Explanation of John Bedini’s Formation of Negative Resistors in Batteries Pt2
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
