The Tom Bearden


Energy from the Vacuum
"Energy from the Vacuum - Concepts & Principles"
Order Now!

Help support the research



Subject: Answers to some questions and an asymmetric free energy approach
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2007 17:48:37 -0500


Hi Jonathan,


At least a dozen nations today have scalar interferometers, in one form or another. These nations include Russia (under the auspices and control of the KGB), China, Israel, Brazil, and several others.


Rigorous proof of scalar interferometry is given by M. W. Evans et al., "On Whittaker's Representation of the Electromagnetic Entity in Vacuo, Part V: The Production of Transverse Fields and Energy by Scalar Interferometry," Journal of New Energy, 4(3), Special Issue, Winter 1999, p. 76-78.


We have all been very much lied to about EM energy, also. Maxwell’s actual theory is not taught in university, and never has been in any electrical engineering courses. When you were told you were studying Maxwell’s theory, you were being lied to.


To see Maxwell’s original theory, courtesy of the ZPE website, simply download the individual pages at these links (one page for each link):



Any EM transmitter you have radiating has, in addition to the accounted divergent Poynting energy flow component you were taught, a giant curled Heaviside energy flow component, unaccounted since Lorentz (apparently at the bidding of the giant cartels) arbitrarily excluded it from the watered-down Heaviside equations and theory in 1900. The magnitude of that giant curled component (ironically discovered by Heaviside, whose work was used to severely truncate Maxwell's theory and work) accompanying every accounted Poynting component is more than a trillion times the magnitude of the Poynting component.


In the 1880s and 1890s, Tesla was hell-bent on giving the world free energy directly from the active medium (what today we would call the “active vacuum” or “active spacetime itself”).


[Rigorous proof that eliminating the arbitrary Lorentz condition provides systems having free additional energy currents from the vacuum is given by M. W. Evans et al., “Classical Electrodynamics without the Lorentz Condition: Extracting Energy from the Vacuum,” Physica Scripta, Vol. 61, 2000, p. 513 -517].


Quoting Evans et al:


Vacuum charge and current appear phenomenologically in the Lehnert equations but fundamentally in the O(3) Yang-Mills theory of classical electrodynamics. The latter also allows for the possibility of the existence of vacuum topological magnetic charge density and topological magnetic current density. Both O(3) and Lehnert equations are superior to the Maxwell-Heaviside equations in being able to describe phenomena not amenable to the latter. In theory, devices can be made to extract the energy associated with vacuum charge and current.”


Obviously, from the cartels' view this intent by Tesla was totally unacceptable! They thus began intensely suppressing Tesla, because "that fool is intent on giving the world cheap clean electrical energy for free, and one cannot put a power meter on that!” To the cartels, it was unacceptable that electrical engineers should be taught that every generator already outputs a mix of two EM energy flows, one very tiny and usable (divergent)  and the other incredibly enormous though usually unusable (usually nondivergent and noninteracting).


Accordingly, they apparently pressed Lorentz into service, to eliminate all those asymmetrical systems that could not only exist in an active medium, but could also receive and use excess energy from it. In 1892 Lorentz arbitrarily symmetrized the already sharply truncated Heaviside vector equations, thus removing the remaining and “offending” asymmetric Maxwellian systems.


Of course, Lorentz simply borrowed that work from his predecessor Ludwig Lorenz, but it was H.A. Lorentz who received credit for it. Indeed, Lorentz apparently received credit for the original work of several persons!  [For a discussion of who got credit for what, see J. D. Jackson L. B. Okun, "Historical roots of gauge invariance," Reviews of Modern Physics, Vol. 73, July 2001, p. 663-680. Discusses roots and history of gauge invariance, verifies that Ludwig Lorenz (without the “t”) first symmetrically regauged Maxwell's equations, although it has been misattributed to H. A. Lorentz (with the “t”) as being first. This is an excellent coverage of the history of who did what and when, and who got credit for it.


In the cartels' view back there in the 1880s and 1890s, electrical engineers simply must not be taught that every generator already outputs more than a trillion times as much EM energy flow as one inputs to it in mechanical energy to crank the generator shaft! So they called again on the services of their useful scientist Lorentz, who in 1892 had nicely symmetrized Heaviside's equations for them, so as to arbitrarily discard all asymmetrical Maxwellian systems from the theory -- the kind of system Tesla was trying to build that would accept and extract excess usable energy from the active medium, and thus could become "self-powering" like a windmill-driven power system, a hydroelectric power plant, or a solar cell array powered generating system.


To get rid of the unacceptable Heaviside giant energy flow component as desired by the cartels, Lorentz simply assumed a closed surface surrounding every volume element of interest. He then surface-integrated the entire energy flow vector (containing both the giant curled nondiverging Heaviside energy flow component and the feeble diverging Poynting energy flow component), around that closed surface. This eliminates (totally discards) that nondivergent giant Heaviside vector component (at least in any special relativistic situation) and retains the divergent Poynting energy flow component that enters the circuit and powers up the electrons.


Recall that the energy flow “in” an EM circuit or system occurs in space outside the conductors, not inside the wires, and it does not involve electron current. The two components of energy flow – the diverged Poynting energy flow component and the Heaviside curled and nondivergent energy flow component – both flow through space outside the wire, and normally only the Poynting component gets diverged into the conductors to power the electrons.


Even in today’s better textbooks, the Poynting energy flow is not the true flow of EM energy through a representative unit area in space. Even Jackson points that out (but does nothing about it). Quoting Jackson:


"...the Poynting vector is arbitrary to the extent that the curl of any vector field can be added to it. Such an added term can, however, have no physical consequences. Hence it is customary to make the specific choice …" [J. D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics, Second Edition, Wiley, 1975, p. 237].


Note that Jackson uses precisely the same argument (no physical significance) that Lorentz used, to justify discarding any curled energy flow vector component.


Jackson's statement is true only so long as the situation is special relativistic (which is most of the time). In that case, the divergence of the curl is zero and so Heaviside's curled flow component doesn’t diverge or interact at all, and hence has "no consequence" at least with respect to ordinary EM. But if the situation is made general relativistic, then Jackson's statement is not valid. In that case, vector analysis fails and the divergence of the curl can indeed be nonzero. So some of that giant Heaviside curled energy flow component can be diverged and used.


The "negative resonance absorption of the medium" (NRAM) process – used in optical physics and proven experimentally since 1967 when the Russians allowed Letokhov to release it – will indeed diverge some of that excess but long ignored Heaviside energy flow component. Hence a self-resonant charged medium, fed (optimized experiment) by an IR laser, will output re-radiate 18 times as much IR energy as one calculates is input to it (using Poynting energy flow component input only).


Because the optical physicists know nothing about that huge ever-present Heaviside curled energy flow component, they have no notion as to where the excess input energy (required by the conservation of energy law) could be coming from. Hence they say "negative resonance absorption" instead of "excess resonance emission", or they do not get their papers published! And they never speak of the thermodynamics of the reaction; instead, they speak only of the "change in the reaction cross section" of a self-resonant charge, compared to the same charge when static.


So since 1967, we have been showing the Russians (and the KGB/FSB) that our scientists still are unaware of the giant Heaviside energy flow component, and still do not really understand what powers an EM circuit. It isn't cranking the shaft of the generator!


In short, we’re showing them that our scientists have still not corrected the horribly flawed old Heaviside-Lorentz model taught in our electrical engineering. Hence we still have not discovered the secret of Soviet energetics – used for superweapons in the Soviet Union since the late 1950s, with weapons deployments beginning in April 1963.


But back to the NRAM process. So the NRAM process in the IR is a heat-amplification process freely receiving excess EM energy from its active environment, and thus a process that outputs 18 times as much energy as the operator inputs in his Poynting energy flow input component. He actually inputs the additional needed energy, in that long-unaccounted giant Heaviside curled energy flow component accompanying his input Poynting energy flow component. But the NRAM self-oscillation process, tuned to the input frequency, is a general relativistic process. Hence the optical physicists can and do diverge additional input energy from that unknown Heaviside giant energy flow component – but without knowing where on earth the excess input energy is coming from!


My close colleague Ken Moore and I prepared and obtained a U.S. Provisional Patent Application (fairly crudely) describing how to modify and adapt the NRAM process for heat amplification across a heat spectrum, not just across a very narrow spectrum as output by an IR laser. We then put that PPA on, and freely gave it to the peoples of the world – in the hope that some large organizations, foreign governments, etc. would adapt that process and very quickly greatly alleviate the world energy crisis. One can freely download that PPA at “Increasing the Coefficient of Performance of Electromagnetic Power Systems by Extracting and Using Excess EM Energy from the Heaviside Energy Flow Component”. PPA filed and obtained in Oct. 2005. Now released into public domain and freely given away. It is available here.


Note that this has applications to all steam boilers – which are used in the majority of standard electrical power systems worldwide, including nuclear power plants.


With an adapted NRAM heat amplifier of – say – COP = 4.0 placed in the slightly modified steam boiler, along with a clamped positive feedback system for taking one part of the output and feeding it back to the input – one can produce a “self-powering” NRAM heat amplifier in that boiler, taking all its input heat energy from the long unaccounted giant Heaviside curled energy flow component.


Then once the steam boiler was heated conventionally and up to speed in powering its steam turbine-powered-generators, and thus powering the grid, the positive feedback could be switched in and the steam boiler would become self-powering. Thereafter all further consumption of fuel – hydrocarbon or nuclear – could cease, and the steam boiler would continue to power the generators and the electrical power grid.


By applying this worldwide, the present tremendous and harmful emissions due to electrical power plants could be dramatically and severely reduced. This also dramatically reduces the addition of nuclear particles and material into the atmosphere by coal-burning plants, a highly detrimental thing often overlooked. Sadly, we are spending a great deal of money to try to make a totally new kind of coal-burning plant that is much cleaner. See Sean Captain, “Turning Black Coal Green.” Popular Science, Feb. 2007, p. 27-29. Quoting:


“A radical new coal-burning power plant aims to convert our dirtiest fossil fuel into clean-burning hydrogen.” …”FuturGen is a $1 billion project sponsored by DoE in partnership with 11 leading energy companies to build the first near-zero-emission coal plant by 2012. The 275-megawatt facility will serve as the model for a new generation of high-tech coal facilities.”


And that is just for a single big coal plant example. Think of the enormous costs of replacing most or all of the present large number of coal-burning plants on earth!


And in the normal “clean system” for burning coal, you merely trap the wastes containing all that harmful nuclear material! You then have the problem of disposing of that horrible mess – and the problem of nuclear waste disposal is not yet solved, contrary to what is often portrayed.


To see that the nuclear wastes problem is far from solved, see “Special Issue: Radioactive Waste,” Physics Today Vol. 50(6), June 1997, p. 22–62.  This collection includes an overview by J. F. Ahearne; “Radioactive Waste: The Size of the Problem,” J. F. Ahearne; “Nuclear Waste Disposal: The Technical Challenges,” K. D. Crowley; “Hazards of Managing and Disposing of Nuclear Waste,” W. E. Kastenberg and L. J. Gratton; “Unresolved Problems of Radioactive Waste: Motivation for a New Paradigm,” D. W. North; and “Nuclear Waste Management Worldwide,” C. McCombie. These articles review the technical problems and risks of nuclear-waste disposal, outline the reasons why the problem has not really been resolved anywhere in the world, and suggest possible new approaches.


And for a quick assessment of the CO2 emissions problem, we quote Deutch and Moniz:


“A modern 1000 megawatt coal plant emits over 20,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide per day.” …  Last year, for example, China reportedly put about 80 gigawatts of coal-fired electricity generating capacity on line – the rough equivalent to all the electricity capacity of the United Kingdom. At present there is no indication the emerging economies will accept the higher cost required to accommodate emission constraints because of urgent competing infrastructure needs.” [John Deutch and Ernest Moniz, “A Future for Fossil Fuel.” Wall Street Journal, Thu. Mar. 15, 2007, p. A17].


Quoting Kintisch:


“Worldwide, the 5.4 billion tons of coal burned each year generate roughly a third of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions. But coal’s low cost compared to other energy sources makes it irresistible to nations with plentiful deposits.” [Eli Kintisch, “Report Backs More Projects to Sequester CO2 From Coal.” Science, Vol. 315, 16 Mar. 2007, p. 1481].


And, unknown to most of the public, a large coal-fired power plant produces more nuclear wastes than a nuclear power plant. The coal-fired plant usually just emits those radioactive particles, contained in the coal that is burned, into the air. If you live near a large coal-fired electrical power plant, you are exposed to more nuclear radiation than you would be exposed to near a nuclear power plant of the same size output!


Everywhere one looks, the answer to our energy problem is direct extraction of the electrical energy from the seething universal vacuum – from spacetime itself. And yet that problem is essentially not being even considered, much less worked on.


As a truly great stopgap measure, the development of NRAM heat amplifiers and clamped positive feedback for self-powering, would allow capitalizing on the already incredible sunk costs in our present electrical power systems having steam boilers.


It can also be adroitly used to very usefully augment a single windmill-powered generator into a horde of steam-powered generators powering a large power grid. The same can be done by using a small solar array powered electrical system to “jump start” modified steam-boilers into self-powering.


It can also be used in accord with a small dam and hydroelectric powered generator, to “jump start” the necessary self-powering steam boilers that will then continuously power a large electrical power grid.


The NRAM process could also be modified on a smaller level for use in home and office heat pumps, thus enabling self-powering systems, once they are jump-started. This would also materially reduce the need for furnishing electrical power to power our modern heat pumps!


If our scientific community would unleash our sharp young doctoral candidates, young post doctoral scientists, and a few sharp professors and theoreticians on all this, then in two to three years there would never again be an energy crisis, anywhere on Earth. But sadly, that is simply not going to happen. The western scientific community -- with respect to electrical power and the terrible mutilation and crippling of Maxwell's theory -- are absolutely not going to allow such to be done.



Presently we don't know of any paper offhand that points out the interference capabilities (as in scalar interferometry) of that giant Heaviside component. Let us put it this way: in any special relativistic situation, the divergence of that curled component is zero and it does not interact at all. That is not true in a general relativistic situation.


In a general relativistic situation, some of that giant Heaviside curled component can be forced to diverge after all, since vector analysis fails and the divergence of the curl is not necessarily zero.


Any practical way of building these scalar interferometry weapons has long been highly classified by those nations that developed and use them.


We do know, thanks to a very fine Australian researcher who had strong Japanese contacts, that the Yakuza leased very powerful scalar interferometers from the Russian KGB in latter 1989. The Aum Shinrikyo also set up a university in the outskirts of Moscow where the KGB scientists trained Yakuza and Aum Shinrikyo scientists and engineers in the theory of scalar interferometry and also in using such devices.


Since early 1990, the weather engineering over North America has been being done by the Japanese Yakuza under direct KGB supervision, where the Yakuza (assisted by Aum Shinrikyo) are acting as direct protégées of the KGB. The engineering and steering of Hurricane Katrina, e.g., was done by the Yakuza. That storm was particularly directed at the U.S. Gulf Coast region, its oil, its oil drilling rigs, etc. It caused great damage to them, to a refinery or so, many oil pipelines, and of course to the populace, New Orleans, etc. There are still a great number of displaced Americans from that storm.


In several of my books we also give incidents from the open literature of the testing of giant scalar interferometry.


These are the weapons that then-SecDef Cohen was referring to, when he stated:


"Others are engaging even in an eco-type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves… So there are plenty of ingenious minds out there that are at work finding ways in which they can wreak terror upon other nations…It's real, and that's the reason why we have to intensify our efforts, and that's why this is so important." [Secretary of Defense William Cohen at an April 1997 counterterrorism conference sponsored by former Senator Sam Nunn. Quoted from DoD News Briefing, Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen, Q&A at the Conference on Terrorism, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and U.S. Strategy, University of Georgia, Athens, Apr. 28, 1997].


To find out how to build one of these scalar interferometers, unfortunately you are strictly on your own. If I even looked like I was going to try to build one, or collaborate with someone who was building one, an immediate security clamp would be most firmly applied.


Other than that, we suggest you take the Whittaker references we cite from the hard literature as a starting point for understanding. But also throw away your electrical engineering book: There are no EM force fields in space, while you were taught that there is. There are also no transverse EM force field waves in space, obviously, since EM force fields exist only in charged matter. Feynman's three volumes of sophomore physics, in 1964, even get at this fact.


Quoting Nobelist Feynman:


"…in dealing with force the tacit assumption is always made that the force is equal to zero unless some physical body is present… One of the most important characteristics of force is that it has a material origin…" [Richard P. Feynman, Robert B. Leighton, and Matthew Sands, The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, Vol. 1, 1964, p. 12-2].


"…the existence of the positive charge, in some sense, distorts, or creates a "condition" in space, so that when we put the negative charge in, it feels a force. This potentiality for producing a force is called an electric field." [Richard P. Feynman, Robert B. Leighton, and Matthew Sands, The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, Vol. 1, 1964, p. 2-4].


"We may think of E(x, y, z, t) and B(x, y, z, t) as giving the forces that would be experienced at the time t by a charge located at (x, y, z), with the condition that placing the charge there did not disturb the positions or motion of all the other charges responsible for the fields." [ibid, vol. II, p. 1-3.]


Instead, as pointed out by Tesla, there are longitudinal force-free EM fields in space, purely in the form of warping (curving and torsioning) of spacetime itself.


In your circuits, of course, you measure transverse EM force-field waves. Since all force field waves exist in matter rather than space, those must be transverse waves of matter (charged matter, since these are EM force field transverse waves). Those are transverse EM waves in the interacting Drude electron gas. The spinning Drude electrons are quite constrained longitudinally (they move down the wire longitudinally only a few inches per hour, in a typical circuit). But they are relatively free laterally, so -- being rotational and gyroscopic -- the electrons generate "transverse electron gas force field waves" at right angles to the incoming longitudinal EM waves from space.


Even in your instruments, they almost always use Drude electron gas in their operations. So inside the instrument itself, it transduces the input longitudinal EM waves arriving from space, into transverse electron precession waves in the longitudinally-restrained Drude electron gas.


Call the force-free condition of spacetime (which is how the EM field exists in space) the PRECURSOR EM field. Then what we call an “EM force field” (in charged matter) is the ongoing interaction of the precursor EM field with that charged matter.


Here's the point: Since there is no force in space, there is no nonzero F dot ds, hence no nonzero integral of F dot ds. In other words, there is no "work" or "power" (rate at which physical work is being done) going on in pure space. Or in an ensemble of longitudinal EM waves in space.


Now here's something often completely misunderstood, even by authors of textbooks. Work is rigorously defined as "the change of form of some energy". It is not the "change of magnitude of some energy", if the energy does not change form.


As an example, changing the voltage V across a circuit or portion thereof containing charges q, changes the collected energy W on those charges q by the equation W = Vq. If no current flows during this change (i.e., if dq/dt = 0), then one has a work-free “change of the magnitude” of the collected energy on those charges q. Mere voltage amplification is not work, nor does it involve work!


So one way to do “free energy” is to momentarily pin the charges in a receiving circuit, and during that pinned moment attach that circuit to a static voltage source. The “static” voltage is nor really static, since it consists of a bidirectional set of longitudinal EM waves, as shown by Whittaker in 1903. So the voltage will of course flow onto those pinned charges q, without doing any work at all. If one multiplies the voltage by 10 during that process, one multiplies the accumulated potential energy on those charges q by 10-fold. All “for free”, without requiring work.


Then switch away the static voltage source (it has not been drained in the slightest, since no current flowed). Connect a diode and resistor in parallel across that now-open region of the potentialized external circuit, with the diode in the “usual flow direction of current”. Now let the pinning of the electrons cease or run out, and – since electrons can now flow – that circuit will freely produce current through that resistor and freely dissipate real energy (real heat, etc.) in it.


Get your voltage amplification very high, and get your switching costs very small. Bingo! You have just made a system which will continually take lots of energy from a “static” source, and then dissipate it in a real load (without dissipating in the original source’s back emf). You have just made an “asymmetrical” Maxwellian circuit – of the kind discarded so urgently by Lorentz in 1892. And in return for the useful work you obtained in the resistor, you paid only a little work in the input for the efficient switching.


You can easily make a COP>1.0 electrical system in that fashion, proving the point.   


As you can see from the pure definition of the precursor field, changing the magnitude of the precursor engine is work-free, because the form of the energy is not changed.


Also remember that, in mechanics, force is defined as change of momentum, or F = d/dt(mv). Note that mass is a COMPONENT of force in that definition. Now substitute m=0 in that equation, and F = 0. But that need not change at all the precursor EM field (force-free) in space, where m = 0 anyway.


Think about that one for awhile. It's important.


But after you make a gigantic precursor engine, then interacting that already-formed precursor form of force-free energy with charged matter, to provide force-field energy in and on charged matter, represents a change of form of the input energy. So that system does indeed produce work -- real physical work on those interacting material charges.


And you can use that principle to design and build your own COP>1.0 EM systems.


So one can build up very intense "patterns" (I call them "precursor engines") of pure precursor (force-free) EM fields in space, without any force or work being required other than a tiny bit in the normal control and switching of the unit so as to switch the directions of the fields. Then, those very intense precursor engines can be interacted with mass -- to give an enormous EM FORCE ENGINE involving very powerful forces in that interacting charged matter.


This ability to use precursor waves and precursor engines to produce force field waves and force field engines in distant matter is what makes scalar interferometry so unique and important in weaponry acting at a distance.


Contrary to present EM theory, it is also possible to produce precursor signals and waves that are not limited by light speed. No force, no drag -- and hence the speed of light is not necessarily a limit. To even find a lexicon for that, one has to look at quantum field theory and the latest discoveries in quantum theory, during the last decade or so. But it has been weaponized for some time.


Anyway, that's about all I can tell you to help you.  The things you are trying to do, starting from scratch, are terribly difficult to do. In those nations possessing these type weapons, very substantial programs involving many, many scientists and very high classification have been ongoing for decades.


For examples of the weapons developed and their testing, see my book, Oblivion: America at the Brink.


Best wishes,


Tom Bearden




Subject: Questions

Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2007 08:55:15 -0400


I have a few questions for Dr. Bearden. Thanks for forwarding them:




Dr. Bearden,


I have been reading your site now for a while and have a few

questions regarding scalar interferometry. I can think of several

potential commercial applications for such devices and would like

some clarification on the concept of how they work. Thank you for your time.


1) In one of your slide presentations, you state,


     "... the substructures themselves interfere, and form energy in

 the grid zones between intersecting zero-lines.


     In the perfect case, however, this energy cannot radiate away.

 It is physically created and trapped as if in an 'energy bottle.'

 We are CREATING this energy at a distance..."


Later you go on to say,


     "If I have a physical target in that crossed zone, I can

 literally 'fry' the target, for I get all the power inputted to the

 transmitters contained in the bottle zone. I don't have any square law losses."


The first quote seems to say that additional energy is created in

the interference zone beyond that which is input by the

transmitters. While the second quote indicates only a summation of

the power input by the transmitters. Can you clarify this? For

example if I want to apply 50MW of power to a target 200 miles away,

I would expect each transmitter to supply 25MW each, or would a

lesser amount be required? I also understand that the required power

is the same, regardless if the distance is 200 miles or 200 ft.


2) Are the exothermic and endothermic effects only due to reactions

with the atmosphere or local medium? Would similar heating and

cooling occur in the vacuum of space?


3) While scalar waves can penetrate Faraday shields, can they also

penetrate regions of ionized atmosphere such as produced by Tesla

shields and the Aurora Borealis for example?


4) Can you give a ballpark estimate of the development effort

required to produce a laboratory demonstrator device of modest power?



Thanks again for your time and effort in making this information

known. If you choose to post this in the correspondence section,

please do not publish my last name.