This iterative additional energy interception and collection (divergence)
from the huge, usually nondivergent Poynting energy flow that Lorentz mistakenly
had everyone discard, is a very important I have constructed a chart of some anomalous and powerful energies (such as from overunity EM systems to anomalous gamma ray bursters) and am awed that the new work-energy theorem (for multipass, multicollection) seems to be the missing principle that is involved in all of them. At the top of the chart (a series of curves), there stands a new kind of Big Bang. In other words, for extremely rapid initiation, the energy density (asymmetrical self-regauging) of the system can rise so rapidly that it is sufficient to rupture 4-space at that region. So the rapidly increasing energy density just "blows out a hole" from 4-space into n-space, where n> 4. Beyond the 4-space hole, in n-space there thus is formed (by the blowout) a new 4-space universe. So it seems that this is indeed a new kind of Big Bang, and a fundamental new change, striking at the very heart of astrophysics. With the new theorem and the multipass, multicollection explanation, I was able then to propose an alternative explanation of how the Lawandy lasing without population inversion works (how the excess energy is extracted from the vacuum) and also the Patterson power unit, which has been replicated and independently tested (one version produced COP = 1200). It is possible, in fact, to utilize energy flow reverberation, multi-pass collection, and asymmetrical self-regauging in a device which surges the energy to and fro along a "single wire circuit" between two collectors, with a load in the middle. Such a device can be permissibly achieve COP>1.0 without violating the laws of nature, physics, or thermodynamics.
Inventor and researcher Scott McKie has filed a patent application on
an energy system using just such an energy reverberation and iterative
energy interception and collection. In addition, it uses the novel fact
that Before the reader pops his eyeglasses, he should read "Quantum Aspects of the Equivalence Principle" by Aharonov and Carmi. We quote from p. 494: "Not only can 'inertial forces' arising upon transition to a noninertial
system of reference be cancelled by the introduction of 'real forces' (and
vice versa), but the 'inertial potentials' belonging to such forces (even
in 'force-free' regions) can similarly be cancelled. Both facts together
afford a 'geometric interpretation' (i.e., as inertial effects produced
by a change of reference frames) to both fields of forces and
their potentials."So Scott apparently charges a capacitor in a rotated frame (without
having to move the capacitor), where its capacitance appears much less
in the lab frame (only the So Scott can apparently discharge more energy from the capacitor in the lab frame, than he was required to furnish to charge it in its rotated frame state. He has in fact utilized a very novel new way of extracting energy from the vacuum. Here again we caution that, due to its frame rotation, the capacitor actually receives excess energy (and charge) from a special kind of "external environment" other than the lab inertial frame. So again it is an open system, not in local equilibrium but switched in and out of equilibrium. Hence in theory it is permitted to produce COP1.0, if other things are sufficient. Here we inject some additional information. It is not commonly known that, in general relativity, the energy is up for grabs anyway, and in fact it can be shown that there really are no ordinary energy, momentum, and angular momentum conservation laws in the accepted sense. In other words, the "normal" conservation of energy we are so used to, can be violated anyway. Even the great Hilbert knew this in 1917. Quoting: "I assert... that for the general theory of relativity, i.e., in
the case of general invariance of the Hamiltonian function, energy equations...
corresponding to the energy equations in orthogonally invariant theories
do not exist at all. I could even take this circumstance as the characteristic
feature of the general theory of relativity."Unfortunately, this remark of Hilbert was evidently not understood
by his contemporaries, since neither Einstein himself nor other physicists
recognized the fact that in general relativity conservation laws for energy,
momentum, and angular momentum are in principle impossible.The novel part of this "frame rotation as a means of asymmetrical regauging" effect is that, without violating the laws of physics, Scott produces asymmetry both of the charge in the charged capacitor and stored energy in the charged capacitor. If we assume that the charge he inputs to the capacitor "exists" as a different amount of charge in the rotated frame, then to an observer in the capacitor's rotated frame he is charging the capacitor with the normal amount of charge and the capacitor has the normal amount of capacitance. To the lab observer, of course, he is using less charge (in the lab frame) to fill the capacitor in the rotated frame, and the capacitor thus has "less capacitance". The asymmetry of yanking the capacitor back into the lab frame then produces observable effects (extra charge and extra energy available for dissipation as work in the load), as is to be expected, given the asymmetry occurs. However, Scott has reported great difficulty with switching, capacitors, etc. but in theory the design should be able to work, at least from the standpoint of relativity, if he can overcome these problems.
Of course, scientifically one is confirmed as actually achieving an
overunity device only after it has been tested and certified overunity
by an Our little group (CTEC, Inc.) does not qualify as a proper independent
testing group for the McKie device, since I have been and am involved in
the project, having come up with the reverberation and frame rotation explanation
of the technical mechanism by which it theoretically works. In fact, I
wrote the draft of the Provisional Patent Application which was filed about
a year before the formal Patent Application. Scott's invention also uses
techniques from both his own former patent and from CTEC's patent pending
approaches. So (quite properly) I disqualify myself (and in fact all my
CTEC colleagues as well) from being any proper In the future, perhaps we will (1) have additional information as to certified test results of the McKie device when the component difficulties are overcome and such tests are accomplished, and (2) be able to post them on the net. Again we caution the reader that all this is theory until independent certified tests verify it.
We have all been misled by our professors in the area of "energy conservation." There is only a single master law of energy conservation, and it is this: Energy can neither be created nor destroyed.Energy collection upon a collector can be created and destroyed.Energy always exists in dynamic flowing form. Collection of energy
upon an interceptor/collector can be in an equilibrium condition and appear
static, just as does a fixed whirlpool in a river. But the "water" -- the
energy itself -- is always flowing in and out of that collected divergence
volume of the whirlpool. And the energy is always flowing in and out of
that collection of energy upon any collector, be it static or dynamic.net
wave that is a time-polarized EM wave.). At any rate, the "static" potential
is a whole set of bidirectional longitudinal EM energy flows.
Then in 1904, Whittaker showed that any EM field pattern (or wave, e.g.) can be decomposed into two scalar potential functions. Since these two scalar potential functions are based on two scalar potentials, then the "static" EM field decomposes into two sets of functions of harmonic sets of bidirectional EM longitudinal EM wavepairs. So a static EM field or potential is actually a Much of the confusion in the energy dynamics field is due to the confusion and failure to differentiate between energy flow, energy transport flow, divergent energy flow component, nondivergent energy flow component, energy collection, energy form, energy collection form, change of energy form, change of energy collection form, etc. Note: Dr. Bearden is no longer associated with the McKie device. |