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 = ∞ 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—resolving 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 = ∞
electrical power systems—using asymmetrical regauging and free input of excess
energy by the environment to freely increase their potential energy for
subsequent use in freely powering loads—are permitted by both physics and
thermodynamics. They are permitted by the Maxwell-Heaviside theory prior to its
Lorentz symmetrical regauging.
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
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.
........................
You can read/download this paper from our Downloads/ZPE related section.