463 lines
24 KiB
Plaintext
463 lines
24 KiB
Plaintext
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(word processor parameters LM=8, RM=75, TM=2, BM=2)
|
|
Taken from KeelyNet BBS (214) 324-3501
|
|
Sponsored by Vangard Sciences
|
|
PO BOX 1031
|
|
Mesquite, TX 75150
|
|
|
|
There are ABSOLUTELY NO RESTRICTIONS
|
|
on duplicating, publishing or distributing the
|
|
files on KeelyNet except where noted!
|
|
|
|
March 8, 1992
|
|
|
|
BEARESP.ASC
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
This file shared with KeelyNet courtesy of Guy Resh.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
The following letter from Tom Bearden relates to comments made by
|
|
Bearden in his reports on the Sweet Vacuum Triode device.
|
|
|
|
The papers are listed on KeelyNet as SWEET1 THROUGH SWEET3 and
|
|
SWEET4A, SWEET4B, SWEET4C and SWEET4D in either .ZIP or .ASC form.
|
|
|
|
********************************************************************
|
|
What follows is, finally, Mr. Beardens' reply to comments made about
|
|
his conjectures. It is dated Feb. 28, 1992...............Jon Noring
|
|
********************************************************************
|
|
|
|
February 28, 1992
|
|
|
|
Tom Bearden
|
|
2311 Big Cove Road
|
|
Huntsville, AL 35801
|
|
(205) 533-3682H Home
|
|
(205) 536-0411 FAX
|
|
|
|
Dr. Jon Noring
|
|
1312 Carlton Place
|
|
Livermore, CA 94550
|
|
|
|
Dear Jon:
|
|
|
|
Thanks for sending along the extract of comments on the papers.
|
|
Perhaps I can add a thing or two that will shed a little more light
|
|
on some of this. First, let's settle the matter of whether this is
|
|
a scam by persons after money. It isn't. There are no stock plans.
|
|
Nobody wants any "investment." No one would accept it if it were
|
|
offered. The inventor presently has a sufficient small income for
|
|
his small needs. I work every day as a senior engineer, and support
|
|
myself adequately in that fashion. I'm also retired from the U.S.
|
|
Army with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. Also, it is certainly
|
|
quite true that the burden of proof is fully upon Sweet and me.
|
|
That proof can only be achieved by independent test and
|
|
certification by agencies and scientists of impeccable credentials
|
|
and with no formal connection to the project. Until that is done,
|
|
we totally accept that what we have said will not be believed, and
|
|
should not be believed. I will say this: I have absolutely no
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
control of the invention, and absolutely no say in its direction.
|
|
It is totally Sweet's invention.
|
|
|
|
If I had had my own fervent wish, formal submission for
|
|
independent testing and certification (or falsification) by the
|
|
scientific community would have been accomplished in 1987. Let it
|
|
also be noted that an inventor has agreements and/or (with other)
|
|
parties involved; he is often not legally free to do exactly as he
|
|
might wish. The best we can presently ask is that the readers keep
|
|
an open but highly skeptical mind, until such independent
|
|
certification is forthcoming. If it isn't forthcoming, then trash
|
|
the whole thing in file 13.
|
|
|
|
To try to address the gist of many of the other comments, let
|
|
me point out that we are referring to two key mathematical papers:
|
|
Whittaker 1903 as cited, and Whittaker 1904 as cited. Let me urge
|
|
all persons who commented on the lack of mathematics to please at
|
|
least study those two papers intensely. Let me summarize what they
|
|
actually show, rigorously.
|
|
|
|
In the first paper, Whittaker shows that, completely at odds
|
|
with the present scientific view, the electrostatic scalar potential
|
|
has a totally unsuspected and highly organized bidirectional EM
|
|
internal structure. It's actually composed of paired EM waves,
|
|
each going in opposite directions (and in my view, one being the
|
|
phase conjugate of the other). Further, the bidirectional pairs
|
|
are phaselocked and in a harmonic sequence. So what the potential
|
|
is actually composed of is a Fourier-type harmonic expansion,
|
|
directly coupled with its time-reversed twin set, in a one-to-one
|
|
ratio, with all the harmonic twin waves phase-locked.
|
|
|
|
Normally, in electromagnetics one just gives a magnitude to the
|
|
potential at each point and leaves it at that. However, Whittaker
|
|
shows that the potential at a point actually encompasses a
|
|
magnificent, hidden, highly organized flow of EM waves and energy
|
|
into and out of that point. Although there may be no net EM
|
|
forcefield at the point, the "hidden interior" energy flow through
|
|
the point to and from the surrounding space is filled with EM forces
|
|
and waves in dynamic motion.
|
|
|
|
This leads to a real quandary in the assumed nature of a scalar
|
|
potential, in my view: Instead of being a passive or simple scalar
|
|
sort of thing that just has a convolution magnitude and sometimes an
|
|
external gradient in that magnitude, it's a new kind of entity that
|
|
is scalar externally, with gradients between adjacent external
|
|
points, but at the same time it's totally dynamic, vectorial, and
|
|
energetically organized "inside."
|
|
|
|
"Further, it would seem to be in hidden hyperspatial EM
|
|
communication with every other point in the universe, at least in
|
|
the simple case. The basic thing, I think, is that Whittaker seems
|
|
to delocalize the notion of the potential, extending it into
|
|
hyperspace with respect to its internal EM energy flow. If someone
|
|
on the net could put that into more precise language, I'd be very
|
|
grateful.
|
|
|
|
In my picture of it, as shown by Whittaker the seemingly quite
|
|
placid scalar potential is an unsuspecting vector EM dynamo inside.
|
|
In early 1987 I simply took the Whittaker picture of the potential's
|
|
|
|
Page 2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
internal bidirectional EM waves seriously, and realized that these
|
|
internal hidden EM waves didn't translate electrons in the electron
|
|
shells of atoms, but instead penetrated to the nucleus directly.
|
|
That meant that, in simply having a stress potential added to a
|
|
material, one effectively had "pumping" EM waves connected directly
|
|
to the atomic nuclei through hyperspace, bypassing the electron
|
|
shells' usual Faraday shielding interaction.
|
|
|
|
One can fairly readily build EM wave oppositions in proper
|
|
harmonic, phase-locked Whittaker fashion, and so one can make and
|
|
use an EM gradient-free potential construction entirely of
|
|
bidirectional waves. This construction is such that :
|
|
|
|
(1) a normal electron-wiggle detector instrument doesn't even
|
|
"see" it,
|
|
(2) the internal wave EM reaches directly to the nucleus and
|
|
affects it and
|
|
(3) it consists of EM "pump" waves in the nonlinear phase
|
|
conjugate mirror sense.
|
|
|
|
All that was needed then was to simply extract the standard pumped
|
|
phase conjugate mirror equations from nonlinear optics and apply
|
|
them to this "potentialized" or "Whittaker-pumped" nucleus of the
|
|
atom. That mean that the nucleus should now be a pumped phase
|
|
conjugate mirror. However, it still needs one small thing
|
|
added. Sweet did one additional thing:
|
|
|
|
he superposed a 60-Hz modulation on the envelope of the
|
|
Whittaker bidirectional waveset.
|
|
|
|
In other words, the external amplitude of the artificially
|
|
constructed stress potential was oscillated at 60 Hz. [Note that
|
|
the external amplitude of the potential is what is in our 3-space;
|
|
the internal Whittaker EM biwaves are BEYOND 3-space. The nucleus is
|
|
a hyperspatial or higher topological entity when the Whittaker
|
|
structures of its potentials are taken into account.]
|
|
|
|
Sweet personally discovered the activation procedure (which he
|
|
still holds proprietary) for causing this 60-Hz oscillation to be
|
|
taken up and self-sustained by the barium nucleus (we assume that
|
|
it's the barium nucleus involved, because it won't work with any
|
|
other kind of magnet except a barium ferrite magnet). Self-
|
|
oscillation of barium compounds is well-known in the phase conjugate
|
|
mirror optical literature. However, most of the papers I've been
|
|
able to find on self-pumping mirrors have achieved the self-pumping
|
|
only at optical frequencies.
|
|
|
|
I've not been able to find anything else at ELF self-
|
|
oscillation frequencies. I will say that, if Sweet's 6-lb unit is
|
|
not in the self-oscillation (activated, or self-pumping) condition,
|
|
you won't get a microwatt out of it, no matter what you do! If it's
|
|
in the self-oscillation condition but at essentially "normal"
|
|
nuclear potential, you will only get a few watts out, say, something
|
|
like six watts.
|
|
|
|
Sweet increased the nuclear potential and its 60-Hz
|
|
oscillation, trapping it in the barium nucleus also as part of the
|
|
activation, whereupon much greater electrical power is extractable
|
|
from the device. He also worked out the device design so that its
|
|
|
|
Page 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
objective output voltage was 120 volts, for an input voltage of 10
|
|
volts (at 33 microamps). This small 1/3 milliwatt 60 Hz input
|
|
corresponds to the signal wave in PPCM theory.
|
|
|
|
The entire device is, in my view, just a special self-pumped
|
|
phase conjugate mirror, precisely like what is already in the
|
|
standard literature, self-pumping and all. It's just self-pumped at
|
|
ELF frequencies, and in a very special manner. It is being fed by
|
|
self-oscillating hidden EM biwave (pumpwave) energy directly from
|
|
the surrounding vacuum. [The EM energy of the vacuum
|
|
intercommunicates internally through the hyperspatial Whittaker
|
|
channels of the vacuum. The gradient in the potential magnitude
|
|
represents the EM energy entering our 3-space by local scalar
|
|
interferometry.]
|
|
|
|
I also quoted a reference that shows that the local vacuum
|
|
immediately around a nucleus is structured by the nucleus and can be
|
|
considered and treated as a special sort of semiconductor. One can
|
|
visualize, then, that the 60-Hz trapped self-oscillation is between
|
|
that local semiconductor vacuum and the potentialized barium
|
|
nucleus. In other words, in the self-oscillating nuclear potential,
|
|
it is both the local vacuum and the nucleus that are oscillating, at
|
|
180 degrees phase from each other. That means that there is a
|
|
rhythmic inflow and outflow of potential (Whittaker biwaves)
|
|
envelope magnitude gradient, to and from the nucleus, exchanged to
|
|
and from the local semiconductor vacuum. Note what we're talking
|
|
about.
|
|
|
|
You've got to get the hyperspatial EM energy exchange of the
|
|
vacuum "gated" or" shifted" into our 3-space, from hyperspace.
|
|
Whittaker's 1904 paper can be interpreted as showing that (1) the
|
|
gradient in the potential represents the 3-space aspect, and (2) any
|
|
such potential gradient in 3-space is produced by scalar
|
|
interferometry (interference of the hyperspatial vector EM wave
|
|
interiors of scalar potentials.)
|
|
|
|
So Sweet's 60-Hz modulation of the nuclear potential's
|
|
amplitude represents a 3-space oscillating flow of EM vector energy,
|
|
in and out of the nucleus from the surrounding semiconductor vacuum.
|
|
If you properly introduce a signal wave to that "activated" or self-
|
|
pumped nucleus (once it's got a 3-space oscillating EM vector flow),
|
|
then by standard textbook theory you are going to get out up to all
|
|
the energy in the pump waves, coming forth from the "nucleus-mirror"
|
|
as an amplified phase conjugate replica (PCR) of the small signal
|
|
wave input.
|
|
|
|
By the standard distortion correction theorem, that amplified
|
|
PCR wave will travel back along the path taken by the signal wave.
|
|
In other words, you've got organized EM energy coming out of the
|
|
nuclei as a coherent EM wave, through the electron shells, into the
|
|
material lattice, and on out of there into the external circuit. At
|
|
that point, one simply taps onto it (e.g., by magnetic induction),
|
|
and you can extract and gate the amplified energy wherever you wish
|
|
in the external circuit. Note that the 60-Hz self-oscillation
|
|
energy comes in from the local vacuum to the nucleus, on the inflow
|
|
or "intake" cycle. If you gate some of it on out of the nucleus
|
|
externally, instead of letting it flow back to the local
|
|
semiconductor vacuum, the adjacent vacuum surrounding the
|
|
semiconductor just promptly replenishes the local vacuum potential.
|
|
|
|
Page 4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It has to do so, because of the nonlocal hyperspatial EM energy flow
|
|
in the Whittaker structure of the potential in the first place. You
|
|
can draw EM energy out of those internal EM waves in the Whittaker
|
|
structure of the potential, and the electrical charges establishing
|
|
that potential will continue to "pump out" virtual photons and
|
|
replenish the potential.
|
|
|
|
It can be seen that the potentials between the self-pumping
|
|
nuclei are self-cohering (in their internal EM) throughout the
|
|
mirror material by what is called "self-targeting," but that is
|
|
another story too long to detail here. The second (1904) Whittaker
|
|
paper I cited is also quite revealing. Here's what it shows.
|
|
Rigorously, you can replace all of classical forcefield EM with
|
|
scalar potential interferometry. Period. Note that this paper
|
|
actually incorporates the Aharonov-Bohm effect, decades before
|
|
Aharonov and Bohm's seminal 1959 paper. It also drastically extends
|
|
it, for it is dealing with macroscopic effects, not just mesoscopic.
|
|
Also, please note that scalar interferometry is not an oxymoron,in
|
|
spite of being so labeled by one eminent scientist.
|
|
|
|
If you realize that the scalar potential is totally vectorial
|
|
in its Whittaker internal composition, and comprised of multiple
|
|
EM waves, then when one interferes two scalar EM potentials, one is
|
|
simply doing multiple wave interferometry simultaneously. It's
|
|
perfectly good "wave" interferometry; it's just a whole bunch of it
|
|
at once. And the wave interference actually connects hyperspace EM
|
|
waves with 3-space EM waves. The hyperspatial EM wave interference
|
|
creates 3-space EM potential gradients (forcefields), including both
|
|
statics and dynamics. To sum up my view of the Whittaker papers,
|
|
here's what they add to physics:
|
|
|
|
(1) They add a second and completely new kind of
|
|
electromagnetics, a hidden hyperspatial EM wave
|
|
communication inside the scalar potential. Since the
|
|
magnitude of the scalar potential from a single point
|
|
charge does not reach zero until an infinite radial
|
|
distance is reached, then each point charge communicates
|
|
electromagnetically with each other point in the universe,
|
|
through the hidden Whittaker EM hyperspace channel.
|
|
It communicates via hidden (hyperspatial) EM waves that a
|
|
normal EM detector does not even see.
|
|
|
|
(2) The papers allow replacing all notions of external [3-
|
|
space] EM force fields, waves, etc. with scalar
|
|
interferometry of potentials [hyperspatial EM wave
|
|
interferometry].
|
|
|
|
(3) by adding the "internal" EM energy and its hyperspatial
|
|
"hidden variable" communication, the two papers do in fact
|
|
extend each of the three disciplines: classical EM, QM,and
|
|
general relativity.
|
|
|
|
Indeed, they force consideration of a sort of "action at a
|
|
distance," where by scalar interferometry the local vacuum
|
|
potential and the local spacetime itself are altered and interact
|
|
with the system in unexpected manners.
|
|
|
|
Since the Whittaker internal EM energy extension set is the
|
|
same in each case, it is my view that adding the Whittaker internal
|
|
|
|
Page 5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EM does unify the three extended disciplines. Note that it does not
|
|
change the three present subsets. We might also ask the following:
|
|
|
|
Can anyone show any paper in the literature, other than the
|
|
Whittaker work and the other two recent papers I cited, that
|
|
deals with this internal organized EM inside the scalar
|
|
potential? If so, I've personally been unable to find it, and
|
|
would very much appreciate the reference.
|
|
|
|
Does there exist any other paper in the literature that treats
|
|
the atomic nucleus as a pumped phase conjugate mirror? I would
|
|
very much appreciate the references, if there are any.
|
|
|
|
Are there any papers at all in the literature, where research
|
|
has been conducted in actually making the Whittaker-type of
|
|
simultaneous wave/antiwave structure as an artificial scalar
|
|
potential, in beams, and performing scalar beam interferometry
|
|
with it on materials and systems at a distance __ e.g., say at
|
|
three feet in the laboratory? If so, I'd again very much
|
|
appreciate the references.
|
|
|
|
It is my strong feeling that we must get such things looked into by
|
|
the universities and by sharp physicists and graduate students. The
|
|
Whittaker approach and the concept of using the nucleus of the atom
|
|
as a pumped phase conjugate mirror that one can externally engineer
|
|
electromagnetically, do seem to lead to some startling things on the
|
|
bench. But presently the phenomenology is so completely unknown and
|
|
unexpected that I fear we may never have a true science and
|
|
technology here unless university-level work is done on it. Indeed,
|
|
it's going to take some good theorists and some good
|
|
experimentalists both.
|
|
|
|
I might add that Sweet is incorporating the Whittaker theory
|
|
into his EM theory of the device, and I expect him to publish that
|
|
in the future for peer review and examination. His wife died
|
|
recently, however, and so that part of the effort has been setback
|
|
for a time. Sweet is a good theorist (I am not), and he is an
|
|
especially good magnetics engineer of high caliber. He is also, in
|
|
my opinion, a genius on the experimental bench.
|
|
|
|
*** He has other highly unusual EM inventions which may ***
|
|
receive more publicity in the future.
|
|
|
|
I believe that, for the quaternions, the best way to describe EM
|
|
expressed in quaternions (or better yet, in Clifford algebra) is to
|
|
note that the EM thus expressed has a higher topology. It seems
|
|
that you can get EM effects in the higher topology that a rigorous
|
|
orthodox EM analysis will never reveal or appreciate.
|
|
|
|
A very interesting reference to check in this respect __ by a
|
|
highly capable scientist, and with all the mathematics __ is T.W.
|
|
Barrett, "Tesla's nonlinear oscillator-shuttle-circuit (OSC)
|
|
theory," Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie, 16(1), 1991,p.
|
|
23-41.
|
|
|
|
Indeed, I'm attracted to the notion that my own concept of the
|
|
nucleus as a pumped phase conjugate mirror could also possibly be
|
|
expressed in terms of Barrett's OSC exposition. This is
|
|
particularly attractive because Barrett points out that in the
|
|
|
|
Page 6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
higher topology the nonlinear optics effects are achievable by
|
|
circuits and devices themselves, without the presence of laser-
|
|
matter interactions as such. He also cites a document number
|
|
225395, 1988, U.S. Patent Office, where the OSC theory was
|
|
originally disclosed.
|
|
|
|
The complete mathematics for decomposition of the electrostatic
|
|
scalar potential into bidirectional EM wave sets in harmonic phase-
|
|
locked series is in E.T. Whittaker, "On the partial differential
|
|
equations of mathematical physics," Mathematische Annalen, Vol. 57,
|
|
1903, p. 333-355.
|
|
|
|
The complete mathematical proof that classical EM can be
|
|
completely replaced with scalar potential interferometry is in E.T.
|
|
Whittaker, "On an expression of the electromagnetic field due to
|
|
electrons by means of two scalar potential functions," Proceedings
|
|
of the London Mathematical Society, Series 2, Vol. 1, 1904, p.
|
|
367-372.
|
|
|
|
I believe Whittaker actually orally delivered both papers in
|
|
1903. Review and commentary from the network scientists on the
|
|
two Whittaker papers, and on the significance of the Whittaker
|
|
papers or lack of it, would be most deeply appreciated.
|
|
Particularly desired would be the results of any experiments
|
|
performed in scalar potential interferometry, at a mild distance
|
|
(say, three feet) where each of the two interfering potentials is
|
|
artificially constructed of multiple phase-locked harmonics
|
|
and their true phase conjugate waves in one-to-one magnitude ratio.
|
|
We accent that at least one harmonic interval, and preferably more
|
|
than that, are essential.
|
|
|
|
Sincerely,
|
|
Tom Bearden
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
If you have comments or other information relating to such topics
|
|
as this paper covers, please upload to KeelyNet or send to the
|
|
Vangard Sciences address as listed on the first page.
|
|
Thank you for your consideration, interest and support.
|
|
|
|
Jerry W. Decker.........Ron Barker...........Chuck Henderson
|
|
Vangard Sciences/KeelyNet
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
If we can be of service, you may contact
|
|
Jerry at (214) 324-8741 or Ron at (214) 242-9346
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 7
|
|
|
|
|