Tom Bearden's EFTV Model is Attainable/Obtainable Right Now Date: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 @ 20:28:21 UTC Topic: Science Another good & informative synopsis on Tom Bearden's theoretical work posted by Leslie R. Pastor to the New Energy Congress forum (less than two months old and still in identity forming growing pains): Tom Bearden has valiantly presented http://www.cheniere.org/misc/adas.htm clarification regarding our flawed energy systems of current delivery. The flaws are obvious and present a picture of dynamic 'controls' upon the populations of planet Earth. Energy is ubiquitous and free for the 'extraction.' All that is needed are the right tools and the right delivery. This can be accomplished immediately, but what is necessary is the will to do so, and a clear understanding of the MODEL presented. Tesla's 'wheelworks of nature' are still 'moving' waiting patiently for us to harness them. He showed us how to accomplish this a long time ago. We need to correct our flawed 'models,' so that we may properly 'view' this basic reality of 'natures laws.' Then we may truly be free to further ourselves and save our planet and its indigenous population. Tom http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1380 explains what these errors and omissions are. He further uses the concept of the electret to explain the static dipolar http://www.cheniere.org/references/electret.htm 'potential' between two opposite 'charges.' E. T. Whitaker http://www.answers.com/topic/e-t-whittaker showed that every scalar potential decomposes http://www.cheniere.org/misc/Whittak/index.html into sets of internal EM energy flows in the form of bi-directional longitudinal EM wave pairs. Hence Van Flandern's analogy http://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/vanflandern.htm is correct and the standard EM textbook is wrong, as to the nature of a "static potential". Indeed, every "static" EM field or potential decomposes into just such sets of internal energy flows, as shown by combining two papers by Whittaker http://www.cheniere.org/references/superpotential.htm in 1903 and 1904. As a dipole, the electret is already a system, which extracts virtual state energy from the vacuum and transduces it into real, observable EM energy pouring steadily from the dipolarity. This process, evidenced by the steady presence of the potential, totally violates the present hoary old second law of thermodynamics because it steadily produces negative entropy. Instead of the "truly frozen static" potential taught in CEM/EE theory, the "static" potential is a nonequilibrium steady state (NESS) system. It is continuously producing negative entropy (absorbing the totally disordered virtual state fluctuation energy of the vacuum, re-ordering it, coherently integrating it to observable (quantum) size, and then re-emitting the energy as real observable EM energy flow). http://www.cheniere.org/references/electret.htm >From my previous http://pesn.com/2005/07/24/9600128_ZPE_Drop_in_Ocean/ discussions with Tom Bearden we discovered that the amount of available 'extractable' energy from the vacuum is literally unlimited and eternally viable literally till the end of 'time.' John Bedini http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/Inventors/JohnBedini/bk/page1/ an associate and close friend of Tom Bearden has provided his own source data on similar subject-matter corroborating the above information. As I see it, the real problem is understanding and properly presenting the correct MODEL in physics, which clearly identifies the appropriate objectives we all seek. In a recent email Tom Bearden explains: "For energy systems, the worst falsity is Lorentz's arbitrary symmetrization of the equations circa 1892, which arbitrarily discarded all asymmetrical Maxwellian systems. Nature does not discard them; Lorentz did and EE professors (check Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics, e.g.) continue to symmetrize the equations - thereby eliminating all COP>1.0 energy-from-the-vacuum systems from the model." Tom Bearden has already provided http://twm.co.nz/Beard_scal_vac.html significant 'documentation.' He further explains, "There are also many models for the active vacuum. One "close" model is the zero-point energy model. The ZP is the lowest level of an OBSERVABLE particle, which (because of QM) has motion and energy left even at its lowest observable level (zero absolute temperature). Classically, it would have no movement left at all, but quantum mechanically it does." However, that IS NOT the virtual state (nonobservable) disordered fluctuation energy of the vacuum! Instead, it is the lowest OBSERVABLE energy state. Therefore the two are quite different [ZPE, EFTV]. Tom Bearden clarifies his position and explains the nature of the problem: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9654/bearden/testunify.html "But a regular scientist has a problem. The ZPE is of course experimentally established. So he can work in that area, and the academic community will begrudgingly permit it without calling him a perpetual motion nut and worse. But if he gets over the line and goes after the VIRTUAL FLUCTUATION ENERGY OF THE VACUUM ITSELF, then he's viciously attacked, suppressed, hounded, and the entire works." To hide the absolute necessity for going after that DISORDERED virtual fluctuation energy of the vacuum, the experimental fact has been ruthlessly suppressed that every charge already does it, already produces continuous negative entropy, already reorders and coherently integrates its continually absorbed virtual state fluctuation energy for coherent virtual excitation to the next quantum level, then abruptly decays by emission of a real photon. Every charge in the universe is thus a Feynman ratchet, http://www.eprairie.com/printer/article.asp?newsletterID=4574 which consumes positive entropy of the virtual state, and produces negative entropy of the observable state. That can easiest be understood if one switches to the more modern (and more complete) Leyton geometry than the hoary old Klein geometry of 1872, still used today in most of physics. In Klein geometry, when symmetry is broken at a given level, the information and ordering at that level is lost, and so the symmetry is reduced to the next lower level. That's a "wired-in" positive entropy operation, due strictly to the choice of the groups and their characteristics that the geometry employs. When Leyton's geometry and more modern groups are used, then when symmetry is broken at a given level, the information and ordering at that level is not lost but remains. Also, a new symmetry at the next higher level automatically is produced -- and that is a "wired-in" negative entropy operation. In short, it absolutely requires changing and extending the hoary old second law of thermo to include production of continuous negative entropy -- proven possible in real systems by Evans and Rondoni a few years back. Nature favors Leyton geometry, and every charge and dipole in the universe proves it. And every charge in the universe already extracts real useful EM energy from the virtual state fluctuations of the vacuum, NOT from the ZPE remaining energy. We ourselves do not have to find how to build a system at the elementary level that will extract energy from the virtual state vacuum. Every charge does it, and every EM field and potential is made that way by its associated source charges. Every joule of usable observable EM energy in the universe has been extracted from the seething non-observable energy of the vacuum, that way. Just assemble some charge or make a dipole. That beast will then sit there and automatically and continuously emit real observable photons in all directions, without any OBSERVABLE energy input. The energy input is there, of course, and conservation of energy is observed -- but between virtual and observable state. But the ordinary professor will be totally ostracized and destroyed if he allows that VIRTUAL disordered energy can be changed into OBSERVABLE ordered energy. It cannot be done in the Klein geometry model. But it certainly can be done in Leyton's model. And nature favors Leyton. Once the correct MODEL has been clearly defined and understood, then another problem must be addressed: "The EFTV area seems to be the only area that the individual inventor/researcher is supposed to somehow be able to combine the capabilities of a whole physics department and a large fully equipped and staffed lab, and just get everything done through ALL the research stages, including (1) exploratory development, where the phenomenology is painfully and expensively worked out, proper modeling is done, etc., (2) engineering development, where early lab prototypes are kluged together and tested until one finds the most promising system directions, and (3) after sufficient maturing ED, then progression into full-blown production engineering, to develop actual final production prototypes to be eventually produced and marketed. Those research areas and the appreciable and costly work in each of them are what has to be done, if the work is to be done scientifically. In addition, a new theoretical model must also be developed that matches the results of the ED, since the normal power system models do not even contain what is being attempted and is to be done. But that's not the way the orthodox scientific establishment does business. Instead of that, they very strongly constrain the "work and research" into already-approved channels. Hence they are not solving the energy crisis, and will not do so. But they will continue to reap ever more billions - even a trillion for the new pebble bed nuclear reactor power plants - and retain the control and status quo, including of the large cartels. What is so sorely needed is (1) funding of highly selected inventors and researchers, and (2) for those who are producing the results needed, add a full and highly capable team (say, of about eight specialists) to work with them on those three stages of research and development. And also fund some of the sharpest and best young doctoral candidates and post doctoral scientists to rapidly correct the present terribly flawed CEM/EE model, so that we finally have an updated model that does allow EM energy from the vacuum to be asymmetrically collected and asymmetrically used to power loads without destroying the source of potential energy flow." [Bearden] I agree with Tom Bearden with respect to funding and I propose that what is needed is a group R&D budget for most 'inventors.' Most serious 'mainstream' corporations usually maintained a significant R&D Research Facility, such as ATT's former 'Bell Labs', neither of which is in existence today. Forget about 'investors.' Serious 'research' requires access to an unlimited budget for Research and Development. In my opinion, what is needed is access to individuals with 'deep pockets' who are willing to fund significant [serious] research into 'first principle' and 'novelty of fact' existing 'models of performance' [fully documented in the open literature] presentations. If you recall this is what happened to Nikola Tesla, he traveled to both sides of the Atlantic giving speech after speech regarding his 'rotating magnetic field' and 'alternating current' discoveries. He filed 40 significant 'patents' regarding his 'novelty of fact' principles. But nothing happened, because the 'educated idiots' couldn't understand him. They were clueless, spellbound, and 'needed to be educated' themselves. If you recall even Thomas Alva Edison was the single most 'obstinate' stubborn antagonist, who stymied and sandbagged Tesla with the 'war of the currents.' George Westinghouse who fortuitously attended one of those Tesla lectures, listened to Tesla's presentation, believed Tesla, offering him, a cool $$$$ million on the spot for all of his patents on AC [40 patents in all]. Tesla, grateful, for the 'acknowledgement,' accepted the offer, and later 'forgave' the most profitable aspect of that offer, the $2.50 per kWh portion. Nikola Tesla and George Westinghouse formed a lifelong partnership [friendship] thereafter. Tesla had to go to Pittsburgh and 'educate' Westinghouse's engineers in building those 'novelty of fact' AC three phase and single phase motors. The rest is history. We should explore inviting significant 'individuals of means' with 'deep pockets' who are willing to 'explore' alternative 'novelty of fact' systems of 'energy' generation. If we could create a buffer insulating and protecting 'inventors' from harassment and greed factors, then a possible solution to future energy development is approachable. Once that is accomplished, and research is underway, any resultant 'findings' of significant value, demonstrating 'marketability' could be licensed to 'manufacturers' with the rights to 'manufacture' given to 'right of first refusal' deep pocket collaborators [those who provided the initial R & D monies in the first place].' All the Best Leslie R. Pastor PS: It is interesting, that, changing from a non-technological age [horse & buggy] to a(n) [initial] developmental 'technological' stage, did not incur 'intransigence' on the part of the developing 'financial politicians.' [Ferdinand Lundberg: The Rich & The Super Rich] http://www.namebase.org/sources/dZ.html and http://www.raken.com/american_wealth/encyclopedia/comment_1924.asp Indeed an association transpired among the original elite financial 'superstructure' and the emerging technocrats: Ford, Edison, and Westinghouse. Investment money flowed freely, while the 'infrastructure' was developing and establishing itself. But once the initial 'foundational' superstructure was 'in place,' future 'investments' were only aloud to 'maintain' that 'initial' superstructure. Any deviation met with significant curtailment of funding for any other 'non-approved' investment. [Tesla: Niagara Falls/AC Generation: Success] verses [Tesla: Wardencliffe: Free Energy: Failure]. Tesla lived between two ages [1856- 1943] and knew first hand what this changeover represented. He knew the implications of his discoveries and where they would take the future 'industrial' giant. But he was stopped 'cold,' by the investment strategists and made into a non-person after Wardencliffe. Every human-being on planet Earth should research the life of Nikola Tesla on the Internet, in the public libraries, and all the book vendors, only then will they appreciate what Thomas E. Bearden has accomplished in furthering Tesla's research into the future. Research: Tom Bearden: CEM/EM Factual Data http://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/CEM%20Errors%20-%20final%20paper%20complete%20w%20longer%20abstract4.doc Problems with the Standard CEM/EM Model http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1543 Energy Observations & Comments: Tom Bearden http://www.cheniere.org/images/Energy/index.html The Final Secret of Free Energy: Tom Bearden http://www.akasha.de/~aton/BeardenFreeE(2).html The Russians Acknowledge Tom Bearden http://physics.nad.ru/cgi-bin/forum.pl?forum=eng&mes=1657 Notes and Reference on the Fogel Transistor http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/fogal_device/notes.htm E. T. Whitaker http://www.csonline.net/bpaddock/scalar/1904.htm http://www.csonline.net/bpaddock/scalar/default.htm A Summary of Research Not Present - Patrick G. Bailey, Ph. D. http://www.padrak.com/ine/INE22.html Archived Emails: Tom Bearden http://www.navi.net/~rsc/physics/beard14.txt Miscellaneous http://www.hempcar.org/ford.shtml http://www.tesla-coil-builder.com/radiant_energy.htm http://www.tesla-coil-builder.com/creating_the_ideal_tesla_magnifi.htm http://www.teslascience.org/ http://www.teslascience.org/archive/archive.htm http://www.tfcbooks.com/articles/monument.htm http://www.tfcbooks.com/articles/twp6.htm http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Tesla_Wardenclyffe_Project/ http://www.explorepub.com/articles/energetics_notes.html http://pacenet.homestead.com/Transmutation.html This article comes from ZPEnergy.com http://www.zpenergy.com The URL for this story is: http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1613