FREE ENERGY FROM VACUUM, BEARDEN
Text: 07/01/05: Andrew Michrowski (PACENET) writes: You may find this new document by Thomas E. Bearden to be of interest to you and to your colleagues. Extract from Tom's letter: "...Finally the energy problem all boils down to several key questions that one must answer: 1. What have been the serious ramifications of the 1892 Lorentz arbitrary symmetrization of the Maxwell-Heaviside equations? 2. What characteristics do the arbitrarily discarded asymmetrical Maxwell-Heaviside equations have that one would not wish to cast aside? 3. What have been the serious ramifications of the universal use of circuits which self-enforce Lorentz symmetry, so that the circuits' behavior must always be describable by Lorentz invariant equations? 4. What are the important ramifications of deliberate usage of asymmetric circuits which do not self-enforce Lorentz symmetry? One particularly is invited to consider the thermodynamic implications of the above questions. The paper attached gets into all that, and gives a listing of the serious falsities that have been propagated in the CEM/EE model by the scientific community for more than a century. The corrections for those falsities are indicated, as are the profound implications of making the corrections..."
ABSTRACT Major errors exist in the classical electromagnetics/electrical engineering (CEM/EE) model, as pointed out by Feynman, Wheeler, Bunge, etc. The errors, implications, and a short history of the model's development and truncation are presented. Whittaker proved that every EM field and potential is a set of ongoing free EM energy flows. However, with its source of potential energy flow connected as a load while physical current flows, the closed current loop circuit self-enforces Lorentz symmetry and kills its source. Lorentz regauging symmetry enforced on the model and circuitry arbitrarily excludes permissible asymmetric Maxwellian systems using free asymmetric regauging energy to provide COP >1.0 (overunity coefficient of performance). A replicable magnetic engine is presented with zeroed back mmf, exemplifying a COP > 1.0 nonequilibrium steady state (NESS) EM system analogous to a home heat pump. Adding clamped positive feedback provides a COP = ƒ system freely receiving all its input energy from asymmetrical regauging, analogous to a solar cell array power system. As one benefit, the solution to the dark matter and dark energy problems arises from the corrections. Dark matter (Dirac sea hole currents) and dark energy (negative energy EM fields and potentials) can readily be evoked in circuits and systems on the laboratory bench, and their odd phenomenology explored and determined. The flawed CEM/EE model should be corrected with highest priority. Asymmetric COP > 1.0 electrical power systems should be rapidly developed-olving the escalating world energy crisis while dramatically reducing biospheric pollution, global warming, and the cost of energy.
FOREWORD The discussions in the paper show several very significant findings:
1. Contrary to orthodox view and teaching, COP>1.0 and COP = ƒ electrical power systems-using asymmetrical regauging and free input of excess energy by the environment to freely increase the
2. Such CEM/EE systems are and have been arbitrarily excluded in our standard electrical power engineering practice by (a) Lorentz's 1892 symmetrizing of the Maxwell-Heaviside equations, thus arbitrarily excluding the entire class of permissible asymmetric Maxwellian systems, and (b) the standard practice of building and using only that small class of Maxwellian circuits and systems that self-enforce Lorentz symmetry and COP<1.0 when the free regauging energy is utilized. These two actions have been raised to a scientific dogma welded in concrete and rigorously enforced.
3. A long list of falsities and flaws in the standard CEM/EE model has been pointed out by eminent scientists to no avail. For more than a century, our own scientific community has adamantly promulgated these known falsities, regardless of who pointed them out-bringing scientific ethics itself into serious question.
4. There is presently little or no movement at all in our scientific community to correct these glaring errors and practices. To the contrary, there is even stronger determination to keep right on promulgating and enforcing them, to the ever increasing detriment of humanity, the environment, and the ethics of science itself.
5. The source charge problem-key to self-powering, fuel-free electrical power systems-has been scrubbed from all the texts. There are no texts that discuss the implications of Lorentz's symmetrical regauging of the equations, or that discuss the ramifications of the self-enforced Lorentz symmetry of our standardized circuits. The continuing false use of force fields in space-a total contradiction even pointed out by Feynman in his three volumes of sophomore physics-is particularly inexplicable, as it is never explicitly stating that the potential energy of any EM system can be freely changed at will, either symmetrically or asymmetrically, and this is guaranteed by the gauge freedom axiom of quantum field theory.
6. There is no 'availability of energy' crisis and never has been. Instead, there is a continuing crisis of scientific mindset-accompanied by elevating Lorentz-symmetric equations and circuits to a universally accepted scientific dogma.
7. The energy crisis and much of the pollution of the biosphere, as well as the increasing contribution to global warming, can be rather quickly, cheaply, cleanly, and permanently solved, whenever our leading scientific organizations will undertake it. We speak of our great scientific organizations including the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, National Science Foundation, Department of Energy, the great National Laboratories, and our universities and many others. This problem can easily be solved and corrected anytime the U.S. scientific community will allow the work and fund it, and not ruin the careers of scientists-particularly young doctoral candidates and post doctoral scientists who try to work in this area. We therefore urge the leaders of the scientific community to take the strongest possible action to correct this inexplicable century-old scientific blunder and restore ethics to science.
See Also:
Source:
