Explanation of John Bedini's Formation of
Negative Resistors in Batteries
By Tom Bearden 4-26-00
First we must include the usual warning that the experimenter assumes all
legal responsibilities for his experiments, at his own volition. This
author assumes no responsibilities or liabilities for such actions.
John has kindly given his permission for me to explain his use of the lead
acid battery and how he gets the vacuum to contribute excess energy to the
battery and to the circuit. I'll discuss the battery a bit, very informally
because I don't have a lot of time to go back and look up all the
references, etc. and prepare a formal paper. But we'll cover the gist of it
so you can understand how John uses batteries and switches them in his
units, and why he does it the way he does. We'll point out the processes
that are involved in his methodology, and why he can use a lead acid
battery to produce COP1.0 in perfect compliance with the laws of physics,
thermodynamics, and the conservation of energy law. One must use a
combination of electrodynamics and particle physics to grasp these
processes and mechanisms, because classical EM theory does not include the
active vacuum interaction, even though it's been clearly proven
(theoretically and experimentally) in particle physics for decades.
Vacuum energy already powers every electrical circuit and every electrical
load today, and always has done so from the beginning. Contrary to the
received view, extraction of usable EM energy from the vacuum is the
easiest thing in all the world to do, and it is ubiquitous to all our
circuits and power systems. All the coal, oil, and natural gas ever burned
in powerplants added not a single watt to the powerline. All that energy
input from the fuel combustion was used only to continuously restore the
source dipoles in the generators, dipoles that our scientists and engineers
unwittingly design the external circuits to keep destroying. The source
dipole, once established, was and is a "negative resistor" of enormous
power that has powered every electrical circuit and load from the
beginning. As we shall see, Bedini discovered how to make a negative
resistor right inside the battery itself.
Every electrodynamicist already assumes (and utilizes) the fact that you
can freely change the potential energy of any EM system, at will. It's
called "regauging". E.g., Jackson's Classical Electrodynamics, second
edition (and any other important EM book one chooses), applies arbitrary
Lorentz "regauging" to the Maxwell-Heaviside equations, changing them to a
new set erroneously said to be identical to the others in every way. They
are not. Specifically, that little change (symmetrical regauging after
first Lorenz in 1867 and later H.A. Lorentz), simply discards all open
Maxwellian systems far from thermodynamic equilibrium with the active
vacuum. In short, it arbitrarily discards all overunity EM systems,
including those that could permissibly capture and use energy from the
active vacuum to power themselves and their loads simultaneously. A priori,
such Maxwellian systems are far from thermodynamic equilibrium in the
vacuum flux -- much as a windmill is out of equilibrium with the wind's
energy exchange with it.
First, to understand John's work one must be aware that there are several
currents in a lead acid battery, not just one. For our purposes we will
need just two: the heavy lead-type ion current in the battery, and the
electron current in the battery but also commuting into the external
circuit.
Note particularly that the electrons communicate between the inside of the
battery (e.g., the plates) and the external circuit, but the lead ions do
not. There is thus an interface and a sharp separation between the electron
current and the ion current.
Here's the point everyone is missing. Check the mass-to-charge ratio of
each of the two currents. (I have it somewhere, from calculating it years
ago, but have no time to search for it again. So someone should look up the
numbers again and add them up; it's straightforward.). As I recall, the
lead ions' m/q ratio is several hundred thousand times the m/q ratio of the
electrons. For our purposes here, all we need to know is that the m/q ratio
for the lead ions is very much bigger than the m/q ratio for the electrons.
So there is obviously a hysteresis (time delay) in the response of the
massive ion current to far less massive electron currents that interact and
try to change the ion current and its momentum. This time-delay in ion
response to electron urging can be adroitly manipulated and used to cause
the vacuum to add energy to the ions and also to the electrons. In short,
the delay can be manipulated to freely "regauge" the system, freely
changing its potential energy, and dramatically increasing how much
potential energy is available for battery recharging and how much is
available for powering the external circuit (loads and losses).
Instead of thinking of the energy John inputs to the battery as the
"powering" energy, one must think of it as "triggering" and "timing" energy
which initiates certain other key interactions to occur. These additional
interactions then add lots of additional energy to the ions and the
electrons, all for free or nearly so. In short, John "switches'" and
"triggers" certain kinds of vacuum interactions, including the highly
specialized formation of a negative resistor in the battery itself. He then
"triggers" that negative resistor in certain ways to increase its
functioning even further.
John's method does the following: (1) It forms a true negative resistor in
a most unexpected way, inside a common lead acid battery, (2) it uses that
negative resistor to extract excess energy from the vacuum and furnish it
both to the ions in charging mode and to the electrons in load powering
mode, and (3) it adds several other stimuli which increase the
amplification of the negative resistor and further enhance the effect,
increasing the excess energy extracted from the vacuum and collected in the
charging process and also in the powering process.
Specifically, the delay in ion response can be manipulated to place the
battery in ion recharging mode while the signal pulse electrons are
simultaneously placed in external circuit powering mode. By manipulating
the hysteresis and adroitly timing the electron pulses and pulse widths,
one can break the forced Lorentz symmetry of the excitation discharge in a
usually closed current loop containing both the battery's source dipole and
the external load. This is possible since John's method deliberately opens
the loop so that the vacuum energy enters freely, increasing the
potentialization (energy collection) upon the ions and the electrons as
well.
Suppose we "hit" a battery's terminals with an instantaneous leading edge
rise of a pulse of electrons and potential. Let us assume the "hit" is in
the "battery-charging" mode. The electrons drive in instantly, trying to
force the heavy ions to start moving in the charging direction. For a
moment the lead ions just sit there, and then very slowly (compared to the
electrons!) start to reluctantly move in the recharging mode. During that
"ion response lag" time, the electrons continue to furiously rush in and
pile-up on the plates. The charge density sharply increases on the plates
in that pile-up where the charges are "squeezing" together (clustering). So
now we have a much higher potential suddenly rising in the squeezed charge
cluster, because of the increased charge density arising there.
Refer to E.T. Whittaker, "On the Partial Differential Equations of
Mathematical Physics, Mathematische Annalen, Vol. 57, 1903, p. 333-355.
Whittaker shows us that a "scalar" potential is not at all what they taught
us in EM theory 101. If one hasn't read Whittaker 1903, one will need to do
so.
As Whittaker shows, the scalar potential (actually its reaction cross
section is what even Whittaker is decomposing) identically is a harmonic
set of bidirectional longitudinal EM wavepairs, where each pair is a phase
conjugate pair. In short, a "scalar" potential identically is a
multivectorial, multiwave entity (but comprised of longitudinally polarized
EM waves, and those waves come in bidirectional pairs!). In fact, because
in the phase conjugate pair one wave is "time-forward" and the other is
"time-reversed", time-reversal and time-forward perturbations occur paired
and simultaneously in nature's electrodynamics. This is erroneously
omitted, however, in Maxwellian electrodynamics theory.
Anyway, the "scalar" potential isn't even a scalar entity. Since Whittaker
1903, the proof has been in the literature nearly a century and it has just
been ignored!
Since the QM vacuum contains and is a virtual particle flux (that's one way
to model it) and thus contains energy, it is (or can be modeled as) a
special kind of "scalar" potential. Every EM potential is in fact a change
to the vacuum energy density. Any EM potential in a circuit is a change to
the ambient vacuum potential or to some intermediate potential that is.
Rigorously, any increased EM potential in a circuit is a special kind of
negative resistor, since extra bidirectional, flowing EM energy from the
vacuum has been added to the circuit. However, electrodynamicists have not
recognized that regauging produces a true negative resistor. Very large
bidirectional energy flows (very large potentials) can be freely added to
the circuit at any time. However, to use these negative resistors so that
we extract usable energy from them, we have to learn how to more carefully
use bidirectional potentials so that we apply them adroitly in two opposing
directions simultaneously.
No textbook or professor ever calculates the potential itself, but only its
reaction cross section. Consider that for awhile; it's quite rigorous. We
have been and are taught to calculate only how much energy is diverged from
the potential, around a little unit point static charge (assumed), and that
little "swirl-around" energy is then supposed to be "the potential". It
isn't. The little swirl-around is the energy diverged from the potential.
Calling that "the potential" is analogous to mistaking a tiny little
whirlpool in a river as the entire river. Same error.
For more than a century the electricians have erroneously "defined" the
scalar potential "at a point" as the amount of energy diverged from it
around a little fixed unit point static charge at that point The amount of
energy "swirled or diverted from all those bidirectional LWs around a
little unit point static charge" fixed at a point, does indeed have a
scalar magnitude. For fixed conditions, there's a fixed amount of energy in
the "swirl-around" at any moment. But that "magnitude of the energy in the
swirl" isn't the potential; it's what's diverted from the potential.
Obviously it's a major non sequitur to mistake "the" potential for a tiny
fraction of itself.
As a set of bidirectional LWs, the potential is an ensemble of mighty,
rushing rivers of EM energy, with paired rivers flowing in opposite
directions. From those rushing rivers of energy comprising any nonzero
"static" potential, you can collect as much energy as you wish, just by
adding more intercepting/collecting charges. The equation is already known
and very simple: W = (phi)q, where W is the total energy collected
(diverged) from a potential of reaction cross section phi, upon
intercepting charges q. Fix the phi to a constant value, then add as much q
as is needed to have W reach any value you wish. One can collect a billion
watts of power from a millivolt, e.g., given enough intercepting charges q.
The "magnitude" of the potential isn't fixed at any point, because the
potential is a set of flows involving the entire vacuum of the universe.
Anyway, back to our battery that we just "popped" with an electron pulse.
Now we have a higher potential in that pileup of electrons onto the
interface with the ions, urging the ions forward. Well, the potential
energy being collected on those ions (i.e., diverged around them from the
potential's multiwaves) is given by W = (phi) q, where W is the energy
collected from the new and dramatically increased potential with reaction
cross section (phi), upon charges q -- in this case, upon the ions. And
also upon the piled up electrons on the circuit side of the battery plate,
because the waves comprising the potential run in both directions.
Set a potential in the middle of a transmission line, and it takes off like
two scalded hogs in both directions simultaneously, thereby revealing its
bidirectional vectorial nature. The new, increased potential from the pile-
up at the interface between electrons and ions in the battery takes off
like two scalded hogs in both directions -- into the battery onto the ions
and out into the external circuit onto the electrons.
But that increased potential at the pileup is actually a change to the
ambient potential of the vacuum. It is part of the vacuum and a
reorganization of it, reaching across the universe in all directions (or
speeding out there in all directions at light speed).
Since the internal LW waves comprising the increased potential at the pile-
up are bidirectional, we have added energy to both the electrons out there
in the circuit and to the ions in there in the battery. Since the electrons
react (relax and move) so much faster than the ions, we can now be drawing
power in the external circuit and its load, due to the instant response of
the overpotentialized electrons, while we are still urging those
overpotentialized ions into motion in a recharging direction.
For the purist, electrons really move on the average with only a very small
drift velocity in the circuit, often on the order of a few inches per hour.
However, that average "drift" is comprised of an enormous distribution of
electron velocities, collisions, etc. So what we have actually done is
dramatically change that distribution underlying the drift velocity. The
"current" in a circuit is not as simple as the physical movement of
electrons like marbles through a hollow pipe, even though loosely one
usually uses that kind of language.
I sent you the IC-2000 paper, in which we pointed out that there is no such
thing as an isolated charge anyway, when you consider the shadowing virtual
charges of opposite sign in the vacuum that cluster around it. That is
already well-established in QM theory. So an "isolated charge" really is a
set of dipoles, where each dipole is comprised of a piece of the observed
charge and one of the clustering virtual charges. Each of those dipoles
contains a potential between its ends, and thus identically generates a
bidirectional LW flow across the universe, altering (and structuring and
organizing) the entire vacuum.
In particle physics, it has been known for more than 40 years (couple of
Nobel Prizes awarded and all that) that any dipole is a broken symmetry in
the fierce virtual energy exchange between the active vacuum and the dipole
charges. By definition of broken symmetry, this means that some of that
virtual disordered energy continuously absorbed from the vacuum by the
dipole's charges, is NOT radiated back as disordered virtual photons.
Instead, it is self-ordered by the charges. Open systems not in equilibrium
with their active environment -- in this case the active vacuum -- are
permitted to do that, and a dipole is such an open system in disequilibrium
with the active vacuum. So the re-ordered component of the energy emitted
from the charges is radiated back as observable EM field energy flow, which
does interact macroscopically and observably with charges.
Rigorously, this "charges pile-up" at the plate interface between electrons
and ions has asymmetrically self-regauged the system including both the
recharging ions inside the battery and the electron current out in the
external circuit now forced into powering mode. The reorganized vacuum has
added excess energy to the entire system, the excess being energy which was
extracted from the vacuum by that pile-up of charges, each with its
associated clustered virtual charges, so that the charge pile-up acts as a
cluster of dipoles.
We have specified a situation and process which asymmetrically self-
regauges the system, using excess energy from the vacuum. The increased
potential at the pile-up is in fact a direct change to the entire vacuum.
It is an organization of the entire vacuum. To the system the change in the
vacuum is negentropic because the vacuum energy has been organized into a
bidirectional set of flows. Such self-organization is permissible in an
open system not in equilibrium with its external active environment. All
this is based on rigorous, proven physics, but it is not in the hoary old
classical electrodynamics, which contains a great many foundations errors
and omissions.
The set of bidirectional energy flows involving the entire vacuum and
comprising that increased potential at the pile-up, represents a re-
organization of the local vacuum to a more ordered state. In short,
negentropy. The pile-up of charges and its associated potential
(negentropic reorganization of the vacuum) constitute an active negative
resistor.
This is the way that John creates a negative resistor directly inside a
lead acid storage battery (and in several other kinds of batteries also).
The pile-up becomes a true negative resistor, extracting additional biwave
flowing energy from the external vacuum. The negative resistor receives
energy from the vacuum in that half of the unobserved internal LWs that
flow from every point in external space to the pile-up. The negative
resistor then sends that organized energy out into the "circuit" in that
half of the potential's internal LWs that flow out into the battery and in
the opposite direction into the external circuit and on out to every other
point in the universe.
One should again check Whittaker 1903 and think about that extra "pile-up"
potential as a harmonic set of bidirectional EM longitudinal wavepairs,
until one understands this active negative resistance effect clearly.
The absolutely permissible, justified, scientific result is that the energy
of the system is freely and dramatically increased (the system is regauged)
from the negentropic vacuum. The ions in that increased energy flow into
the battery take on more energy than we ourselves "input", with the excess
being taken from the reorganized vacuum by the action of the negative
resistor formed at the pile-up. The charges in the pile-up took on more
energy, taken from the vacuum, and the higher potential also flows at the
speed of light back out the terminals along the conductors, potentializing
the surface charges and increasing the intercepted energy diverged into the
conductors by the surface charges. Since a back-lash emf exists from the
higher potential at the back-up and the beginning potential in the external
circuit, current flows in the external circuit (1) in circuit-powering
mode, and (2) with greater energy collected upon the electrons from the
increased Poynting energy flow diverged into the circuit conductors.
John puts in some electrons and potential and makes a negative resistor.
The action of the negative resistor then overpotentializes both the
battery-charging ions and the circuit-powering electrons. The vacuum
furnishes the extra potential energy. So John now has lots more energy in
the circuit than he himself put in, both to recharge the battery and power
the load.
The net result is that the system eats its cake and has it too, courtesy of
having produced a negative resistor and tricked the active vacuum to
momentarily give it lots of excess energy (potential energy). It collects
some of that excess energy upon both the recharging ions and the circuit
electrons back-forced to power the circuit. Note that the formation of the
negative resistor actually produced in the external circuit a "back emf"
which is of the circuit powering type, even though in the battery the ion
current is still moving and accelerating in the charging position -
- exactly opposed to the electron current!
So the timing and negative resistor effect simultaneously introduce
additional energy extracted from the vacuum to (1) the battery charging
process, and (2) the load powering process in the external circuit.
Then we deliberately cut off the pulse sharply, with the ions now moving in
the charge direction and with the electrons in the external circuit
powering the load. The sharp cutoff rate produces a very interesting effect
here also, if we end it just precisely while most of the pile-up (and
higher potential) still exists at the plate-ion interface. In that case,
Lenz's law applies due to the sharp cutoff and it aids us, since
momentarily the negative resistor potential is even further dramatically
increased by the Lenz reaction! So even more potential energy momentarily
surges out onto the circuit electrons in the "powering the circuit" mode,
and even more potential energy simultaneously surges onto the ions in the
"charging the battery" mode.
The result of this second effect is that (1) the negative resistor is again
increased, (2) even more energy is furnished from the vacuum to the
battery-charging process, and (3) even more energy is furnished from the
vacuum to the load-powering process.
In short, the system suddenly and remarkably increases the negative
resistor effect, self-regauging itself for the second consecutive time, and
increasing the excess energy extracted from the vacuum!
This second surge of excess energy comes directly from the vacuum, from the
suddenly increased negative resistor, via those suddenly increased
bidirectional longitudinal EM wave energy flows between the pile-up and
every point in all the surrounding space. That's what a bidirectional set
of wavepairs means; observable energy flows from the pile-up (source
dipole) to every point in external space, and from every point in external
space virtual (complex) energy flows to the source dipole.
That is the second case where we cause the external circuit to be
"regauged" and change its potential energy freely, and we cause the
internal ions to be "regauged" and change their potential energy freely.
Again we accent that electrodynamicists already assume that any EM system
can freely change its energy at any time; it's called "regauging". It is
inexplicable why electrodynamicists have not focused upon actually
producing self-regauging circuits which asymmetrically discharge their
freely increased energy, as John has done, so that the dissipated energy is
used to recharge the battery while also powering the load. Instead, the
electrodynamicists continue to give us regauging circuits which
symmetrically discharge their freely increased energy, so that half the
dissipated energy is used to destroy the source dipole of the generator or
battery while the other half is dissipated in the external loads and
losses.
On the other hand, John uses half the excess regauging energy from the
negative resistor to restore the battery (source) dipole, and uses the
other half to power the load and losses simultaneously. So he
asymmetrically discharges the free excitation energy received from the
vacuum via the negative resistor.
But back to John's battery process. Now we have the Lenz effect pulse
finally removed and the ions moving in charging mode but slowing down now.
Since the Lenz law effect dies rapidly, we have a rapid resumption of
"draw" of electrons from the pile-up into the external circuit to power it.
But for a bit, the ions only start to slow and have not yet stopped
completely. They "overshoot" because of their sluggishness, and keep on
charging the battery a moment longer. During this third moment, the
external circuit is still being powered even though the battery is still in
charging mode.
When all these "excess energy" mechanisms are added, one finds that excess
energy can be collected from the vacuum by the negative resistor and used
appropriately to produce a system with a permissible overall COP1.0
performance. The dramatic difference in John's method, from the
conventional method, is that in John's method the same current through the
load does not pass back through the back emf of the source dipole negative
resistor to continually destroy it. On the contrary, he inverts the phase
of the current through the source dipole negative resistor to continually
restore it.
There are several other schemes that can be used at this point. If the
follow-on pulsing etc. is matched to again initiate the effects discussed,
one can continue to draw power in the circuit while charging the battery,
etc. for about a succession of the three periods of time: (1) the initial
hysteresis pileup, formation of the negative resistor, and associated
effects, (2) the following Lenz law reaction, increase of the negative
resistor, and associated effects, and (3) the follow-on period of
simultaneous charging the battery and powering the circuit from the pile-up
while the overshoot of the ions is still slowing and ending.
One trick John sometimes uses is to time the next pulse front to arrive
just at the time that the ions are almost but not quite stopped in their
"overshoot" charging mode and are preparing to reverse into discharge mode
(following the electrons in the external circuit, which are already in that
mode). With the exact timing, the whole situation starts over. There are
several other variations that John has also used and found effective.
In developing this methodology, John long ago built various controllers and
timers, and experimented with a variety of pulses, pulse widths, and timing
to get it all just right for a specific battery of interest. He had one
little battery-powered motor -- an inefficient little beast with only about
35-40% normal efficiency -- which continuously "ran off the battery"
seemingly (actually, off the excess energy from the negative resistor
created and manipulated in the battery) for a couple of years. The motor
represented a "load" continually being driven by the excess energy
extracted from the vacuum by the negative resistor continually created in
the battery. He recharged the battery and ran the motor directly off vacuum
energy, using the precise set of negative resistor effects just discussed.
John has freely shared his work with many researchers. E.g., an excellent
microwave switching engineer named Bill Nelson visited John, observed some
of John's devices working, and reasoned correctly that the motor was just a
load and played no part in producing the excess energy. So Nelson and
another engineer used an electric light bulb as the load, adjusted the
pulses and timing appropriately, and produced a little unit which kept its
battery charged while continuously illuminating the light bulb. John shared
his research with Jim Watson, who succeeded in developing a version that
powered a much larger motor (8 kW), which he demonstrated at one of the
Tesla conferences at Colorado Springs. Watson and his family were later to
mysteriously drop out of all contact, so that even his own financial backer
could not find him. Ron Cole visited John's lab often, and Ron and John
built several successful and similar devices together.
There are several other powering schemes that can be worked out, using the
negative resistor created inside the battery by splitting the current
phases. E.g., with the ions moving in discharge mode and the circuit being
powered, one can again introduce a sharp voltage pulse of electrons for
charging, onto the circuit. This of course invokes Lenz's law, dramatically
increasing the powering of the circuit and the energy upon the ions driving
the circuit powering. Now the pile-up occurs even stronger, because the
ions keep bearing down in charging mode with increased energy, while the
electrons are forced to keep boring in much more densely to oppose them,
yet on the other end the electrons are even more strongly powering the
circuit momentarily because of the increased regauging energy. So the pile-
up becomes even higher than before, increasing the potential of the pile-up
even more due to the "charge squeeze" effect being greater. In other words,
we make an even greater "negative resistor" at that pile-up. This will
greatly amplify the potential out into the circuit, and also greatly
increase the potential on the "powering" ions, so that the ions have more
energy to give to the pile-up and to the circuit, and so do the electrons
in the circuit. Again, when the "back-popping" pulse sharply cuts off on
the trailing edge, one gets a Lenz law effect of further increase, etc.
There are a great variety of useful excess energy schemes which can be
worked out and applied, all using the excess energy freely obtained from
the vacuum by the negative resistor created and manipulated in the battery.
Once one understands John's negative resistor effect and how one gets it,
how one increases it, and how one sustains it or repeats it rapidly, then
one can adjust that motor (or other load) and that battery to function as a
self-powering system, perfectly permissible by the laws of physics and
thermodynamics. Because of the negative resistor effect and its extraction
of excess energy from the vacuum, this open dissipative system can output
more energy than the chemical energy that is dissipated in the battery. In
fact, the chemical energy is not dissipated, but remains, when the timing
and negative resistance effects are properly adjusted. Then everything just
runs off the vacuum energy from the negative resistor.
The point is this. The system has two major currents greatly differing in
their momentum and responses, that can be exploited to get these negative
resistor effects., So why do all our theorists just continue to assume a
"simple current" in and through the battery? If one ignores the duality,
one will just mush around any transient negative resistor effect and the
effect will not help, because one will get it wrong as much as one gets it
right.
But if we know what is happening in there, and if we deliberately
manipulate the phenomena as John Bedini has done for years, we can make a
battery recharge itself at the same time that it is powering the external
circuit, because of a negative resistor formed in the battery and properly
manipulated. Actually the energy extracted from the vacuum is powering both
the battery's recharging and the circuit's loads and losses.
We point out that these negative resistor effects can in fact occur in a
battery that is almost completely discharged, and John has also
demonstrated such specific negative resistor formation and operation in a
nearly uncharged battery for a sustained period of time.
For ease in building and timing the system, John often prefers to use two
batteries and switch between them. He will charge one as ostensibly an
additional part of the load, but all the while adjusting his pulses in the
charging process to dramatically open the process and get the injection of
a lot of excess vacuum energy in there via similar phenomenology to what we
described above. Meantime, the other battery is powering the circuit
normally. Then he just switches, and recharges the first battery including
evoking the negative resistor effects in it, while using power from the
second, recharged battery. The amount of excess charging energy he tricks
the vacuum into giving him while charging the battery, is "free" energy he
can then use to power the system when he switches the recharged battery
into system-powering position. He continues to switch, which yields a self-
powering open dissipative system, freely extracting all its energy from the
active vacuum. In that case, he makes the charging battery charge a lot
faster by the negative resistor effects than just with the simple energy he
inputs in his pulsing and in his "normal charging currents" to the battery.
He "opens" that battery-charging process and subsystem the way we
described, so that the vacuum furnishes more than half the charging input
energy.
Now for the skeptics who love to quote the second law of classical
thermodynamics. Classical thermodynamics is equilibrium thermodynamics.
While the system is open and receiving excess energy from the vacuum, it is
far from equilibrium and does not have to obey the old equilibrium
thermodynamics with its infamous second law. Indeed, classical
thermodynamics does not even apply, including the second law. Here is a
magic truth: The energy of an open system not in equilibrium is always
greater than the energy of the same system in equilibrium. Bye-bye second
law of thermodynamics for non-equilibrium systems.
In John's systems, the thermodynamics of a system far from equilibrium with
its active environment (in this case, the active vacuum) rigorously
applies. As is well-known in that kind of thermodynamics, such an open
disequilibrium system is permitted to (1) self-order, (2) self-oscillate or
self-rotate, (3) output more energy than the operator himself inputs (the
excess is just taken from the active environment, in this case the vacuum),
(4) power itself and a load also (in that case, all the energy is taken
from the active environment, in this case the active vacuum), and (5)
exhibit negentropy. John's devices have exhibited all five effects for
years.
In other words, the laws of physics already permit this to happen. We just
have to correct the foolish old flawed notion in electrodynamics of what
powers the external circuit. Batteries and generators do not use the energy
input to them (generator shaft energy) or available to them (chemical
energy in the battery) to power the external circuit! I fully explain that
in the IC-2000 paper. The chemical energy available in a battery and the
shaft energy input to a generator are dissipated only to restore the source
dipole that our closed current loop power systems keep destroying by
design.
No laws of nature, laws of physics, or laws of thermodynamics are violated
by John's novel negative resistor approach. The conservation of energy law
is obeyed at all times, as of course is recognized for open dissipative
systems. As an example, Ilya Prigogine was awarded a Nobel Prize for his
contributions to nonequilibrium thermodynamics of systems similar to those
we are discussing.
I just wanted to set the record straight. You can make an overunity system
anytime you wish, with adroit use of a lead-acid battery (or two of them)
where you pay meticulous attention to the production and use of a negative
resistor inside the battery itself. The science is there and it is correct.
It's already in physics, but it isn't in the seriously flawed classical
electrodynamics. The full basis has been in the textbooks for decades, but
it has not been applied by EM power system designers. Instead, they
continue to ignore the active vacuum and the creation and manipulation of
negative resistors in batteries by current splitting and adroit
manipulation.
How many readers have thought of using the appreciably different response
times of the electron current and the ion current? How many professors have
thought of it? How many textbooks mention it? What EM text points out that
a scalar potential is actually a set of bidirectional longitudinal EM wave
energy flows, conditioning and organizing the entire vacuum? What paper in
a scientific journal contains it? One gets the point after only a moment's
reflection.
Now for the scientists, advanced engineers, and strategic planners. What is
needed to make all this quite rigorous is the development and usage of a
dual instrumentation system., We need to develop a proper instrumentation
system to measure and portray the ion current in the battery and its
actions, and simultaneously to measure and portray the electron current in
there at the interface. Then one can add the standard instruments to
monitor the electron current, voltage, phase angles, and power in the
external circuit.
Well, to get those two "internal" instrumentation systems, we need to
enlist some good electrochemists, who know about measuring things like
that, know about overpotentials on electrodes and plates and such,
understand all the internal chemical and ion reactions including their
energetics, and have worked out measurement techniques for such matters. To
an electrical engineer, the problem usually appears unsolvable (many, e.g.,
have no knowledge of overpotential theory, or of double surfaces theory, or
differentiating multiple current types in a battery, etc.).
We just need a really good straightforward and well-funded scientific
project by a good scientific team, to develop the instrumentation and
procedures, and then to perform enough experimentation to thoroughly
explore and measure the phenomenology in all its glory. Then the leading
theorists can produce a good theoretical model, including of the
interaction between vacuum energy and the circuit, while the developers
give us a good measurement and instrumentation system for precisely
measuring such systems. Once we get the experimentally-fitted theoretical
model and we have the instrumentation system, then we're off and running
with ordinary applied engineering, to design and build self-powering
battery-powered systems (actually as open systems adroitly extracting and
using energy from the ubiquitous vacuum) on a massive scale for the world
market.
Major universities and laboratories should fund such work as a matter of
great scientific priority. So should the National Science Foundation and
National Academy of Sciences, the Department of Energy, the private
research institutes, the Environmental Foundations, etc. If they do so,
then we'll all have overunity devices powering our automobiles and homes
and factories straightaway. And we will also take a giant stride toward
cleaning up the pollution of the biosphere.
We need, however, to stress again one shocking point above all else.
Batteries and generators do not themselves power their external circuits!
Please read that again, and do not miss the importance of what we are
saying. All that the dissipation of the shaft energy input to a generator
does, or dissipation of the chemical energy available in a battery does, is
perform work upon the internal charges to separate them and form the
negative resistor source dipole. Not a single joule of that dissipated
generator shaft energy or that battery's dissipated chemical energy goes
out onto the power line. Every electrical circuit and electrical load is
now and always has been powered by energy extracted directly from the
vacuum by the source dipole acting as a negative resistor due to its known
broken symmetry in the fierce vacuum energy flux.
To clearly understand that startling fact, we must temporarily set aside
the 136-year old flawed electrodynamics (Maxwell's seminal paper was given
in 1864), and turn to particle physics, because the old electrodynamicists
did not have an active vacuum in the equations, and it still isn't in
there.
In the latter 1950s, particle physicists discovered and experimentally
proved broken symmetry, and also that every dipole is a broken symmetry in
the continuous virtual energy exchange between vacuum and dipole charges.
The very definition of "broken symmetry" means that something virtual has
become observable. This means that part of that fierce, virtual, disordered
energy continually absorbed by the end charges of the dipole, is not re-
radiated as virtual, disordered energy -- but as observable, ordered
energy. In short, the ubiquitous source dipole is in fact a ubiquitous
negative resistor par excellence.
The source dipole, once made, is a true negative resistor that freely
extracts observable, usable field energy from the vacuum, and pours it out
through the terminals of the generator or battery. The outflowing energy
moves at light speed through all space surrounding the conductors of the
external circuit, and generally parallel to them. It's a tiny bit
convergent into the wires, because in the "sheath" or boundary layer of the
flow right down on the surface of the conductors, that part of the flow
strikes the surface charges and gets diverged into the wires to power up
the electrons and the circuit.
Every electrical circuit and every electrical load is and always has been
powered by energy extracted directly from the vacuum by the negative
resistor source dipole. That statement is fully justified in particle
physics, but not electrodynamics. The electrodynamicists and leaders of the
scientific community have refused to change the flawed foundations and gaps
in EM theory, even though a great deal has been learned since 1867 that
substantially changes the foundations assumptions used originally to
construct the theory.
The energy extracted by the source dipole from the vacuum sprays out of the
terminals of the battery or generator, filling all space around the
external conductors. A good illustration of this incredible energy flow is
shown in Kraus, Electromagnetics, Fourth Edition. The magnitude of the
energy flow extracted is so great as to boggle the imagination. In a simple
little circuit, it's about 10exp13 times as much as is intercepted in that
little "sheath flow" by the circuit and diverged into the circuit to power
it. Well, the enormity of that energy flow extracted from the vacuum by the
source dipole is totally mystifying and embarrassing, or it was highly
embarrassing back there in the 1880s.
And therein lies one of the greatest scientific faux pas of all time.
Energy flow through space was discovered independently by Heaviside and
Poynting and at about the same time. Poynting only thought of, and
accounted, the feeble little component of energy flow that actually entered
the circuit -- in short, the energy in that "little sheath or strip" flow
right down on the surface of the conductors. He never even imagined all
that nondiverged, nonintercepted energy component missing the circuit
entirely and just being wasted. But Poynting published prestigiously, while
Heaviside published more obscurely, and the theory of EM energy flow was
named after Poynting.
Heaviside realized the entire energy flow, including the huge nondiverged
component that entirely misses the circuit -- the component that Poynting
missed. Heaviside also corrected Poynting on the overall flow direction
(Poynting missed it by 90 degrees). Note that Maxwell was already dead at
the time.
Then the great Lorentz entered the energy flow picture, and confronted a
massive problem. How was one to account for the inexplicably enormous
nondiverged Heaviside energy flow that was pouring forth from those
terminals? And why did the circuit catch such a feeble little Poynting
fraction of the overall flow? That output is far more energy than even a
host of power systems contained or were thought to output. At the time
there was absolutely no conceivable way to account for the enormous
magnitude of the nondiverging energy flow component.
So Lorentz hit upon a stratagem. He eliminated the problem rather than
solving it. He reasoned that the nondiverged Heaviside component of the
energy flow was "physically insignificant" because it was not used in the
circuit and did not even enter it. So he integrated the energy flow vector
itself around a closed surface surrounding any little volume of interest.
Voila! That little trick discarded that bothersome huge nondiverged
Heaviside component of the energy flow (it's physically still there around
every circuit, but the circuit does not catch it and the electrodynamicists
just ignore it.). Lorentz's trick retained the Poynting component, and
since that is the energy that enters the circuit and is collected by it,
then it will be the energy that the circuit dissipates in its losses and
loads. So it will match our instrumental measurements, since we measure
dissipation. I have a 1902 reference by Lorentz where he did that little
integration trick, but it is in a book so he very probably did it earlier
in a scientific paper which I have yet to locate.
Anyway, following Lorentz the electrodynamicists just arbitrarily threw
away far more available EM energy associated with every circuit than they
retained. All the electrodynamicists fell into line, and they are still in
the same line after a century, marching along to Lorentz's cadence. The
neglected Heaviside energy flow is still physically there as a special
negentropic organization of the vacuum surrounding every circuit, just
waiting to be used. E.g., if you retroreflect the passed Heaviside energy
flow component, you can send it back across the circuit's surface charges
again and catch some more of it. Do it iteratively lots of times -- as in
intensely scattering optically active media -- and you will have
asymmetrical self-regauging and what has been called "lasing without
population inversion". Or just resonate an intercepting charge -- as per
Letokhov and Bohren -- and it will sweep out a greater geometrical reaction
cross section and collect additional energy from the Heaviside component
(18 times as much more energy as an identical but static particle
collects). Letokhov has been publishing in all sorts of journals on this
subject since 1957. In an article in Contemporary Physics he has freely
called such excess energy collection and emission a process for a
"Maxwell's demon" -- in other words, a special kind of negative resistor.
The bottom line is that true overunity systems and negative resistors have
been built and demonstrated by several inventors and scientists such as
Bedini, Golden, Nelson, Watson, Letokhov, Bohren, Chung, Kron, Sweet, etc.
They do work, and in fact John can demonstrate one at any time. But instead
of valid scientific attention and courteous scientific treatment, the
scientists and inventors who have pioneered this legitimate overunity area
have been hounded, persecuted, vilified, etc. Careers of legitimate
scientists attempting to scientifically investigate this area have often
been ruined.
What is needed is not another group of grasping "vulture capitalists" and
stock scam artists seeking a fast fortune by selling stock and licenses to
the gullible public. What is needed is for the organized scientific
community to face its responsibility and its serious errors in
electrodynamics, and (1) correct the terribly flawed classical
electrodynamics as a matter of the highest scientific priority, including
at the foundations level, (2) fund legitimate overunity EM power system
investigators, scientists, engineers, and serious inventors before they
produce the final demonstration model; just as they have funded hot fusion
researchers for decades without the process ever adding a single watt to
the power line, (3) set aside at least 1% of the energy research budget for
high priority vacuum-energy-powered systems and phenomenology research, and
(4) recognize that conventional leading institutions which are bastions of
the present theory have zero experience, zero expertise and usually zero
institutional tolerance for the new overunity EM systems area. They do not
even have, and do not wish to develop, any legitimate theory of permissible
EM power systems as open systems in disequilibrium with the active vacuum,
freely using vacuum energy via the creation and manipulation of internal
negative resistors.
The scientific community -- including the leading scientific journals and
scientific associations -- now must honestly face its energy and biospheric
responsibilities and reassess its adversarial position on overunity EM
power systems. For decades the community has been a major part of the
vacuum energy problem, not part of the vacuum energy solution. It already
intercepts, controls, "cuts up," prepares and sends down the energy
research budget packages, which all those research professors, sharp grad
students, and sharp young postdocs must seek funding from, in fierce
competition. The scientific community has already pre-determined what shall
and what shall not be allowed as permissible EM power system research. And
its woeful past record as an adversary of overunity EM power systems speaks
for itself. Its years of neglecting and opposing practical
electrodynamically-initiated vacuum energy extraction have resulted in the
ever-increasing pollution of the planet and a threat to the life and
survival of every species, including the human species itself.
It is scientifically unacceptable when the scientific community still
implicitly proclaims the "source charge" as ostensibly creating all that
enormous energy in its fields and potentials reaching across the universe
in all directions. In short, classical EM excludes the interaction of the
vacuum in its power system theory, and implies that the "source charge"
freely creates all that field energy and potential energy reaching across
the universe in all directions, and creates it right out of nothing. Yet
this same community habitually confronts the serious open dissipative
system EM researcher with the label of being a "perpetual motion machine
nut". In our very worst nightmares, we could not begin to advocate such a
vast array of perpetual motion machines as does the present scientific
establishment, which advocates every source charge in the universe as a
perpetual motion machine of the grossest kind, ignoring a resolution of the
source charge problem that has been available for almost half a century in
particle physics.
Many skilled scientists have tried to get electrodynamics changed and the
flaws corrected -- including Nobelist Feynman and the great John Wheeler,
as well as many others such as Barrett, Evans, Cornille, Lehnert, Yang,
Mills, Vigier, de Broglie, etc. When Maxwell constructed his theory, the
electron and atom and atomic nucleus had not been discovered. The three
dozen electrodynamicists worldwide all believed in the material ether, so
to them there was no place in all the world where mass was absent. A
"charge" was just a piece of electric fluid, nothing more, nothing less.
Maxwell wrote a material fluid flow theory, and he also left out half the
energy, half the wave in space, etc. because he omitted Newtonian third law
reaction. Both mechanics and electrodynamics continue to omit one of the
most fundamental principles of all nature: that the effect acts back
through the observation process upon the cause. This principle does appear,
however, in general relativity. But in mechanics and electrodynamics, as a
result of this terrible omission, Newton's third law remains an effect
without a cause, mystically appearing out of nowhere and producing that
half of the energy and effect that Maxwell erroneously omitted.
The purpose of this long write-up is to set the record straight on what
John Bedini has been doing in his overunity battery powered devices,
including some that have been self-powering.
A final word on entropy. Simply put, entropy refers to increasing energy
disorder, where disorder is the effect. But the back-reaction of the effect
upon the cause, omitted from mechanics and electrodynamics but present in
general relativity, has not been taken into account. That principle means
that each time there is a disordering of energy, there is simultaneously a
reordering of an equal amount of energy. Entropy and negentropy occur as
twins, simply from the occurrence of the potential as a harmonic set of
bidirectional phase conjugate pairs of longitudinal EM waves. We usually
apply one set of those waves (the forward time set) and ignore the second
set (the time-reversed set or phase conjugate set). In every experiment
where an incoming EM wave from space affects a receiving wire antenna, not
only do the Drude electrons recoil, but also the positive nuclei recoil
with equal energy, though highly damped because of the enormous m/q ratio
of the nuclei. Eerily, hundreds of thousands of scientists and engineers
have been taught to measure the Drude electron recoil and state they are
measuring the "incoming wave" disturbance. Not so. They are measuring the
effect of half of the interaction; the other half of the cause omitted by
Maxwell interacted with the time-reversed nuclei, and produced the
Newtonian third law recoil forces. Every scientist will acknowledge the
accompanying recoil of the nuclei, then will mystically invoke a demon who
stands in the wire, observes the disturbance of the electrons, and kicks
the nuclei equally and oppositely. A similar situation occurs in a wire
transmitting antenna, where the recoiling nuclei also perturb the
surrounding spacetime with equal energy as do the perturbed Drude
electrons. Equal energy perturbation of ST means equal ST curvature
perturbation. So two ST perturbation waves are launched simultaneously, not
one. One is a time-forward wave, and one is a time-reversed wave, paired
together. Look at it this way. The vacuum is a giant potential, which means
it can inherently be decomposed into Whittaker's bidirectional longitudinal
EM wavepair sets. Any perturbation of the vacuum must a priori disturb
those bidirectional waves, thereby producing bidirectional wavepair
disturbances, not "plucked string" waves. There are no taut physical
strings in the vacuum! Maxwell omitted the time-reversed half of the vacuum
disturbance, because the atom, nucleus, and electron had not even been
discovered at the time, and because he assumed the taut string wave a
priori. The reasoning was just that a single electrical fluid under tensile
stress was perturbed.
Anyway, I wanted to explain what John Bedini is doing in that lead acid
battery, and why his systems really do work. He has done enormous
experimentation for years. He's built many units which exhibited the
overunity effect due to creating a negative resistor in the battery, and
some which also exhibited the self-powering effect. With a little proper
scientific funding and support, a team of scientists working with Bedini
can quickly produce working overunity EM power systems, the theoretical
model, and the instrumentation system. Bedini-type systems are easily and
cheaply produced in conventional manufacturing plants. Development and
availability of such Bedini-type negative resistor systems will start a
rapid, world-wide resolution of the so-called "energy" problem. That will
also start a rapid clean-up of this suffering biosphere that is now being
poisoned and destroyed by hydrocarbon combustion waste products at an ever-
increasing rate. It will also revolutionize the living standards of the
developing nations and peoples.
In spite of the previous and present vilification of the overunity
researchers by the scientific community, I have great faith in the
scientific method, once it is permitted to function and be funded. But just
now, our own scientific community continues to impose seriously flawed
theories and approaches upon the laboratories and scientists, and actively
blocks the innovative overunity EM power systems research that could save
this planet and humanity. We can do better than that, and we must do better
than that. Else in a few more decades none of the rest of the scientific
works will matter anyway, as the nature we are now destroying turns upon
this upstart humanity and destroys us all.
Thanks, Jerry, for bearing with this very long write-up and explanation of
Bedini's method. It is of great importance -- to the experimenters, the
inventors, the scientists, our nation, and every human being on this
planet.
Very best wishes,
Tom Bearden