhere, anytime in the entire
universe. One can easily extract as much EM energy flow as one wishes.
That is not the problem! The problem is in how to intercept and
collect it in a circuit, then dissipate it in a load to power that load,
WITHOUT using half the collected energy to destroy that source dipole
and its free energy flow (in this case, the free S = E X H).
That silly little
capacitor and magnet already invalidates everything we were told in
university about how difficult it will be to ever extract usable EM
energy from the vacuum. There is also a form of the Poynting equation
for a single dipole, as just the charged capacitor or the permanent
magnet. It's already known and accepted.
Yet engineers believe
that they have to input all the EM energy to a circuit that one can get
in the circuit to use. That's not only wrong, it's a bald-faced lie
after more than 100 years of that dogma (the Poynting theory dates back
to the 1880s).
In the MEG, when we
perturb the B-flux with shaped perturbation input energy signals, and
the A-potential as well, we create large E-fields. Well, one of the
tricks is to get those large E-fields perpendicular (or nearly so) to
that powerful B-field of the permanent magnet. Voila! Real S = E X H
energy flow, which now only requires a little ingenuity to intercept,
capture, and use. Else one has to get after the universities to destroy
the Poynting theory! Well, the Poynting theory is okay, because it
works on the bench. So we get our extra S = E X H in the MEG and
Poynting holds okay. Since we perturb things, get large E-fields, get
them correctly oriented with respect to the H-field of the permanent
magnet, and we've got a whacking lot of extra S = E X H energy flow to
utilize at will. Also, it's AC and so that is much easier to intercept,
collect, and use.
A real advantage of
the permanent magnet in the magnetic circuit is that the magnetic dipole
--- in this case, the permanent magnet --- does not and cannot be
destroyed when the magnetic flux returns back through the dipole, as
contrasted to a standard closed current loop electrical circuit which
uses half the energy collected in the external circuit to destroy the
source dipole in the generator. So our "primary source dipole" is
nearly indestructible, so long as no excessive heating or great
mechanical shock is received.
Now to critique the
standard "wisdom" of what powers circuits. Generators do not power
their circuits with transduced input shaft mechanical energy! Never
have, never will. Instead, they transduce that mechanical input energy
into magnetic energy when the rotor rotates. Every joule of the
magnetic field energy internal to the generator is dissipated by forcing
apart the INTERNAL charges in the generator between its terminals, to
make a source dipole. And that is all that a generator does. It makes
that source dipole. That is all that burning the hydrocarbon to make
steam to run the turbine to crank the shaft of the generator does. That
is all that building a dam to use hydroturbines to crank the generator
does. That is all that a windmill uses the wind for. None of all that
adds a single joule of EM energy to the external power line. All of the
oil and coal and gas burned, and nuclear fuel rods used, and dams built,
and windmills built, have never from the heat energy or wind energy or
water energy produced a single joule of energy onto the power line.
If the engineers would
leave that dipole intact once made inside the generator, a little
initial rotation of the generator to get the dipole made ONCE would be
all that would ever be needed. But they use the closed current loop
circuit, which forcibly drives every "depotentialized" electron in the
ground return line back through that source dipole in the generator,
continually destroying the source dipole. So the engineers have to keep
cranking the shaft of the generator so they can keep remaking and
remaking the source dipole inside the generator. No source dipole, no
energy onto the external circuit.
The source dipole,
once made, extracts that energy directly from the vacuum, transduces it
into real energy, and passes that real, observable EM energy out onto
the external power line to power it. None of the shaft input energy got
transduced to be sent out on the power line.
To understand that,
please read why Lee and Yang were awarded the Nobel Prize in 1957, for
their work in broken symmetry. One of the broken symmetries long proven
in particle physics is the broken symmetry of opposite charges --- such
as on the ends of a dipole --- specifically, that source dipole in the
generator, once it is made. That "broken symmetry of the source dipole
following from the broken symmetry of opposite charges" has an exact
meaning in particle physics, but one that does not even exist in the
electrical engineering departments and in the electrical engineering
model. It means that, once formed, that source dipole continuously
absorbs virtual particle energy (virtual photons) from the seething
vacuum (the active environment), transduces some of that unusable
virtual energy into real EM energy, and emits that EM energy in all
directions. When connected to an external circuit, THIS SOURCE DIPOLE
-- ONCE FORMED -- EXTRACTS FROM THE VACUUM AND POURS OUT OF THE
GENERATOR TERMINALS A VAST FLOOD OF EM ENERGY, FILLING ALL SPACE AROUND
THAT EXTERNAL CIRCUIT AND FLOWING GENERALLY PARALLEL TO THEM. The
circuit intercepts a small part of that energy flow in surrounding
space, and diverges that part (the Poynting component) into the circuit
to power the electrons.
Every circuit we ever
built, and those built today, are powered by energy directly from the
vacuum, via the broken symmetry of the source dipole or dipolarity --
and they always have been and always will be. Read Gabriel Kron, his
never-released "open path" secret is indeed the dipolarity between any
two points in a circuit, whether connected or not. And Kron was one of
the most able electrical scientists we ever produced -- some say the
greatest.
Sadly, there is not
now and there never has been a single electrical engineering department
in the Western world which understood or taught what actually powers an
electrical circuit in the first place. It isn't the generator
dissipating its internal magnetic field energy or the battery
dissipating its chemical energy. Yet the basis for the vacuum powering
the external circuit via the broken symmetry of the internal source
dipole has been in particle physics for 45 years, with Nobel Prize
awarded. Inexplicably, it still is not included in electrical
engineering, and particularly in power engineering.
The
Maxwell-Heaviside-Lorentz model used in electrical engineering assumes
an inert environment (the vacuum) which has been falsified for more than
half a century. It also assumes a flat local spacetime, which has been
falsified by general relativity for approaching a century. If one
assumes the external environment is never active, then one does not
model nature, as proven in spades in particle physics.
Why our electrical
engineering curricula have not been upgraded to incorporate what has
already been discovered and proven in particle physics is a giant
enigma. Why the more than a century old U(1) electrodynamics has not
been upgraded to include the proven active vacuum energy exchange with
the system or the proven local curvature of spacetime energy exchange
with the system whenever the energy density changes in a local region
such as a power system, is also a giant enigma. And why we continue to
use the Lorentz symmetrical regauging condition --- which arbitrarily
discards all those permissible Maxwell-Heaviside disequilibrium systems
with active environmental exchange and thus capable of overunity and
self-powering, is also a deep mystery. Lorentz threw out the
"windmills in the wind" by putting the windmills in a closed barn, as an
analogy! In short, our electrical engineers are taught to just
arbitrarily modify the model to select only those Maxwellian systems in
equilibrium with their active environment (the active vacuum).
To use a phrase from
Tesla, such a continuing mess -- with its resulting giant pollution of
the biosphere, death of species, rape of the planet, and a coming energy
crisis that may destruct many of the national economies --- may be "the
most inexplicable aberration of the scientific mind ever recorded in
history".
Best wishes,
Tom Bearden
|