Create an account Home  ·  Topics  ·  Downloads  ·  Your Account  ·  Submit News  ·  Top 10  
Mission Statement

· Home
· Forum
· Special Sections
· Advertising
· AvantGo
· Books
· Downloads
· Events
· Feedback
· Link to us
· Private Messages
· Search
· Stories Archive
· Submit News
· Surveys
· Top 10
· Topics
· Web Links
· Your Account

Who's Online
There are currently, 143 guest(s) and 1 member(s) that are online.

You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here

  • (June 9, 2021 - June 11, 2021) ICCF-23 online

  • Hot Links

    American Antigravity

    AESOP Institute

    Closeminded Science



    Integrity Research Institute

    New Energy Movement

    New Energy Times

    The Orion Proj.




    Science Hobbyist

    Tom Bearden's Page


    Want to Know

    Other Info-Sources
    NE News Sites
    Alternative Energy News
    E-Cat World
    NexusNewsfeed ZPE
    FringeEnergy News
    NE Discussion Groups
    Energetic Forum
    Energy21 YT Channel
    Energy Science Forum
    Free_Energy FB Group
    The KeelyNet Blog
    Tesla Science Foundation (FB)
    Vortex (old Interact)
    Magazine Sites
    Electrifying Times (FB)
    ExtraOrdinary Technology
    IE Magazine
    New Energy Times

    Interesting Links

    Click Here for the DISCLOSURE PROJECT
    SciTech Daily Review
    NEXUS Magazine
    Find Jobs

    The Fundamentals Necessary To Understand Overunity and Free Energy
    Posted on Monday, December 05, 2005 @ 21:06:54 MST by vlad

    Science Leslie R. Pastor posted for the NEC forum the following message from Tom Bearden: Les,

    The last working overunity MEG demonstrator (we originally had three) was destroyed - and yep, by an "EE".

    Let me give a simple analogy. A working model COP = infinity system is the common solar cell array powered electrical system, even though its efficiency may be only 21%. There the environmental source of energy is already understood, so one has no problem in accepting such a system, without all the usual stuff and nonsense about "perpetual motion machines" etc. In this area, the legitimate researchers are seeking merely to tap an additional though a bit unusual source of environmental energy - usable EM energy extracted from the seething virtual-state vacuum. The extraction and output of real usable EM energy is already done by every charge in the universe; but presently the exact mechanism by which the charge extracts all that energy (in a purely negative entropy operation) is not solved or understood. We have proposed a testable solution, but of course it remains to be established clearly by experimental demonstration and proof. Indeed, the experiments are already in the literature, if one knows where to look, but have not yet been "accepted".

    Nonetheless, we are very close to finalization of the needed funding agreement needed to get on with the MEG. That's the best way to go, because this particular funding group we will be working with is excellent, and we will also be working with an excellent university.

    Meanwhile, a word to the New Energy Congress. Your efforts are very necessary, and they are sorely needed! Please do not follow the trail of so many other organizations that have formed in the very loose-knit "free energy area" I've seen over the last 35 years. Most have just used and propagated standard electrical engineering concepts and jargon, set up "pundits" who pronounce without citations or real understanding of physics beyond EE, and to no avail. Most such organizations which originally were scientifically serious were also rather shortly penetrated and redirected by actual agents determined to keep such things forever off the market. Keeping most all the activity and discussions and orientations directly in the sad old EE model arena is the major method used to suppress nonequilibrium electrical power systems freely receiving and using excess energy from their vacuum environment. The Congress should be meticulous in how the area is viewed theoretically, and in the foundations experiments that are done and reported properly.

    In short, there are two main aspects of any new research project struggling with a "new phenomenology area". One aspect is in the theoretical foundations arena, and the other aspect is in the experimental phenomenology area. But in interpreting the phenomenology experiments, a blend of experiment and theory outside EE must always be used, else there is misdirection of the experimental phenomenology as claiming it is already something in EE that is well-understood.

    Some words in the theoretical foundations area:

    First, please, please promote extracting and stating the assumptions of a given theoretical model and then evaluating those assumptions in view of modern physics. We've seen almost none of that by the overunity community at large, particularly by those who set themselves up as "judges" of whether a proposed system is "valid". In this arena, anyone who is not discussing the specific foundations assumptions in the CEM/EE model isn't validly working in the overunity field, because that EE standard model absolutely prohibits extracting and using excess EM energy from the active vacuum/curved spacetime environment. Now, if something is possible after all, but the standard model forbids it, then obviously the standard model has some errors somewhere that must be found and corrected. And when one discusses one or more of the invalid assumptions found in the old model, it is important to give the technical citations where physicists have dealt with that, if they have. If it's already proven in the hard literature, so much the better.

    Another example is the source charge problem. Since all EM energy occurs as freely flowing streams of photons from their associated source charges, and there is no observable energy input into these charges, then this is the fundamental problem in overunity systems and in the entire area (and in fact, in all of electrodynamics). The lowly charge continually produces negative entropy, totally in violation of the second law of thermodynamics. That violates all the CEM/EE model assumptions. So one has to be able to deal with the problem of a real system that produces continuous negative entropy. If one does not know that nonequilibrium thermodynamics already recognizes several areas that allow violation of the old second law at will, then one knows little or nothing of the basis for overunity systems taking their excess energy from the vacuum environment. Well, how many people in the overunity community have said anything at all regarding the source charge problem? How many have or are discussing the terrible known flaws in the CEM/EE model? How many have listed those flaws? Very, very few. Indeed, most of the community unfortunately doesn't know the precise difference between thermodynamic efficiency and thermodynamic coefficient of performance. They are two very, very different things, even when their numerical values are equal. So one of the things in the theoretical field that is required, is a very careful and deeply penetrating lexicon.

    In short, if we are ever to have a legitimate overunity field, we must have some sharp young fellows (preferably grad students working on their doctoral thesis and some young post docs) digging into these areas. In the absence of standard funding for such, it behooves the serious researchers in the overunity area to fill in the gap until the orthodox scientific community bends and gets on with it.

    And one must be very wary of the insidious errors planted in one's mind by the conventional EE education process. E.g., everyone talks about "drawing power from the source". Now put on a rigorous foundations hat and think about that stupid statement. Power is rigorously the time rate of performing work. Work is rigorously the change of form of energy (note how difficult it is to pull that rigorous definition out of the morass). Work and energy are totally different aspects: The amount of energy that is changed in form at some place, and in some way, is equal to the work done at that place, obviously. And since there will be a rate of doing that work (energy form changing) there, then there is a "power" being "produced" there. But not many of the overunity community clearly understands that only energy and energy flow are drawn (received) from the source, because "power" is the time-rate of changing the form of some energy, and so all power obviously occurs only at that place where the energy form is being changed (which produces what we call "work").

    Further, there are absolutely no EM force fields in empty space - who says that? Feynman says so in his three volumes of sophomore physics, Wheeler says it, the foundations scientists such as Margenau say it, etc. So one must get away from the force fields (in charged matter) limitation since they are not the primary EM fields as produced in space. How many persons in the overunity field are tangling with that part of the overunity problem? Very few indeed.

    So since we are all embarked on a novel voyage demanding a new model to adequately explain and capture it, in the theoretical area we must struggle fiercely with foundations and the errors in the old 1880s foundations of the CEM/EE model we were and are all taught.

    Finally, one must range widely into modern physics (most of which was not even born yet when the old 1880s CEM/EE model was stuck together and finalized) to find the keys to how the present "electrical power model" errs and what changes must be made. Here one of the shocking things is that Lorentz arbitrarily symmetrized the equations circa 1892, thereby arbitrarily discarding all asymmetrical Maxwellian systems. All the university EE departments, professors, and textbooks continue to arbitrarily symmetrize those equations and thereby arbitrarily discard all asymmetrical Maxwellian systems in nature. And here we are, in the overunity community, and we are actually seeking to build asymmetrical systems, which are the only kind that accept and freely use additional EM energy from the vacuum/spacetime environment. It means that our very first requirement is always how to break (and use the breakage) Lorentz symmetry so artificially imposed on the present EE model.

    Some words in the phenomenology area.

    Here one seeks careful measurements, and always a good knowledge of what is being measured. A couple examples will be given. Since we seek to violate the old second law of thermodynamics, then one real clue is to hold in mind those areas pointed out specifically by the nonequilibrium thermodynamicists that do allow such second law violation at will. Since one of these areas is sharp gradients (which are not well understood at all, either experimentally or theoretically), then in using sharp gradients and evaluating the resulting phenomenology that results, one must simultaneously (and theoretically) examine what a "sharp gradient of energy density" does across a small region of space/vacuum. One of the things one can likely and very easily get is a sharp lifting of electrons from the Dirac sea (made of holes filled with electrons), so that a surge of excess electron current momentarily occurs in the direction the current already was going before we attempted to change it with that sharp gradient. That electron current surge is detectable - e.g., in the magnetic Wankel engine's killing of its back mmf - and usually called the Lenz law effect. What is not known or usually examined experimentally is that the emptied holes can and often do exist for awhile, and they are negative-mass-energy electrons. (They are the so-called dark matter, being produced by sharp gradient processes in the cosmos, that the astrophysicists are so strongly pursuing and seeking). They move as a current in the opposite direction from the normal electrons. As source charges, these holes produce negative energy EM fields and potentials also - the so-called dark energy that the astrophysicists are so anxiously seeking. Hence the Sweet device, which produced mostly negative energy output and Dirac sea hole currents, could be "pushed" to produce practical antigravity on the bench.

    If one is not careful, one will use a symmetrical circuit so that these hole currents wind up back at the input section, thereby swallowing up many incoming electrons in the flow of current input by the external source of energy to the device. In the improper EE vernacular, the arriving holes "eat incoming power" (ugh!), so that electrons and holes combine to form just empty Dirac sea vacuum again. But that appears to the external source as an extra load directly in the input section, and it will wipe out the overunity operation (the asymmetry) one might otherwise obtain, since it re-symmetrizes the circuit. So anyone experimenting with sharp gradients can find them very useful, but one must be very cautious as to how he handles the grounding etc. Otherwise, the relatively unknown Dirac sea hole current will always wipe out his best efforts.

    Here the conventional literature also contains an assumption that is erroneous. It is widely assumed that a Dirac hole is a positron, which is absolutely false. The truth is that Dirac hated negative energy, and much of his work was an attempt to get rid of it. He failed, hence buried the negative energy in his Dirac sea hole. (As a source charge, the Dirac hole produces negative energy EM fields and potentials, while a positron produces positive energy EM fields and potentials). He steered physicists away from considering the negative energy and negative mass aspects, by pointing out that the hole will be filled or move away, leaving an excess positive charge in the lattice, which will be observed as a positron. That is not at all the hole which moved away or ate an electron from the Drude electron gas.

    As can be seen, the phenomenology experiments need much theoretical study outside normal EE, to even know and understand what is really occurring in some of the most useful but least understood phenomena. Those who wish to share and help their fellow researchers, and who strive mightily to understand such phenomenology from a more advanced physics standpoint than the EE model, should try to share it as straightforwardly as possible.

    And we wish to point out that there is a vast "extra" EM phenomenology in physics, scattered everywhere, that is beyond the old standard EE. Some of it deals directly with excess energy in or from the active environment - as does the Aharonov-Bohm effect used in the MEG. There are some 20,000 papers in the literature on the AB effect, its generalization to the Berry phase, and its further generalization to the geometric phase. Some of that vast literature - and all those experiments and the phenomenology - has to be understood by anyone who would build a MEG. In the MEG, one does not have to worry about the production and availability of excess energy from the uncurled A-potential in space just outside the B-field localization area. Indeed, one has to worry about the surplus of excess E-field energy that is received by dA/dt = - E , radiating into everything in the MEG from that surrounding environment once perturbed. This yields a great variety of multi-phase energy pulses input to the MEG, and re-radiated from point to point in the MEG itself. It is the control and additive synchronization of these excess free multi-phase signals that is the engineering research problem remaining. It is certainly doable, but developing it is very expensive, uses measurement equipment outside the normal EE category, and demands the use of some real AB specialists and specialists in the Russian system of control. It's a straightforward but highly expensive nonlinear R&D problem.

    Anyway, my hat is off to the fellows who try to organize all this "overunity" area - a field that is not yet a developed scientific field - and do it properly and scientifically. That is a formidable job in itself. But it is absolutely necessary, if we are to progress along a scientific road rather than "pronouncements" from self-appointed persons who never even cite (and appear not to have read) the physics literature, and who most often do not even know the difference between COP and efficiency.

    Very best wishes in all your stringent and laborious efforts, and may the Creator reward you with great success. The organization work is absolutely necessary, and it is very warming to see it starting and progressing. We really don't care who does it or who does it first, just as long as it gets done and into production, and out there on the world market. It will almost certainly only get done long after this old dog is dead and gone. But it is very important to give the best advice and insight possible to the young researchers coming along.


    Tom Bearden



    Security Code: Security Code
    Type Security Code

    Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.

    Related Links
    · More about Science
    · News by vlad

    Most read story about Science:
    100 miles on 4 ounces of water?

    Article Rating
    Average Score: 5
    Votes: 4

    Please take a second and vote for this article:

    Very Good


     Printer Friendly Printer Friendly

    "The Fundamentals Necessary To Understand Overunity and Free Energy" | Login/Create an Account | 2 comments | Search Discussion
    The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

    No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register

    Re: The Fundamentals Necessary To Understand Overunity and Free Energy (Score: 1)
    by vlad on Monday, December 05, 2005 @ 23:20:28 MST
    (User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com

    Would you mind publishing this post of Leslie's as well?

    I would prefer to link to your site as a permanent item, rather than have the entire text on a directory page. I'd post it at PESN, but am short on time right now. I plan to feature this in a couple of days in our news.

    Keep up the great work.


    (The following statement was issued by New Energy Congress member, Leslie R. Pastor, on Dec. 5, 2005)

    Two of The Brightest Lights Shine Forth in the Realm of Modern Physics Currently

    Searching for Isaac Newton, James Clerk Maxwell, or for that matter Albert Einstein is a sheer impossibility, since they have long since departed from our Earthly realm. They merely exist, as mere memories, or as an after-thought, when referring to their various equations, F=MA, E=MC^2, or the unification of electricity and magnetism giving us electromagnetic waves [light]. But they have remained steadfast pillars as a bulwark supporting our known 'sciences.' They are gratefully acknowledged for the sheer genius, they have bestowed upon us. Others, from a previous generation [Nikola Tesla] developed our industrial base from their discoveries.

    But today we have furthered their reach, we have extended their 'science,' indeed, we have formulated newer 'novelties of fact' from the 'minds' of their fresh discoveries. The ability to lower the ground state of the hydrogen atom is a significant accomplishment. Indeed the resultant release of vast quantities of plasma energy from those reactions is mind-boggling. The resultant creation of a new form of matter astounds one's credulity let alone belief. But, to further our incredulity, we also have newer 'unification' examples that seem to verify, indeed support, such 'novelty of fact.' This would tend to provoke us to toss such affirmations into the refuse bin. But...........

    Dr. Randell Lee Mills, [MD, Ph.D, Harvard, MIT, Summa Cum Laude,] http://www.blacklightpower.com/ the father of the 'hydrino' not only accomplished the lowering of the ground state of the hydrogen atom. He has earned the respect, admiration and acknowledgement of over sixty (60) university and research labs worldwide. He has received support from some of the most astute financial houses in the economic world. He is one of the greatest minds to grace this planet since, Newton, Maxwell and Einstein.

    Dr. Myron Wyn Evans http://www.aias.us/ recently received an 'historic' civil list pension from Her Majesty Elizabeth II, the Queen of England for his 'Unified Field Theory.' This is a magnificent and rare accomplishment that only five (5) previous historic men of science/letters have achieved: (1) Michael Faraday, (2) James Prescott Joule, (3) Lord Byron, (4) Lord Tennyson, (5) William Wordsworth.

    Both Mills and Evans sustain James Clerk Maxwell's original 'unified field theory' enabling us to discover 'energy' systems not hitherto acknowledged as acceptable to the 'scientific' community. Both of these superlative gentlemen have 'breathe' new life into our tired planet, giving us hope for the future of all mankind. Einstein would be proud of their achievements, since they, together, have furthered his reach.

    Incidentally, both of these 'gentlemen' have verified Thomas E. Bearden, and his Motionless Electromagnetic Generator. Their 'unified field theories together support and sustain 'overunity' and 'energy from the vacuum' systems. And by inference, these same two gentlemen sustain Nikola Tesla's initial discoveries as well.

    All the Best,
    Leslie R. Pastor

    PS: For those 'educated idiots' who rant and rave regarding the impossibility of 'perpetual motion,' let me silence them once and for all, by stating unequivocally, that Perpetual Motion is Sir Isaac Newton's FIRST LAW OF MOTION. Perpetual Motion is not only a possibility, IT IS REALITY throughout the known UNIVERSE enabling Nikola Tesla to make his now famous statement regarding the 'wheelworks of nature.'

    Randell Mills and Blacklight Power

    Directory: Blacklight Power

    Blacklight Power Management

    A New Physics Paradigm

    Eugene Mallove Answers Robert Park: Voodoo Science, INDEED!

    On Extracting Electromagnetic Energy From the Vacuum [EFTV]

    Myron Wyn Evans: Alpha Institute of Advanced Study

    Fact OU is Suppressed: The Control Paradigm Enforces This Policy

    Extracting Energy From the Vacuum is Just A Drop In The Ocean

    The Assault on Alternative Energy Systems (Score: 1)
    by vlad on Sunday, December 11, 2005 @ 17:54:53 MST
    (User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com
    Message: New Energy Congress
    Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 14:04:10 -0500
    From: "Leslie R. Pastor"
    Subject: Dale Pond Acknowledges Tom Valone: The Assault on Alternative Energy Systems opposed to Oil and Nuclear Energy

    Several years back, when the First International Conference On Free Energy was being attempted by Thomas Valone, Dale Pond responded to Valone's invitation http://www.svpvril.com/cofe.html [www.svpvril.com] objecting to the use of SSN's as 'official' ID's. Dale Pond was vindicated, and those SSN's were not required, simply, presenting a photo [Driver's license] ID was sufficient. Today, I doubt that such ID's would suffice to enter 'Official' functions. In any event Dale finally discovered what had happened to Mr. Valone, when he read my recent post, vindicating Mr. Valone in a recent http://users.erols.com/iri/ValonePatentOfficeDecision.htm [users.erols.com] Arbitration Decision. Dale Pond is the host for http://www.svpvril.com/dalebio.html [www.svpvril.com] Sympathetic Vibratory Physics, a forum, that was initially visited by Antony C. Sutton and Jeane Manning http://prop1.org/thomas/peacefulenergy/9808.atlantisrising.htm [prop1.org] at its initial inception. Hence, my interest in Mr. Pond and Ms. Manning. http://www.atlantisrising.com/issue4/ar4topten.html [www.atlantisrising.com]

    At the time, Dale, neither understood, nor recognized the ramification, or for that matter the consequence, of the actions taken by Mr. Valone. Mr. Valone was to pay a heavy price for his audacity in attempting to circumvent the intransigence of 'officialdom.' His recent Arbitrator's decision not only vindicated him, restoring him to his job at the Patent Office at the US Dept of Commerce, but it also revealed the significant 'skullduggery' associated with Mr. Valone's forced removal in the first place. I gave a scathing account of the hidden 'skullduggery' http://groups.yahoo.com/group/endsecrecy/message/6266 [groups.yahoo.com] that is performed behind the scenes upon unsuspecting personages. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FlyingSaucerMachine/message/477 [groups.yahoo.com]

    The Reality is 'Crystal' Clear: No one will be allowed to establish any alternative 'energy' system that opposes 'official' Washington DC policy. All 'novelty of fact' discoveries dealing with 'overunity' and 'free energy' are strictly 'verboten.' Thomas S. Kuhn, has been vindicated regarding 'novelty of fact' discoveries http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/Kuhn.html [www.des.emory.edu] dealing with subject-matter that clearly shows http://www.cheniere.org/misc/oulist.htm [www.cheniere.org] the reality of 'more energy out than in' systems.

    Tom Bearden http://www.cheniere.org/toc.html [www.cheniere.org] and I have had numerous email discussions regarding such systems. They are REAL, but have been continuously suppressed, unless they benefit the 'control' paradigm, such as the recent 'cold fusion' discoveries conducted by the US Navy, which clearly reveal the 'creation' of TRITIUM at room temperature via LENR/CANR procedures. Tritium, under 'normal' process and procedure is a difficult 'application' to achieve. But the Pons/Fleischmann cold fusion experiments [which have been duplicated successfully worldwide] created the by-products of helium and tritium at 'room temperature by-passing the http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/030904a.htm [www.cheniere.org] coulomb barrier. The 'control' paradigm will ultimately allow some aspects of 'cold fusion' to prevail, because it benefits them, namely, the 'cheap' manufacture of 'helium' and 'tritium' from the [cold fusion] LENR/CANR procedure.

    Access to the appropriate 'information' and 'structure' of the 'control' paradigm's methodology is important in understanding how and why this kind of 'skullduggery' transpires. For them "OPENNESS" is not an option. They have 'vested' and 'powerful' interests to defend and competition is a 'non sequitur' in their statements of "OPENNESS."

    The exercise of 'free enterprise' and of the 'scientific method' is an absolute 'fraud,' practiced by the 'control' paradigm. There is no freedom for honest discovery within the United States of America. This has been proven over and over, again and again. And this is particularly sad, for we are headed for Oblivion is we do not attempt to extricate ourselves from those who wish to remain within the past. We are currently involved in a costly and dangerous war to guaranty access to a very limited resource, that will ultimately run out within the next decade. We already have the answers, if, we allow our young scientists and engineers access to information that has already been provided by Feynmann and Bearden.

    If you take the time to connect the dots, you will recognize the pattern of deception and obfuscation from the true facts.

    All the Best,
    Leslie R. Pastor

    PS: Only those aspects of 'cold fusion' will be allowed to be developed, that sustain and enhance the existing 'nuclear' energy paradigm: such as 'helium and tritium.' This is a significant scandal, because it shows a clear and present danger in patterning all scientific research into a specific 'dogma' and 'retinue' of 'precision' that clearly 'surgically' removes any semblance of truthful scientific enquiry, which would lead to significant and expansive freedom in energy development and freedom for all of us, unencumbered and unfettered by outside influences, thus saving our most valuable resource: human life.

    PSS: In a recent email discussion with Tom Bearden he revealed significant information regarding our discussion:
    Mind is Not Matter http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/index.html [www.cheniere.org] His answer to my question is provocative to say the least. And that is a good thing, for we need a good dose of reality. I highly, recommend, from my review of Tom Bearden's book: Oblivion, that everyone who values knowledge on this subject to get a copy. We appear to be created 'beings' who have been [significantly] 'engineered' for specific 'designed' purposes. Intelligent Design intelligently interposes inconclusive information inferred by Darwin's original 'theory,' with an alternative opposite option oppressed by opposing opponents opposed to origination theories other than 'Ascent of Man' dogmas.

    A New Physics Paradigm
    The Coulomb Barrier
    http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nucene/coubar.html [hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coulomb_barrier [en.wikipedia.org]
    Overcoming The Coulomb Barrier
    http://burro.astr.cwru.edu/Academics/Astr221/StarPhys/coulomb.html [burro.astr.cwru.edu]
    Gene Mallove/Tom Bearden: Regarding the Coulomb Barrier
    http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/032104a.htm [www.cheniere.org]
    Tom Bearden: On the death of Gene Mallove
    http://www.pureenergysystems.com/news/2004/05/27/TomBeardenGrievesMalloveLoss/ [www.pureenergysystems.com]
    New Report Establishes Case for Cold Fusion
    Foundations of ElectroMagnetism
    http://www.cheniere.org/images/EMfndns1/index.html [www.cheniere.org]
    A Science of Pure Time Is Possible
    http://www.cheniere.org/time/index.html [www.cheniere.org]
    James Clerk Maxwell
    James Clerk Maxwell's original 1873 Electromagnetic Theory
    Foundations of Physics Letters, Vol. 14, No. 1, 2001 15 Authors
    Explanation of the Motionless Electromagnetic Generator with O(3)
    The Aharanov-Bohm Effect
    A Partial List of Successful Documented Over-Unity and Negative Resistor Devices and Processes
    Healing By Reversing the Time-Domain [time-reverse waves] Antoine Priore et al.
    http://www.cheniere.org/patent%20application/claim.htm [www.cheniere.org]


    All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2002-2016 by ZPEnergy. Disclaimer: No content, on or affiliated with ZPEnergy should be construed as or relied upon as investment advice. While every effort is made to ensure that the information contained on ZPEnergy is correct, the operators of ZPEnergy make no warranties as to its accuracy. In all respects visitors should seek independent verification and investment advice.
    Keywords: ZPE, ZPF, Zero Point Energy, Zero Point Fluctuations, ZPEnergy, New Energy Technology, Small Scale Implementation, Energy Storage Technology, Space-Energy, Space Energy, Natural Potential, Investors, Investing, Vacuum Energy, Electromagnetic, Over Unity, Overunity, Over-Unity, Free Energy, Free-Energy, Ether, Aether, Cold Fusion, Cold-Fusion, Fuel Cell, Quantum Mechanics, Van der Waals, Casimir, Advanced Physics, Vibrations, Advanced Energy Conversion, Rotational Magnetics, Vortex Mechanics, Rotational Electromagnetics, Earth Electromagnetics, Gyroscopes, Gyroscopic Effects

    PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.