991 lines
50 KiB
Plaintext
991 lines
50 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!
|
|
|
|
February 23, 1992
|
|
|
|
SWEET3.ASC
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
This file shared with KeelyNet courtesy of Guy Resh.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
Progress Report on the Sweet Vacuum Triode
|
|
|
|
T. E. Bearden
|
|
|
|
Updated Jan. 29, 1992
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
Phase I Operation Completed
|
|
|
|
In 1991 we ended Phase I, and began the opening round of Phase II of
|
|
our decades-long operation. Phase I was to alert the free nations
|
|
to the dangers of Soviet scalar EM weapons, and the necessity of
|
|
countering them. That phase has been successfully completed. There
|
|
are now three other nations - not hostile to the U.S. - that have
|
|
developed and deployed scalar EM weaponry. The Soviets/KGB are
|
|
soundly checked by these three nations, with regards to scalar EM
|
|
weaponry.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
Phase II Operation Begun
|
|
|
|
The goal of the phase II operation is to get cheap, clean energy
|
|
from the vacuum, obtain antigravity, and develop scalar EM healing
|
|
of notorious diseases such as cancer, leukemia, AIDS, etc. In this
|
|
phase we are now publishing papers in the orthodox literature that
|
|
carry the message. Our target is the bright young graduate students
|
|
and postdoctoral candidates who are becoming increasingly curious in
|
|
this area. We will try to get as many of these interested as
|
|
possible. The idea is to have about 100 "seed cells", in major
|
|
universities, so that these young tigers do the necessary
|
|
phenomenology experiments and produce the necessary theory
|
|
extensions. If we can reach that number of seed cells, then those
|
|
young Turks will turn over the present physics. That Phase II
|
|
operation has begun.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
Two Fundamental Papers Published
|
|
|
|
For example, in mid-1991 we gave (in absentia) two fundamental
|
|
papers to a very large symposium (IECEC '91) in the Boston area.
|
|
The symposium was sponsored by IEEE, AIAA, and many of the other
|
|
leading technical societies of the U.S. The two papers are
|
|
published in the Proceedings by the American Nuclear Society.[1,2]
|
|
|
|
One of these papers [1] tells what is wrong with quantum mechanics,
|
|
|
|
Page 1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
electromagnetics, and general relativity - that is, what actually
|
|
prevents their unification. It also tells what has to be done to
|
|
unify them. I emphasize that the thesis in this paper is testable
|
|
on the laboratory bench; it isn't just conjecture.
|
|
|
|
The second paper [2] is rather unique, to say the least. In it I
|
|
openly released the basic universal mechanism that is capable of
|
|
directly tapping the potential energy of the vacuum,
|
|
electromagnetically. That's a secret eventually worth billions of
|
|
dollars; I freely gave it to everyone. I discovered the theoretical
|
|
mechanism, so it was mine to give. The paper reported on Floyd
|
|
Sweet's (my colleague for several years) vacuum triode which
|
|
successfully taps the vacuum's virtual photon flux energy to produce
|
|
500 watts of time-reversed electrical power, with only 330
|
|
microwatts of normal power input. That device has been in existence
|
|
since 1987 or earlier.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
The Fundamental Mechanism Is Proven
|
|
|
|
There are several hundred papers in the nonlinear optics literature
|
|
that prove that the fundamental pumped phase conjugate mirror (PPCM)
|
|
mechanism works, in the macroscopic world. I seem to have been (in
|
|
1986/87) the first person to openly treat the nucleus of the atom as
|
|
a PPCM.
|
|
|
|
In a proprietary 1986 draft and later 1987 paper given to Sweet, I
|
|
produced the basic theory of how Sweet's vacuum triode device (which
|
|
then was producing 6 watts output) was tapping the vacuum energy.
|
|
To do so, I treated the Whittaker bidirectional EM wave components
|
|
of a scalar EM potential __ introduced onto the nucleus - as a set
|
|
of wave/antiwave pairs or pump waves.
|
|
|
|
This application simply uses the internal scalar potential's
|
|
internal structuring as clearly established by Whittaker in 1903.[3]
|
|
With the internal Whittaker wave/antiwave structure, one can
|
|
establish a self-oscillation (self-pumping) on the barium nucleus,
|
|
in and of the virtual photon flux (VPF) exchange between the nucleus
|
|
and its immediately surrounding vacuum.[4]
|
|
|
|
When that is successfully done, the material containing the barium
|
|
(in Sweet's case, barium ferrite magnets) is activated. That is,
|
|
VPF exchange energy is rhythmically flowing into the barium nucleus
|
|
and back out again in a 60 Hz wave __ as a wave of pure VPF stress
|
|
potential; a pure scalar EM wave, which is composed of (and can be
|
|
decomposed into) phase-locked AM oscillations of the set of
|
|
Whittaker biwaves composing the potential.
|
|
|
|
With this Whittaker decomposition, the self-oscillating barium
|
|
nucleus is then a self-pumped phase conjugate mirror. Note that
|
|
this "nucleus as a pumped phase conjugate mirror" approach is a
|
|
universal scheme for tapping the trapped energy in a massless scalar
|
|
EM potential in the vacuum, without depleting the potential.
|
|
|
|
The potential in the vacuum is a function of vacuum VPF activity;
|
|
the potential is continually replenished by the vacuum itself. The
|
|
EM energy trapped inside the potential can be tapped forever, if the
|
|
potential is not bled off by translating electrons (or other charged
|
|
particles).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Then all that remains to be done to tap this vacuum-furnished
|
|
"pumping" energy, is to utilize standard 4-wave mixing theory from
|
|
nonlinear optics, and introduce a small signal wave input. By
|
|
standard textbook theory, up to all the energy in the pump waves
|
|
will then be emitted by the nucleus as a phase conjugate replica
|
|
(PCR) (time-reversed replica) of the signal wave input.
|
|
|
|
In other words, an amplified EM energy wave - in this case, 60 Hz -
|
|
will come from the self-pumped nuclei and will backtrack the path
|
|
taken by the signal wave, in accordance with the so-called
|
|
distortion correction theorem of orthodox nonlinear optics.[5]
|
|
|
|
In this fashion, the energy in a potential established in vacuum can
|
|
be directly tapped, taken from the VPF exchange with the nucleus,
|
|
and gated out of the atom and into the external circuit, to power an
|
|
external load.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
The Secret of Overunity EM Devices
|
|
|
|
THIS "NUCLEUS AS A PUMPED PHASE CONJUGATE MIRROR" MECHANISM IS THE
|
|
FUNDAMENTAL SECRET OF ALL LEGITIMATE OVER-UNITY DEVICES THAT TAP
|
|
VACUUM ENERGY.
|
|
|
|
The tapping device is not a closed system, but is open to the flow
|
|
of energy from the vacuum to the nuclei and back. All systems
|
|
everywhere are open to this in-and-out VPF flux exchange anyway.
|
|
Normally, however, the two VPF flows - in and out - are equal and
|
|
opposite, and so the energy exchange between vacuum and nucleus is
|
|
in equilibrium. In that case, none of the VPF exchange energy is
|
|
gated out to the external circuit.
|
|
|
|
In the "activated" case, however, the two VPF flows (between the
|
|
nucleus and the vacuum) are not equal, because part of the flow
|
|
energy that accumulates in the in-surge into the nucleus is gated
|
|
out of the atom and into the external circuit.
|
|
|
|
Hence the vacuum/nucleus flux exchange system is not locally in
|
|
equilibrium, because part of the in-flow is being gated by 4-wave
|
|
mixing accomplished in the PPCM barium nuclei, into forming an
|
|
organized PCR wave, which in turn goes on out of the atom instead of
|
|
back to the vacuum. Any local vacuum energy extracted is just
|
|
instantly replaced by the surrounding vacuum - just as a raging
|
|
ocean instantly refills the hole left in dipping out a spoonful
|
|
of water.
|
|
|
|
So in the self-oscillating PPCM nucleus, part of the vacuum influx
|
|
energy is gated into an organized phase conjugate replica (PCR)
|
|
wave, instead of simply being flux-exchanged back to the local
|
|
vacuum. This amplified PCR wave backtracks the path previously
|
|
taken by the input 60 Hz signal wave, and thus proceeds out of the
|
|
vacuum-pumped nuclei, through the atom's electron shells, into and
|
|
through the material lattice, and arrives in the outer circuit,
|
|
which is connected to the external electrical load.
|
|
|
|
The device thus powers the external load directly off the energy
|
|
organized and gated from the local vacua surrounding the excited,
|
|
activated, self-pumped barium nuclei.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Floyd Sweet's Vacuum Triode
|
|
|
|
In his second vacuum triode, Sweet obtained 500 watts of negative
|
|
electrical power out (at 60 Hz and 120 volts), with an input (signal
|
|
wave, in nonlinear optical PPCM terminology) of only 330 microwatts
|
|
(10 volts, 33 x 10-6 amps) from a small 60 Hz oscillator. That's
|
|
about a 1,500,000 power gain. Not too bad at all.
|
|
|
|
Sweet later "close-looped" the device, tapping off a wee bit of the
|
|
output, and using it as the rigidly clamped positive-feedback input.
|
|
So his later devices put out 500 watts, directly from the vacuum,
|
|
without any external input at all.
|
|
|
|
Sweet has also built devices having 1,000 watt output and 5,000 watt
|
|
output. The devices also are solid state, with no moving parts.
|
|
|
|
A nominal Sweet device outputs 1,000 watts of time-reversed (PCR) EM
|
|
power at 60 Hz and 120 volts. It weighs 6 pounds, and can be rigged
|
|
to simultaneously produce antigravity, while it is producing its
|
|
negative power.
|
|
|
|
However, there are still some serious problems with stability, etc.
|
|
Also, there are serious legal problems, and in fact the entire thing
|
|
has been in litigation. It may be that nothing will ever be
|
|
possible with this device, because of the horrendous legal
|
|
entanglements. But the device is real, it works (albeit it is just
|
|
a laboratory demonstration device, and not at all a production-ready
|
|
model). It proves the principles, and the report is now in the
|
|
standard literature.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
World's First Antigravity Success
|
|
|
|
Also, to prove the scalar EM interpretation of gravity and
|
|
antigravity, at my urgent request in 1987, Sweet specially rigged
|
|
the device for antigravity production. In the cited paper we report
|
|
on the highly successful result.
|
|
|
|
The 6-lb. weight of the object was reduced in periodic stages by
|
|
90%, on a scale on the lab bench, in a totally controlled, smooth,
|
|
slow, sustained experiment without transients or sudden surges,
|
|
jerks, etc. At the same time, the device was steadily producing
|
|
negative electrical power.
|
|
|
|
In fact, the method of producing antigravity in a "rigged" unit is
|
|
simply to force it to process more negative power through the
|
|
nucleus. Gravitational energy is negative energy, and gravitational
|
|
power is negative power, as is well known.
|
|
|
|
It follows that to first order, antigravity can be regarded as
|
|
simply the outputting or ejecting of negative energy from the atomic
|
|
nucleus, through the electron shells and into an external load,
|
|
rather than return of the negative VPF energy back to the vacuum
|
|
from the nucleus.
|
|
|
|
The curve is reproduced in the paper, and printed in the
|
|
proceedings. I had qualitatively predicted the results, prior to
|
|
the experiment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is not printed in the proceedings is that, with another more
|
|
powerful model, Sweet has actually fully levitated the entire 6-lb
|
|
unit, and "flown" it above the bench, via this approach to
|
|
antigravity.
|
|
|
|
So the scalar EM theory works. It's still tricky, and we're just at
|
|
the stage that normal EM went through with "cat fur, glass rods, and
|
|
pith balls." But slowly we're getting there. Still, we desperately
|
|
need to develop good instrumentation for detecting (1) the absolute
|
|
scalar potential, including its magnitude, and (2) the exact
|
|
Whittaker bidirectional EM wave harmonic structure of the scalar
|
|
potential. We know how to approach that problem, but it will be
|
|
quite expensive, and funding to do that has simply never been
|
|
available.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
"Energy" Is Presently Incorrectly Defined
|
|
|
|
To illustrate just how poorly some of the foundations of normal
|
|
science (including physics) are known, let me point out that the
|
|
present definition of energy is totally wrong. Now there's a real
|
|
attention grabber of a statement! Can I prove it? Let's see.
|
|
|
|
The present "definition" of energy in science is usually stated
|
|
something like this. "Energy is the capacity to do work." Well,
|
|
that statement happens to be totally, hopelessly false. It isn't
|
|
even correct logic. Here's why.
|
|
|
|
What is work? Ultimately, work is the scattering (disordering) of
|
|
energy. We can always resort to calorimetry, e.g., and determine
|
|
the warming of a solution (such as water) by a mechanically-powered
|
|
paddlewheel, to convert mechanical energy to heat energy, etc. But
|
|
in QM, all mechanical forces are generated by the exchange of
|
|
virtual photons, so even mechanical force is electromagnetic at
|
|
base. Hence mechanical force times distance is also EM-generated,
|
|
at its causative base. Eventually, mechanical and electromagnetic
|
|
work involves the scattering of EM energy.
|
|
|
|
So substituting for the term "work" in the accepted definition of
|
|
energy, the standard definition is really this: "Energy is the
|
|
(capacity to do) scattering of energy."[6] That's logically
|
|
contradictory. It says that energy is just its own scattering! And
|
|
that's nonsense.
|
|
|
|
Try it on the notion of a fishhook. I can truthfully state: "A
|
|
fishhook can be used to catch fish." That's perfectly okay.
|
|
However, we cannot accurately define a fishhook as "A fishhook IS
|
|
the capacity to catch fish." That's a non sequitur. We can say,
|
|
accurately, that "a fishhook HAS the (innate) capacity to catch
|
|
fish," and that is accurate. That's just a statement about
|
|
fishhooks, it is not a definition. But we cannot say that "a
|
|
fishhook IS the capacity to catch fish." Indeed, a fishhook IS a
|
|
bent piece of wire, where one end is usually curved with a barb on
|
|
the tip.
|
|
|
|
Similarly, we can say that "energy HAS the capacity to do work," and
|
|
that is logically accurate. In that form, it's just a statement of
|
|
one of the things that energy can be used to do. One can, by
|
|
scattering the energy, do work - since work is just the scattering
|
|
of energy in the first place. But one cannot say that "Energy IS
|
|
|
|
Page 5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the capacity to do work." A thing cannot be defined as just its own
|
|
scattering!
|
|
|
|
I find it remarkable - even astounding - that generations of
|
|
scientists and engineers have apparently failed to notice this
|
|
simple, elementary fact. Could it be that all the physicists and
|
|
engineers are presently wrong in their notion as to precisely what
|
|
energy IS? If so, then (one might say) what, pray tell, is it?
|
|
What is energy anyway?
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
A Fundamental Redefinition of Energy
|
|
|
|
Here's the precise definition: ENERGY IS ANY ORDERING, EITHER
|
|
STATIC OR DYNAMIC, IN THE VIRTUAL PARTICLE FLUX OF VACUUM. Period.
|
|
Note that energy overall refers to the flux of any and all kinds of
|
|
virtual particles in the vacuum. It can be any kind of ordering
|
|
imposed in or on any or some or all of those particle fluxes.
|
|
|
|
But when you put an adjective modifier in front of the word
|
|
"energy", then you have selected a particular type of flux. In that
|
|
case you have to discriminate the type of quantum particle of the
|
|
field, comprising the flux that is being referred to. Like the
|
|
following:
|
|
|
|
Definition of Electromagnetic Energy
|
|
|
|
Electromagnetic energy is any ordering, either static or dynamic, in
|
|
the virtual photon flux of vacuum. In other words, for a field
|
|
energy, one selects only the type of particle in the VPF that is the
|
|
quantum particle of that field.
|
|
|
|
Let's continue: Nowhere in physics - in all of physics - does there
|
|
appear a legitimate definition of the electrostatic scalar
|
|
potential. The normal "definition" utilized or advanced is a
|
|
prescription for calculating its magnitude. I could not find a
|
|
single physicist or electrical engineer who could accurately define
|
|
it. So I went to QM and dug out what it is, myself. Let's
|
|
continue:
|
|
|
|
Definitions of Some Types of Potentials
|
|
|
|
A potential is any ordering, either static or dynamic or combination
|
|
thereof, in the virtual particle flux of vacuum.
|
|
|
|
Note that, according to this definition, a potential is pure energy,
|
|
a priori. But we must be careful. Because of the nature of the
|
|
virtual particle flux comprising it, the potential is a collection
|
|
of individual virtual energies - a collection of the individual
|
|
energies of a host of individually moving virtual particles. Each
|
|
particle is still almost totally separate from each other, most of
|
|
the time. In other words, as an informal analogy, potential is a
|
|
sort of mostly disintegrated energy, which only has just a touch of
|
|
integration, enough to allow it to be referred to as a single
|
|
"collection" or "ordering."
|
|
|
|
A scalar potential is any static (stationary) ordering in the
|
|
virtual particle flux of vacuum. A vector potential is any dynamic
|
|
(nonstationary) ordering in the virtual particle flux of vacuum. So
|
|
scalar potentials and vector potentials are simply different subsets
|
|
of the energy domain.
|
|
Page 6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An electrostatic scalar potential is any static (stationary)
|
|
ordering in the virtual photon flux of vacuum. And so on.
|
|
|
|
Now those are all precise definitions. To the best of my knowledge,
|
|
they have not previously appeared in physics.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
Internal Wave Structure of A Scalar Potential
|
|
|
|
However, with respect to the electrostatic scalar potential, one
|
|
still has a conceptual problem. Any photon in the vacuum must of
|
|
necessity be moving at an average velocity of c, it would seem. So
|
|
how does one have a "stationary" ordering of these extremely fast
|
|
photons? In other words, how do you catch and "hold stationary" a
|
|
particle that's moving at luminal velocity, and have it still
|
|
continuing to move that fast?
|
|
|
|
It's simply a special case of a kind of "standing wave" stationary
|
|
solution by another name. Indeed, Whittaker decomposes the scalar
|
|
potential into bidirectional pairs (in a harmonic series) of EM
|
|
waves.[7] In other words, a scalar electrostatic potential
|
|
internally consists of - and is composed of - paired EM waves,
|
|
passing through each other, in pairs in a harmonic set. Sort of
|
|
like a Fourier expansion set of harmonic waves, coupled with its
|
|
phase conjugate set that is present at the same time. Notice that
|
|
the harmonic wavepairs are phase-locked in frequency and time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hence this structure establishes an organized, standing, stationary
|
|
spatiotemporal lattice directly in the vacuum potential. It is
|
|
strongly pointed out that this represents a local organization and
|
|
structuring of spacetime itself.
|
|
|
|
Further, a given potential created by our circuits is a change in
|
|
the trapped local EM energy of the vacuum. It therefore represents
|
|
a local curvature of spacetime, and this local curvature is
|
|
Whittaker-structured.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
Gravitons, Photons, and Antiphotons
|
|
|
|
So we look at one pair of Whittaker waves, at its wave and antiwave
|
|
components. We point out that the antiwave is a true phase
|
|
conjugate (time-reversal) twin of the wave. In that wave/antiwave
|
|
pair, photons in the wave are moving forward (say, from left to
|
|
right) in one direction, and antiphotons in the antiwave are moving
|
|
back (say, from right to left). In other words, photons and
|
|
antiphotons are present and constantly meeting each other in each
|
|
wave/antiwave pair.
|
|
|
|
Further, the antiwave is precisely coupled to the wave by phase
|
|
conjugation. This requires that photons and antiphotons are also
|
|
continually and precisely coupling - which they can do and will do
|
|
if one is a precise phase conjugate of the other - and decoupling.
|
|
|
|
But when momentarily coupled, the photon/antiphoton pair have
|
|
helicity 2. In other words, at that moment the paired system
|
|
(couple) is stationary. As a crude visual model, each may be
|
|
visualized as "whirling around" (orbiting) the other momentarily, so
|
|
that each has tangential velocity c, but oppositely directed,
|
|
producing a spin-2 system that is momentarily "trapped" and not
|
|
|
|
Page 7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
translating.[8] In this fashion a photon may be "spatially trapped"
|
|
in a graviton system, but the individual photon may still be moving
|
|
with tangential velocity c, even though the graviton system is
|
|
stationary.
|
|
|
|
Thus what we have in the Whittaker bidirectional wave structure of
|
|
the scalar EM potential is the continual formation and dissolution
|
|
of stationary spin-2 gravitons, with photons and antiphotons
|
|
continually entering and exiting each coupling position. The
|
|
gravitons resulting from the photon coupling/uncoupling are
|
|
statistical, for they are continually being created and destroyed.
|
|
|
|
Those statistical gravitons are what comprise the "electrostatic
|
|
scalar potential," and constitute the convolution of the locally
|
|
trapped photons. Consequently, the local EM energy trapped in the
|
|
scalar EM potential exists in that form.
|
|
|
|
Note that, because of the arrangement of the photon/antiphoton pairs
|
|
into a harmonic series, all the EM waves in the entire Whittaker set
|
|
are phase-locked, as are the gravitons. This means that the phase-
|
|
locked graviton sets represent an ordered spacetime graviton lattice
|
|
__ containing EM energy ordered both dynamically and statically in
|
|
frequency, energy, space, and time.
|
|
|
|
So, the scalar electrostatic potential is actually a hidden graviton
|
|
latticing organization of local spacetime itself.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
Photon Interaction And Newton's Third Law
|
|
|
|
It follows that, in photon interactions, normally we actually have a
|
|
bust-up of a graviton, so that we have two photon interactions,[9]
|
|
not one, as follows: (1) the freed forward-time photon interacts
|
|
with the shell electrons of the atom, which is the reaction
|
|
contained in the textbooks, and (2) the freed time-reversed
|
|
antiphoton interacts with the nucleus of the atom to produce
|
|
Newton's third law reaction force.[10]
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
The Scalar Potential Is Gravitational
|
|
|
|
Now that we know that the scalar potential is comprised of
|
|
gravitons, we can understand why the potential is gravitational (as
|
|
is well-known in general relativity.)[11] We also realize something
|
|
even more important: We realize precisely how gravitational
|
|
potential is made and sustained electromagnetically. In other
|
|
words, we now understand electrogravitation. Note that, so far, we
|
|
have described a very "linear" condition in spacetime, where the
|
|
local spacetime from one point to its neighboring points does not
|
|
change in the photon coupling constituency of the graviton lattice.
|
|
Such a spacetime is locally flat.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
Curved and Flat Local Spacetimes
|
|
|
|
However, it follows that we also should be able to do some nonlinear
|
|
things to make the average photon/antiphoton coupling differ from
|
|
spin-2. In that case, we can have some multiple photon couplings
|
|
greater than helicity 2. We can also have the occasional failure of
|
|
photon and antiphoton to couple, so that the average coupling is
|
|
less than helicity 2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Because of the continual creation and annihilation of gravitons, in
|
|
describing "the" graviton we are speaking of the average photon
|
|
coupling over a finite time, where the average smooths and becomes a
|
|
constant value, and where by "photon" we refer to both photons and
|
|
antiphotons.
|
|
|
|
If so, we then have this characteristic: If the average photon
|
|
coupling in the vacuum EM potential is spin-2, then that's the
|
|
"linear" coupling case, and the local spacetime is flat (uncurved).
|
|
If the average coupling is less than spin-2, then the local
|
|
spacetime is curved in one direction. It is deficient in photons
|
|
for its preferred coupling, so it acts as a photon sink, or EM
|
|
energy sink. So to speak, such a potential/vacuum/spacetime has
|
|
"unfilled photon holes - sort of a slightly depleted "Dirac photon
|
|
sea." On the other hand, if the average coupling is greater than
|
|
spin-2, the local spacetime is curved in the opposite direction. It
|
|
has a surplus of photons, so it acts as a photon source - in other
|
|
words, as an EM energy source. In this case, it is a sort of
|
|
"excited Dirac photon sea."
|
|
|
|
Just as the spacetime/vacuum possesses a negative energy sea of
|
|
Dirac electrons, so it possesses a negative energy sea of photons.
|
|
When it's flat, all the negative energy "holes" are filled with
|
|
virtual photons. When it's curved in one direction, some of the
|
|
holes are empty, and the local spacetime will "absorb" some
|
|
available photons. When it's curved in the other direction, an
|
|
excess of virtual photons/antiphotons are crammed in there in excess
|
|
of the holes, so the spacetime will emit photons and serve as an
|
|
energy source.
|
|
|
|
Remember that spacetime/vacuum to first order is just scalar
|
|
potential. We can have a negative or a positive potential, as a
|
|
delta compared to the normal or ambient vacuum potential. And when
|
|
we speak of curved spacetime, we are just talking about a surplus or
|
|
shortage of trapped photon energy coupling density to comprise the
|
|
local vacuum/potential.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
Potential, Vacuum, Spacetime, and Energy
|
|
|
|
The four words, potential, vacuum, spacetime, and static energy turn
|
|
out to be essentially identities. Also, all of them have a dynamic
|
|
substructure. That is, a vacuum per se is structured/ordered, since
|
|
it is essentially a scalar potential. To first order, it is an
|
|
electrostatic scalar EM potential, in the manner shown by Whittaker
|
|
to have an internal bidirectional EM wave harmonic structure.
|
|
|
|
A spacetime is internally structured; this provides direct access to
|
|
"hyperspace" engineering, since the "internal" part of spacetime is
|
|
hyperspatial, mathematically. But with the Whittaker approach, it
|
|
is straightforward to directly engineer this internal hyperspace
|
|
aspect.
|
|
|
|
The ultimate engineering is hyperspatial engineering, vacuum
|
|
engineering, engineering of potentials, engineering of vacuum
|
|
engines, energizing the vacuum, energizing spacetime, structuring
|
|
the local curvature of spacetime, engineering the internal
|
|
electromagnetics, etc. All these things are identically the same
|
|
thing. They are all part of scalar electromagnetics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interference of vacua/potentials generates what we call EM waves in
|
|
vacuum.[12] These waves may move either time-forward or time-
|
|
reversed (antiwaves). You can also engineer this direct scalar
|
|
interferometry to produce, stabilize, and control EM energy, in
|
|
static or dynamic form, as Whittaker showed in 1904, even at a
|
|
distance.[13]
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
Overunity Condition: Tapping The Potential
|
|
|
|
So, as you might surmise, in scalar EM we can curve local spacetime,
|
|
and use it as either a source or a sink of EM energy. Once we pay
|
|
to move a set of charges so as to establish a particular excitation
|
|
and structure to the local or distant spacetime, so long as we do
|
|
not allow the depletion of the charges, they continue to "pump"
|
|
virtual photons (that is what electric charge is, according to QM)
|
|
and sustain that particular active/excited/ energetic
|
|
spacetime/vacuum/potential. If virtual EM photon energy is removed
|
|
from that excited/activated vacuum region, the surrounding activated
|
|
vacuum instantly replaces it, continually and forever.
|
|
|
|
Now we are free to build a device which (1) establishes the excited
|
|
vacuum/spacetime/potential in the first place, and (2) then taps off
|
|
the virtual photon energy of the excited vacuum potential itself,
|
|
without allowing depletion of the sustaining charged particles that
|
|
are fixed in position and creating/pumping the virtual photon flux
|
|
that creates the potential. We can tap the continual power of the
|
|
Whittaker EM biwaves flowing through the excited vacuum potential
|
|
forever, without exhausting it. I
|
|
|
|
t is simply comparable to putting a paddlewheel in a river, where in
|
|
this case the Whittaker bidirectional EM wave structure is the
|
|
river, and a special tapping device or process is the "paddlewheel."
|
|
We can extract all the energy we wish, forever, from the stream, and
|
|
the vacuum itself will continually and forever replenish the stream
|
|
as fast as we extract the power.
|
|
|
|
So we can build an over-unity machine, IF WE TAP THE LOCALLY ALTERED
|
|
VACUUM POTENTIAL'S HIDDEN WHITTAKER RIVER, rather than releasing the
|
|
sustaining electrical charges/VPF spray pumps we accumulated to
|
|
create that altered potential.
|
|
|
|
If you release the charges (the electrons, e.g.) as normal
|
|
electrical engineers are trained to do, the charges translate and
|
|
mechanically bang and clang their way through resistances, etc. on
|
|
the way to electrical ground, depleting the potential in the
|
|
process. This banging and clanging produces scattering of the
|
|
order/energy in the potential and hence does work. But that way you
|
|
only get one shot of it. It's a one-time thing, and then you've got
|
|
to pay to move in some more charges, build another potential, and
|
|
release the potential and the charges so the charges will go banging
|
|
and clanging through the circuit again, scattering energy (order)
|
|
and producing one-time work again.
|
|
|
|
That's a very poor way to do business. It's rather like having some
|
|
free, self-powered pumps, building a dam to hold some water
|
|
pressure, moving in some of the pumps and pumping up water behind
|
|
the dam to provide the pressure, then knocking down the dam and
|
|
releasing the pumps and the water simultaneously, so that the water
|
|
will rush out and push the pumps along to bump into things along the
|
|
|
|
Page 10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
flow channel and do "banging and clanging" work. Yes, you can get
|
|
some work done by the pumps one time that way. But it's a "hell of
|
|
a way to run a railroad!" Yet all our present electrical engineers
|
|
and electrical scientists are trained to plan, develop, build, and
|
|
utilize just such crude EM systems!
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
Nature's Engines: Charged Particles Are Pumps
|
|
|
|
Charged particles, in quantum mechanics, are engaged in a violent
|
|
virtual particle flux exchange with the vacuum. The violent virtual
|
|
photon exchange between vacuum and mass particle is what creates and
|
|
constitutes the electrical charge on that particle of mass. In
|
|
other words, the electrically charged particle is nature's little
|
|
"spray engine" or "spray pump," with respect to virtual photon flux
|
|
or spray.
|
|
|
|
The magnitude of the electrostatic scalar potential created by the
|
|
accumulated charges (spray pumps) represents the local magnitude
|
|
(flux/spray density) of that virtual photon "spray." It has nothing
|
|
to do with the mass of the charges, except that nature has built
|
|
those particular masses to be "little self-powered spray pumps."
|
|
|
|
When we "charge up" an accumulator, such as a steel sphere or a
|
|
capacitor, we push in the electrons so that they pack closer
|
|
together, and we thus increase the virtual photon spray density
|
|
because we've accumulated more sprayers in a confined volumetric
|
|
region. The volumetric spray density represents the magnitude of
|
|
the electrostatic scalar potential (ESP), in this analogy.
|
|
|
|
Contrary to conventional wisdom, Whittaker proved that this scalar
|
|
potential - this "spray density" - is internally organized into
|
|
hidden, flowing, bidirectional EM waves.[14] EM forcefield wave
|
|
Energy is flowing in both directions. In the electrostatic scalar
|
|
potential, the net Poynting vector resultant is zero, but it is a
|
|
"sum-zero system" composed of an infinite set of opposite but equal
|
|
finite Poynting vectors. That zero vector resultant is a scalar EM
|
|
potential. It's got lots and lots of EM energy flowing both in and
|
|
out simultaneously, but these flows are normally balanced and in
|
|
equilibrium.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
The Overunity Electrical Machine's Secret
|
|
|
|
However, if we could tap the EM energy in those hidden EM waves
|
|
flowing oppositively inside the ESP, we could extract EM energy from
|
|
the vacuum. We could "gate" some of the spray energy, that comes in
|
|
from the vacuum to the charged particle, into the external circuit
|
|
instead of back out to the vacuum. If so, we can use that
|
|
"extracted and externally gated EM energy" to power a load.
|
|
|
|
The "nucleus as a Whittaker-pumped phase conjugate mirror" mechanism
|
|
I found in 1986, furnished to Floyd Sweet in early 1987, and
|
|
released in 1991 allows precisely that tapping and gating
|
|
capability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here's the magic secret of all electrical over-unity machines:
|
|
|
|
1) TAP THE VIRTUAL PHOTON SPRAY.
|
|
2) TAP THE ENERGY IN THE MASSLESS VACUUM POTENTIAL.
|
|
3) DO NOT RELEASE THE SPRAY PUMPS.
|
|
4) DO NOT ALLOW CURRENT FLOW IN THAT PART OF THE CIRCUIT WHERE
|
|
THE CHARGE PUMPS ARE COLLECTED TO CREATE THE POTENTIAL.
|
|
5) OR AT LEAST ALLOW ONLY THE ABSOLUTE MINIMUM OF FLOW/BLEED-OFF
|
|
THERE, OF THE PUMPS.
|
|
6) ORGANIZE, GATE, AND APPLY THE POTENTIAL SPRAY TO THE EXTERNAL
|
|
CIRCUIT, WHERE IT WILL ATTACH TO AVAILABLE ELECTRONS, FORMING
|
|
FORCE FIELDS, VOLTAGE, AND CURRENTS TO PUMP ELECTRONS AROUND
|
|
THE CIRCUIT.
|
|
7) USE THOSE EXTERNALLY POWERED FIELDS AND CURRENTS TO POWER THE
|
|
LOAD.
|
|
|
|
You can freely tap the potential's VPF "spray" forever, once one is
|
|
created in the vacuum. As fast as you scavenge out the power in the
|
|
spray, it is just renewed by the continued pumping of the charged
|
|
particle "spray pumps." Nature and nature's excited vacuum potential
|
|
"flux-spray" provide and replenish that pumping and that power, for
|
|
free, forever.
|
|
|
|
So the altered vacuum (potential) is a universal "virtual-photon-
|
|
flux fuel" if you construct your power units correctly. But you
|
|
must engineer things one step deeper than the present seriously
|
|
flawed electromagnetics prescribes.
|
|
|
|
Similar constructions give the secret of gravity and antigravity,
|
|
and how to engineer them as well. However, that is beyond the scope
|
|
of this paper.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
All Systems Are Open To Vacuum Flux Exchange
|
|
|
|
As we stated, our attention is no longer directed to scalar EM
|
|
weapons, but to the Phase II operation. That is progressing; there
|
|
are at present several legitimate devices or processes that produce
|
|
overunity. We reiterate that this is nothing mystical; none of
|
|
these systems or processes is a closed system, so closed-system
|
|
energy conservation need not apply locally.
|
|
|
|
Indeed, there is really no such thing in the universe as a truly
|
|
closed system, anywhere. Every system is open to the vacuum's
|
|
virtual particle flux, and is in fact already in a fantastic virtual
|
|
particle exchange with the vacuum. Normally, however, the influx
|
|
and the outflux are equal in absolute magnitude; hence the system is
|
|
in internal equilibrium vis-a-vis the vacuum.
|
|
|
|
However, if one breaks the equilibrium in this internal flux
|
|
exchange, and organizes and gates a portion of that influx on out of
|
|
the atom and into the external circuits, one can power an external
|
|
electromagnetic load directly from the extracted vacuum energy.
|
|
|
|
It is no more mysterious than placing a paddlewheel in a flowing
|
|
stream, to extract some useful energy as shaft horsepower. We just
|
|
have a more esoteric stream and a more esoteric paddlewheel.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In Conclusion
|
|
|
|
We also point out that there are no irrevocable "laws" of nature.
|
|
Every so-called "law of physics" is just a great and useful
|
|
generalization, based on certain fixed assumptions, that holds in a
|
|
broad area. If the assumptions are violated, however, the law need
|
|
no longer hold, and it can be violated.
|
|
|
|
Scientific proof is proof by the experimental method, not by the
|
|
authoritarian pronouncements of orthodox scientists. Unfortunately,
|
|
orthodoxy as yet knows nothing of the process we are advancing, or
|
|
of scalar electromagnetics. In the unorthodox experimental arena,
|
|
however, scalar EM is still a newborn infant in the womb, but it is
|
|
thriving and advancing. It is up to us to serve as midwives and get
|
|
the infant born.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
NOTES AND REFERENCES
|
|
|
|
1. T.E. Bearden and Walter Rosenthal, "On a testable unification of
|
|
electromagnetics, general relativity, and quantum mechanics,"
|
|
Proceedings of the 26th Intersociety Energy Conversion
|
|
Engineering Conference, August 4-9, 1991, Boston, Massachusetts.
|
|
|
|
2. Floyd Sweet and T.E. Bearden, "Utilizing scalar electromagnetics
|
|
to tap vacuum energy," Proceedings of the 26th Intersociety
|
|
Energy Conversion Engineering Conference (IECEC '91), August 4-
|
|
9, 1991, Boston, Massachusetts.
|
|
|
|
3. E.T. Whittaker, "On the partial differential equations of
|
|
mathematical physics," Mathematische Annalen, Vol. 57, 1903, p.
|
|
333-355. See also V.K. Ignatovich, "The remarkable
|
|
capabilities of recursive relations," American Journal of
|
|
Physics, 57(10), Oct. 1989, p. 873-878. See also Richard W.
|
|
Ziolkowski, "Localized transmission of wave energy," Proc. SPIE
|
|
Vol. 1061, Microwave and Particle Beam sources and Directed
|
|
Energy Concepts, Jan. 1989, p. 396-397.
|
|
|
|
4. This self-oscillation in barium compounds is well-known in
|
|
nonlinear optics, although it is usually experimentally
|
|
accomplished in the optical frequency regime. Sweet brilliantly
|
|
discovered how to initiate this self-oscillation or self-pumping
|
|
at ELF frequencies, such as 60 Hz.
|
|
|
|
5. For a statement of the distortion correction theorem, see Amnon
|
|
Yariv, Optical Electronics, Third Edition, Holt, Rinehart and
|
|
Winston, New York, 1985, p. 500-501. See also David M. Pepper,
|
|
"Nonlinear optical phase conjugation," Optical Engineering,
|
|
21(2), March/April 1982, p. 156-183 for a good overview of
|
|
optical phase conjugation.
|
|
|
|
6. Shortly below, energy will be defined as a certain kind of
|
|
order. So the present "definition" of energy actually is
|
|
stating that "order is the disordering of order." In that form,
|
|
the logical contradiction in the "definition" is immediately
|
|
apparent.
|
|
|
|
7. E.T. Whittaker, 1903, ibid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8. This is true because the wave and antiwave are interferring.
|
|
Such interference produces galloping waves, whose instantaneous
|
|
velocity varies from the speed of light.
|
|
|
|
The galloping wave slows to, say, 0.01 c, then rushes forward
|
|
again at 100 c, then slows, then speeds up, and so on. Its
|
|
average velocity is c. But its instantaneous velocity is
|
|
usually anything but c. See William G. Harter, John Evans,
|
|
Roberto Vega, and Sanford Wilson. "Galloping waves and their
|
|
relativistic properties." American Journal of Physics, 53(7),
|
|
July 1985, p. 671-679.
|
|
|
|
9. Occasionally yet another physicist discovers that photon
|
|
interaction is actually binary, and that we ignore or discard
|
|
half of almost all of our measurements. For example, see
|
|
Richard Kidd et al, "Evolution of the Modern Photon," American
|
|
Journal of Physics, 57(1), Jan. 1989, p. 27-35. See also R.
|
|
Chen, "Cancellation of Internal Forces," American Journal of
|
|
Physics, 49(4), Apr. 1981, p. 372.
|
|
|
|
10. Essentially this has been experimentally proven. E.g., when one
|
|
has a phase conjugate material, it may emit either photons (a
|
|
normal wave) or antiphotons (a time-reversed or phase-conjugate
|
|
wave).
|
|
|
|
Now, if I am right as to the genesis of Newtonian 3rd law
|
|
reaction force, then when the material emits a time-reversed
|
|
wave, or an antiphoton, the material should not recoil. Such
|
|
experiments have in fact been done in nonlinear optics
|
|
experiments, and "inexplicably" a phase conjugate mirror
|
|
material does not recoil when it emits an antiphoton or a phase
|
|
conjugate wave, seemingly violating Newton's third law! So it
|
|
seems I am correct after all.
|
|
|
|
11. In the modern GR view, all trapped energy is gravitational. It
|
|
is the trapped EM energy in mass, e.g., that is gravitational.
|
|
Mass is in fact a highly intense mass potential.
|
|
|
|
Since any scalar potential is also a form of trapped EM energy,
|
|
that energy - and hence the potential also - is gravitational in
|
|
nature.
|
|
|
|
12. 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. Here Whittaker demonstrates that the
|
|
present forcefield electromagnetics can be replaced by scalar
|
|
potential interferometry. And I'm called a lunatic for speaking
|
|
of scalar interferometry!
|
|
|
|
Rigorously the scalar potential is composed of a dynamic,
|
|
opposing vector forcefield wave internal structure. Internally
|
|
it's vectorial; externally it's scalar. Whittaker 1903 tells
|
|
how to make standing scalar potentials; these can be made as
|
|
beams.
|
|
|
|
And one can then interfere the two scalar EM beams to produce EM
|
|
force fields directly in distant charged particle systems, by
|
|
Whittaker 1904.
|
|
|
|
Page 14
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13. E.T. Whittaker, 1904, ibid.
|
|
|
|
14. Mathematically these hidden waves may be modeled as hyperspatial
|
|
waves.
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
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 15
|
|
|
|
|