A concatonated e-mail exchange has come to my attention, which I think it good to reproduce here. It has to do with the availability of "Over Unity (OU) Energy Systems" and took place Wednesday, August 18, 2004 between Leslie R. Pastor and Dr. Tom Bearden, LTC, U.S. Army (Retired), CEO, CTEC Inc., Director, Association of Distinguished American Scientists (ADAS), Fellow Emeritus, Alpha Foundation's Institute for Advanced Study (AIAS).
The Source and Reference Internet links at the bottom of what follows were included in the text of the message cancatonation I received, and I have verified that, as of 8/24/04, they are all operative. I have exercised editorial discretion by separating them and presenting them in a format different from that of the following message exchange. Additional editorial prerogatives are described below. Mr. Pastor's introduction to the exchange constitutes the text of Message 5.
From: Leslie R. Pastor
Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2004 2:37 PM
To: Tom Bearden
Subject: Do we have any marketable OU Energy Systems
Available Right Now?
Hello Tom,
This is one question, that you definitely have a
significant interest in. Do we have any marketable Over
Unity Energy Systems available RIGHT NOW? One such system
is the Perendev Motor [that I am aware of, but is it
functioning and marketable?] appears to have been
demonstrated to the Germans, who have agreed to tool up and
mass market in continental Europe and there is a company
PerenTech that is in the final process of negotiations in
the United States. I'm also aware of the potential
reevaluation of cold fusion by the Dept of Energy.
But do we have an operating, fully functional, ready to
market OU system right now?
All the Best,
Leslie R. Pastor
PS: We have been shown how current 'mathematical
formulations' don't necessarily provide an insight into
'novelty of fact' demonstrations. Faraday, Maxwell, Tesla
and of course [Bearden] yourself.
From: Tom Bearden
To: Leslie R. Pastor
Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2004 5:06 PM
Subject: Do we have any marketable OU Energy Systems
Available Right Now?
Leslie,
So far as I'm aware, the only marketable overunity "energy
from the vacuum" systems available are in Japan, and being
withheld from the world market by the Japanese Yakuza. The
Takahashi magnetic Wankel engine, e.g., is one such, and it
can be built by any competent electrical engineering
department. It can also be simulated by a standard good
quality magnetics computer simulation model. In short, it
can be designed etc. right on the computer, using the
magnetics simulator, to include the characteristics of the
magnets, etc. Yet no one does it or investigates it. The
Takahashi magnetic Wankel approach simply wraps a standard,
well-known linear magnetic motor (standard) almost in a
complete circle, so the back mmf region is across a very
short distance between the ends. An inverted "T" section
polepiece is used in that region, with a coil around the
handle of the T, so that - if the coil were FULLY
energized, the field from the bar of the T (across the back
mmf region) would override the back mmf field, canceling it
or even converting the "net" field to a forward mmf in that
region.
Then a very small trickle current is placed on the handle
of the T. Intentionally, it is not nearly enough for the
weak field of the bar of the T to override the back mmf!
However, just as the moving rotor magnet starts to enter
that back mmf region, where it will have to payback all the
rotational energy it has absorbed during its acceleration
phase, the trickle current is very sharply broken (as with
magneto type breaking), so that a momentary surge of power
in the same direction occurs in the coil around the pole-
piece due to the well-known Lenz-law effect. That provides
a MOMENTARY overriding of the back mmf. During that
MOMENTARY overriding of the back mmf, the rotor passes
through there, encountering no back mmf and hence no
payback.
For all the skeptical theorists and pundits, please check
Dilip Kondepudi and Ilya Prigogine, Modern Thermodynamics:
From Heat Engines to Dissipative Structures, Wiley, New
York, 1998, reprinted with corrections 1999. Areas known to
violate present thermodynamics - and accepted as such by
the thermodynamicists themselves -- are given on p. 459.
One of these areas is the use of a sharp gradient, which is
precisely what is being used here. And Kondepudi and
Prigogine also state that not much is known about it,
either theoretically or experimentally.
So we are using a KNOWN violation area for violating the
second law of thermodynamics. Don't worry, the Second Law
is easily violated; any departure from system equilibrium
is a negative entropy operation a priori, hence violates
the present imperfect Second Law. The Second Law is
actually an oxymoron implicitly that a previous negative
entropy operation has occurred but is deliberately not
accounted. That "departure from equilibrium (equilibrium is
the state of maximum entropy)" is not accounted and is just
ignored. Then the PRESENT second law merely accounts the
normal entropy decay of this excited system back to
equilibrium (the non excited, maximum entropy state).
The second law always did assume a negative entropy
operation occurring (its own self-contradiction), but
merely ignored any accounting of it. It was never a law of
nature, but only a "half law" at best. Even simple
statistical fluctuations violate it, and there are
accordingly many fluctuation theorems that are applied in
thermodynamics itself, for violating the Second Law. A
particularly good one is given by D. J. Evans and D. J.
Searles, "Equilibrium microstates which generate second law
violating steady states," Phys. Rev. E, Vol. 50, 1994, p.
1645-1648. That one is further extended by Gavin E.
Crooks, "Entropy production fluctuation theorem and the
nonequilibrium work relation for free energy differences,"
Phys. Rev. E, Vol. 60, 1999, p. 2721-2726.
In short, one pays a LITTLE BIT to obtain a MOMENTARY
override of the back mmf in the magnetic Wankel engine, but
just long enough for the rotor to pass safely through that
former back mmf WITHOUT experiencing any net back mmf
because the net back mmf is momentarily zeroed.
So one pays a little bit to eliminate the entire back mmf.
In short, that converts the line integral of the net
magnetic force field around the circuit to a NON-ZERO net
field, or what is known as a "nonconservative" net field.
Hence the rotor continuously accelerates, except when
"gliding" through the usual back mmf during its momentary
change to zero back mmf. And it has no region of back mmf
deceleration.
Simply put it on a good magnetics simulation program, and
simulate it. In fact, DESIGN the beast entirely, with a
good simulator, and save lots of materials cutting and
jiggling and wiggling in the process.
The electrical engineer will not have any trouble
understanding the principle, since all effects mentioned
are already in his textbook. If he gets concerned about
the second law of thermodynamics, he is also on strong
grounds since he is applying a type of effect known to be
capable of violating the Second Law. What he will NOT
understand is where the excess EM energy comes from, since
that unit will power itself and a small load, if a very
small generator is also attached to the shaft to furnish
the switching and timing and the weak trickle current. It
is easy to explain where the energy comes from and how, but
the source of the energy IS NOT MODELED in conventional
Maxwell-Heaviside electrodynamics and electrical
engineering.
If anyone wishes to just go build an overunity "energy from
the vacuum" system, then by all means replicate the
Takahashi magnetic Wankel engine. And design it by getting
access to a computer and a modern, good magnetics
simulation program.
If you wish to be a little more exotic, but still
understandable, the Kawai engine works exactly like the
U.S. patent states. If one uses (1) a very efficient
magnetic motor as the basis (say, one that is 80%
efficient, available from several manufacturers), and (2)
very efficient (photon-coupled) switching of the electrical
aspects, then the COP of the net unit will be about twice
its basic efficiency. So the 80% efficient basic motor with
the Kawai process applied, will provide a motor with about
COP = 1.6. That motor can then be closed-looped for self
powering, by several methods, so long as one is very frugal
with use of power for switching. The switching must be very
efficient, but well within the state of the art. Kawai and
his engine were suppressed right here in Huntsville,
Alabama in 1996 in the physical presence of my colleagues
and I, so there were multiple witnesses. Had the Yakuza
not suppressed Kawai, we would have placed self-powering
Kawai magnetic motors on the world market before the end of
1997.
For a proven COP>1.0 process, but one requiring much more
technical understanding, the entire area of "negative
resonance absorption of the medium" is already well
documented in the hard physics literature since the late
1960s (see work by Bohren, Letokhov, and others in the
standard literature). Done in the IR or UV appropriately,
the effect produces a thermodynamic COP = 18. Note that
the researchers in this field (since the late 1960s)
painfully try to avoid using the phrase "excess emission",
or any discussion of the thermodynamics, and use the term
"increase of reaction cross section", but do show the
actual results. The reason one can increase the reaction
cross section is that electrical engineers do not, and
never have, calculated the E-field in space. Instead, they
calculate the EFFECTS of the force-free E-field in space,
in its ongoing interaction with a STATIC charge, which
gives the standard E force field that only exists in
charged matter, with the assumption of "static" charged
particles comprising the matter. If instead of static
charges one feeds the energy in, in the IR (heat) area, and
uses charged particles that self-resonate in that region,
then indeed one has changed the "effects of the force free
field" in its interacting charged matter. The water flow
diverged around a fixed rock in a river is quite different
from the water flow diverged around the same rock if it is
violently churned to and fro.
Such negative resonance absorption experiments are
replicated every year at many universities. Also note
that, in the IR, one is talking "heat". In theory at
least, a self-resonant charged medium (made of self-
resonant charged particles, sized so as to be self-resonant
at IR), when fed with IR input, will re-radiate some 18
times as much IR (heat) energy as the accounted POYNTING
component of the input IR energy. Hence one could place a
layered self-resonant charged particle medium around a
boiler, between it and the combustion heating source, then
heat the layered medium instead of the boiler, get perhaps
a practical COP = 10, and thereby reduce the combustion of
the hydrocarbon (coal, oil, natural gas) for heating the
water in the boiler, by an order of magnitude. We are
saying that perhaps an order of magnitude reduction in the
actual coal or fuel burned could be realized, while
furnishing exactly the same amount of steam to the steam
turbines that power the generators, and therefore while
furnishing exactly the same amount of electrical power to
the transmission lines and distant loads.
If one wishes to be even more exotic but in an area proven
to be factual already, then use the Johnson approach to a
totally permanent magnet motor, which self-evokes the
magnetic exchange force (by spin flipping). This one is
very sensitive to very precise machining and precise
assembly of the nonlinear magnets in the field pieces.
The exchange force - which momentarily may be hundreds of
times stronger than the normal magnetic field force in the
magnet - must be evoked at precisely the right time and in
the right direction, to give a "tremendous short kick" to
the passing rotor magnet, in the proper direction.
The exchange force is well known and documented in
magnetics materials literature. Johnson was working in
what today is called "spintronics", but doing it 50 years
ago. Again, if that exchange force is correctly evoked and
is in the proper direction and timing, then the line
integral of the total magnetic force acting on the rotor
around the closed rotation loop is nonzero. That means
there exists a NET ACCELERATION FORCE in the overall
complete rotation, so that the unit will indeed rotate
itself and power a load, given efficient bearings with
little friction, and not too much air drag. Here again the
PRINCIPLES are totally known and solidly proven in physics.
It's just the specific embodiment that is critical and
quite meticulous in its machining, timing, and direction
requirements. A good place to start with, in looking into
exchange forces, is the discussion in Feynman's three
volumes of sophomore physics. Follow that up with a good
review of the subject from a modern magnetic materials
textbook or current magnetics handbook.
Those should be good enough for openers.
Best wishes,
Tom Bearden
From: Leslie R. Pastor
Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2004 5:57 PM
To: Tom Bearden
Subject: Do we have any marketable OU Energy Systems
Available Right Now?
Thank you Tom, for reminding me about the Takahashi
magnetic Wankel engine and the Kawai engine. I wish
however for some form of 'marketable' device that all of us
could acquire for immediate use. Obviously, your M.E.G.
immediately comes to mind, for it would provide substantial
sources of power. Do you have a target date for bringing
the M.E.G. into the mainstream market for commercial and
'home-owner' production. When do you foresee a realistic
timeframe for eventual 'marketability' of your M.E.G?
All the Best,
Leslie R. Pastor
From: Tom Bearden
To: Leslie R. Pastor
Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2004 10:27 PM
Subject: Do we have any marketable OU Energy Systems
Available Right Now?
Leslie,
No, we are not out of engineering development yet, and we
will require a very hard year of funded final research and
development work before we are out of it. So the MEG is not
going to be ready for production and marketing until we can
get the necessary funding to perform that absolutely
essential work. Neither is any other such system, unless
the inventor has had the greatest stroke of luck of anyone
in the universe.
The progress of a technical system through exploratory R&D,
advanced engineering R&D, engineering development R&D,
production engineering and then into actual production and
marketing, is the normal cycle taken by untold thousands of
engineering systems. It isn't mystical at all; it's the
actual technical development system itself.
So that is the normal progress and procedure for
engineering and development of any technical system.
Oddly, it is only in the struggling overunity field - which
a priori is much more complicated than ordinary electrical
engineering - that the actual progress through the various
stages of research and development is somehow expected to
not be required. Or, the inventor/developer is expected to
be able to just go down to Radio Shack, get a kit of gee-
whiz parts and whip them together, and that's that. Heck,
if it were THAT simple, all those sharp young graduate
students and post docs we keep producing in our
universities would have done it decades ago. So would all
the folks out there who wax so eloquently and confidently
on how easy it really is, when most of them have never even
seen a true "energy from the vacuum" (EFTV) overunity
system, let alone experienced the unusual EM phenomenology
exhibited by such systems.
Most other legitimate inventors are also in a similar bind
with their overunity EFTV systems. There are two inventors
(names will not be furnished) who are at least out of
engineering development, and thus ready to go into full
production engineering, which would require something like
three to six months of intensive work. THEN their systems
could actually be produced and made available on the world
market.
Just now, it appears that such is not going to be allowed
without some strenuous maneuvering and a great deal of
sheer luck. We simply point out that something like at
least 80 to 100 inventors have achieved successful
prototype EFTV systems in the last 100 years, of quite a
variety, and as yet not a single one has actually got a
system out onto the market.
Anyway, good luck on your quest, and I hope you find it,
but I recommend you don't sit up nights counting on it.
The very few inventors in this country who have managed to
shoehorn their way to "ready for production" have all been
suppressed, without exception. And the forces doing the
actual suppression are far more numerous, organized, and
ruthless today than in the past. That is not going to
change in the near future, or even in my lifetime.
But anyway, hang in there and keep searching and trying.
Much better to try and fail, than never to have tried.
Best wishes,
Tom Bearden
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:08:17 -0400
From: Leslie R. Pastor
Subject: Do we have any marketable OU Energy Systems
Available Right Now?
Tom Bearden recently responded to my query regarding
marketable OU Energy Systems, specifically, if they are
available right now. Tom's response is indicative of my
postulate concerning the 'control paradigm,' that these
systems will remain difficult at best, if not nearly
impossible to provide the entire planet with abundant
renewable alternative energy sources. For several years
now I have been researching this phenomenon, and always the
attainability of these 'systems' remains elusive. Dr.
Bearden, in my opinion, is the foremost expert on these
matters. His credentials are above reproach, his character
and attitude remain steadfast in support of a truly dynamic
energy alternative as demonstrated by his Motionless
Electromagnetic Generator.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Source:
Perendev Motor Links:
- http://www.anomalynews.com/phorum/read.php?f=9&i=169&t=169
- http://www.pureenergysystems.com/news/2004/06/30/6900029PerendevPowerMagneticMotor/
- http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2004/7/emw138231.htm
- http://www.greaterthings.com/News/FreeEnergy/Directory/
- http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=812
- http://www.perentech.com/devices/perendev/magnetic_motor/
- http://www.perentech.com/
The 8/18/04 e-mail exchange between between Leslie R. Pastor and Dr. Tom Bearden is not exactly reproduced in the form I received it. The exchange I received included "> " characters on every line, indicating quoted e-mail messages. These I have removed. Also, the lines in the concatonation I received were truncated and wrapped at about the 50th character, which produced the familiar effect in such e-mail exchanges of frequent lines containing only one or two words. These I have corrected by making every line a maximum of 60 characters long, with short lines appearing only at the end of a paragraph, where they would normally occur. Finally, the message exchange I received was arranged, as is usual in such exchanges, with the most recent message at the top, and the first message at the bottom of the concatonation. This order I have reversed, on the basis of the date and time borne by each message, and "titled" each successive message, Message 1, Message 2, etc.; so the order of this presentation reads, top to bottom, in the order indicated by the messages' respective date / time stamps. Otherwise, I have made no changes in the text of the 8/18/04 Bearden / Pastor e-mail exchange as I received it.