| Subject: RE: Lisitsyn's Work Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 09:46:46 -0500 Dear
Chris, I
have the Lisitsyn report somewhere; it was translated back there
originally by a contract from the intel agency.
I did a little work then for our medical intelligence people.
What probably happened was that the Russians changed the book,
which then would include the U.S. version.
I don't think they intended that one to leak out of there. But
finding the report will prove a challenge.
Still in hypoxia, slowly recovering from a heart attack.
My "files" are actually "piles" in my 1230
sq. foot office, so it will take me some real time.
But if I can locate it, I'll copy it to you.
Can't promise. Yes,
don't argue with the professors.
Just bide your own time, learn from them what you have to do to
get your degree and do well. But
just understand the stuff better.
I got a minor in electronic engineering, without ever realizing
that we were not calculating the field in space before its interaction
with the assumed "unit point charge" at any point, but only
after that interaction. In
short, we were calculating what was diverged or diverted from the
field (as-it-exists prior to interaction) after the interaction. Of
course that is substituting the effect for the cause, a grand non
sequitur. However,
can't blame them too much. Originally
space was considered filled with a material ether, so to the old guys
there was not a single point in the entire universe where mass (and
charge) were absent. So
they thought the field actually existed in space in that form.
But when the Michelson-Morley experiment disproved that
material ether, then the problem began.
They never changed an equation, but simply announced one day
that "well, since there isn't a material ether, then we are not
using one! Also,
in classical EM theory (as used in electrical engineering), the model
assumes that the local vacuum is inert (falsified by particle physics
for a half-century) and that the local spacetime is flat (falsified by
general relativity for nearly a century).
Please hold in your mind (but do not dispute with the profs!)
the notion of the SUPERSYSTEM. The
supersystem consists of three components: (1) the system and its
dynamics (as you were taught, with assumed flat spacetime and no net
vacuum interaction), (2) the local nonlinear vacuum and its dynamics,
and (3) the local curvatures of spacetime and their dynamics.
All three components of the supersystem interact with each
other. The present
closed-current-loop circuits are specifically (unwittingly) designed
to self-enforce Lorentz symmetrical regauging, which then
self-enforces such symmetry on the circuit's behavior.
In short, it minimizes or negates the interaction of the other
two components of the supersystem. In
the real world, no electromagnetic analysis of a system is complete
until the supersystem interactions have been analyzed and/or accounted
for. This is of the
utmost importance in extended electrodynamics, particularly of
overunity systems. Yet
this central organizing concept has not been recognized as such, but
just in bits and pieces in the literature. I
attach a paper showing the necessity for considering the Dirac Sea in
normal theory. I assure
you that it directly appears in all COP>1.0 EM circuits, and unless
understood and dealt with, will kick (decay) those circuits right back
into COP = 1.0 condition. A
colleague and I have filed a patent on the process for transforming
negative energy into positive energy (special kind of regauging), so
that the decay process then furnishes the powering energy for the
system, with all the energy coming from the interactions of the other
two components of the supersystem.
It is working in prototype on the bench, and makes possible
self-powering closed-loop EM systems.
Those will be the systems of the future.
I will have details on that process, etc. in my forthcoming
book (2002) published by World Scientific. Best
wishes, Tom
Bearden
|