Additional Information On
The Final
Secret of Free Energy

Update 15 February
1994
© 1994 by T.E. Bearden

Introduction

My associates and I have filed the first patent application on two
electrical overunity processes and devices; one similar to what is outlined in
The Final Secret of Free Energy [Ref
1] and an additional variation utilizing, as collectors, standard
step-charged capacitors rather than degenerate semiconductor materials. In 60
to 90 days, we will have a very enlightening paper (more likely a book) ready
on that. We also plan to file several more extremely fundamental overunity
patent applications from additional phenomena and mechanisms that we have
uncovered.

In this paper, it is assumed that the reader is familiar with the content
of The Final Secret of Free Energy. Figure 1 shows the invention
schematically, and we briefly summarize it as follows:

Summary of the Invention

A method and apparatus for extracting bidirectional EM wave energy
from the vacuum through the scalar potential gradient across the terminals of
an electrical source, collecting the excess energy in a collector without
entropy, then separately discharging the collected energy through a load to
perform work, without sending the load current back through the primary source
against its potential gradient; i.e., against its back emf. Removing the load
current from the source thereby substantially reduces the production of work
inside the source to dissipate its bipolarity; said internal dissipative work
being well-known to be the cause of exhaustion of the source's ability to
continue to furnish emf to the external circuit. By reduction of its internal
dissipation, the source is enabled to furnish more energy for dissipation in
the external load than is utilized to dissipate the source internally. Hence
the source is enabled to operate with an overunity operational efficiency. The
system permissibly operates as an "open" system, and extracts and utilizes
excess EM energy from a free-flowing external source (the flux exchange
between the surrounding vacuum and the bipolarity of the source), hence it can
operate at an efficiency greater than unity without violation of the laws of
physics, in a manner analogous to but entirely different from a heat pump. In
this invention, it is not the purpose of the primary source to furnish current
and dissipative power to the external circuit. The bipolarity of the source is
utilized primarily as a dipole antenna to receive the bidirectional EM wave
energy flow from the vacuum, and direct it without entropy through a switching
unit to the collector. Conduction electrons in the collector are temporarily
restrained while being overpotentialized by the excess energy being collected
upon them. The collector and its overpotentialized electrons are then switched
away from the primary source, and connected across the load as a separate
circuit and closed current loop. The electrons in the collector and their
excess energy are then automatically released to flow as current discharge
through the load, releasing their excess energy to perform useful work in the
load. The collector is then switched away from the load and back across the
primary source, and another collection cycle is initiated. Iteration of the
collection and discharge cycles provides power to the load. Additional
collection and smoothing capacitances for smoothing the iterations and
furnishing steady power to the load may be added as desired. The invention
violates the closed circuit practice of powering loads, but does not violate
the conservation of energy law, the second law of thermodynamics, or any of
the other known laws of physics.

Figure 1a. Type circuit utilized for ramp-up charging of
a capacitor without work, and separate discharge of the collected energy in the
load without substantial depletion of the primary source.

Figure 1b. Type circuit for single pulse charging of a
degenerative semiconductor collector without appreciable work, and separate
discharge of the collected energy in the load without substantial depletion of
the primary source.

Use of Step-Charged Capacitor as the
Collector

Fulfilling our search for a special material with the extended
electron gas relaxation time for the collector, a material alloy composed of
98% aluminum and 2% iron is tentatively suggested. However, production of this
alloy is particularly difficult, so we are still researching for a solution
that is more easily manufactured.

Meanwhile, the necessity for using a special material for the collector has
been bypassed by another procedure we have utilized. Rigorously one can use a
normal capacitor as the collector, if one step-charges it in several
hundred small incremental rectangular voltage steps (stair-step-charging). The
proof that this can freely charge a capacitor with energy, without having to
do appreciable work, is already known in the literature. You can charge the
capacitor without entropy and essentially without drawing electron mass
current. [Ref
2,Ref
3,Ref
4,Ref
5]

Actually we consider the capacitor to be charged by massless
displacement current flow, which for circuitry purposes we consider to be
d/dl -- a flow of pure potential (trapped EM energy) along a
conductor or through the vacuum; i.e., under conditions where mass
displacement current flow does not exist. [Ref
6, Ref
7]

Massless Displacement Current Is Freely
Available From Any Source

The principle embodied in the invention is that one can extract
all the free EM energy one wishes, from any electrical power source, as long
as it is extracted via massless displacement current and not by electron
mass flow current. [Ref
8] And one can freely collect this extracted energy from a source into an
ordinary capacitor if one does it correctly, because one can charge the
capacitor via massless displacement current without expending any appreciable
work inside the source to dissipate its dipolar separation of charges.

Every Electrical Source of Potential Is
Already a Free Energy Source

We thus advance a revolutionary concept: all present power systems
already utilize free energy source-antennas. However, the standard
two-wire closed circuitry diabolically utilizes one-half the total free energy
extracted by the source-antenna from the vacuum, to perform work inside the
source-antenna to dissipate its dipolarity and hence to dissipate the
source-antenna (i.e. the receiver) itself.

The source already acts as a "dipolar antenna" to continually receive
"scalar potential" current d/dl (massless displacement current) from the vacuum. [Ref
9] Previously scientists and engineers have simply ignored this special
massless EM energy influx. For load-free (i.e., mass-current-free) conditions,
(d/dl) is continually received from the vacuum by any
dipole (i.e., by any dipolar source-as-an-antenna), and the flowing
energy is continually exchanged back and forth between the vacuum and the
dipole.

This free energy exchange with the vacuum is also true of any two points in
our circuit that possess an open-circuit voltage or potential difference
between them. Two such points act as a dipole. Free energy dipolar antenna
sources are everywhere; we just have to learn how to break the symmetry in
their energy flux exchange with the vacuum, collect some of the freely flowing
influx, and distribute that collected excess energy to an isolated load to
separately power it.

In other words, we simply have to implement circuitry that operates
analogous to the standard heat pump cycle.

Figure 2. Why present electrical power systems have
underunity operational efficiency.

Conventional 2-Wire Closed Circuit
Operation

In the conventional 2-wire system a load is added to the
source-antenna, allowing circulation of electron current in a closed circuit
through the load and then through the ground return line back to and through
the dipolar source-antenna. The only useful reasons for this "closed
circulation" of the electrons are (1) it is simple, easy,
habitual, and accepted, (2) all our components, instruments, and methodologies
are developed in accordance with this usage, (3) one uses the electrons as a
working material fluid to receive, transport, and discharge
excess EM energy, and (4) forcing the electrons back through the back emf
reloads the spent electrons again with excess EM energy in the
form of little 's (excess trapped energy density) upon each recycled
electron.

Some of the excess collected upon the electrons is expended in the load as
useful work, but one half of the total is expended in driving the spent
(without excess Consequently all conventional 2-wire circuits, which return
all external electron-flow current loops back through the
source, are always underunity devices, as is shown in Figure 2. Eerily
these conventional sources are already free energy devices, which are
unwittingly attached to circuitry specifically designed to utilize part of
their freely received energy to deplete or destroy themselves, i.e., they are
already open systems receiving free energy from the vacuum, but they are
hooked up and designed in a suicidal manner so as to use at least half of that
freely extracted energy to re-close the system and shut off the influx of free
energy. Since at least some of the remaining half of the energy is lost in
inefficiencies, frictional losses, etc., less than half the total free energy
goes to the load. So there is always less useful work being done in the load
than the destructive work being done inside the free-energy source-antenna to
destroy it.

Operational Efficiency

We define operational efficiency Alpha as the average power
expended in the load to power it, divided by the average power expended inside
the source to dissipate its dipolarity. If Alpha < 1, one has to externally
furnish energy to do restorative work upon the source to replace or offset
that amount of destruction being done inside the source, if one wishes the
source to continue to operate as an energy-receiving antenna. If Alpha > 1,
then if the additional losses are minimal, the device can conceivably run
itself while furnishing some energy to a load to produce useful work.

We Must Excise the Suicidal Closed Circuit To
Achieve Overunity

There is no mysticism in the overunity electrical device. The
device is an open system that extracts excess energy from the vacuum, collects
it, and transports it to the load to separately power the load. It is simply
analogous to the standard heat pump cycle. It is also directly analogous to
presently operating overunity systems such as windmills, waterwheels, solar
cell arrays, and hydraulic turbines in a dam installation. All that we have
done is to eliminate or dramatically reduce the standard cancerous mistake in
conventional electrical power systems wherein much of the excess energy freely
extracted from the vacuum by the already-overunity electrical source is then
utilized to destroy the source's energy reception ability!

As we stated, in the conventional electrical device and circuitry, more
destructive work is always done inside the source than is done usefully in the
external load. Hence the conventional operational efficiency is always
underunity.

Legitimate Overunity Systems Comply With
Well-Known Requirements

There are many alternative and well-known permissible free energy
systems that operate at overunity operational efficiency: solar cells,
windmills, hydraulic turbines, heat pumps, and water wheels, to name a few.
All of these are open systems, receiving an influx of free energy from a
natural energy flow, and collecting and gating some of that energy to be
dissipated in a load to do useful work. All of them are permissible overunity
devices, since (1) they are open systems, (2) they constantly receive a free
energy influx from an external source, (3) they extract and collect some of
this energy without dissipation, (4) they dissipate this collected energy in a
load, and (5) the discharge process is totally separated and isolated from the
"collection-from-the-source" process.

No Legitimate Overunity System Is
Intentionally Made Self-Destructive

Not a single one of these open overunity systems foolishly uses
part of its freely extracted and collected energy to re-close the system and
shut off its influx of free energy flow! What engineer would build a solar
array such that, the moment the current started to flow, it powered a shutter
arrangement to gradually close and shield off the solar array from the sun?
Who would build a windmill so that, whenever the angled-blade assembly rotated
in the wind to furnish power, a gearing feedback assembly also slowly caused
the individual blades to rotate into a position parallel to the wind, thus
stopping the windmill?

Yet this is precisely what the conventional electrical power system does
with its external circuit. It deliberately utilizes half of the freely
extracted energy to re-close the system and shut off the free energy flow
between the vacuum and the source-antenna, by destroying the receiver-antenna!

However, this "suicide circuit" practice is guaranteed to keep the power
meter on your home or business, and to keep the meter on the gas pump for
fueling your automobile. Perhaps one may be forgiven for suspecting that, at
the deepest levels of financial control, this may be the real purpose in
seeing that the existing interpretation of classical EM stays "as is."

All Electrical Power Sources Are Already Free
Energy Receiving Antennas

All conventional electrical power systems already contain fully
functional free energy systems in their source component. Each
conventionally designed system is, however, deliberately suicidal, since part
of the system's own energy is utilized to work against itself and destroy
itself. This is primarily due to the preoccupation of engineers with power and
work. They do not consider the source as an energy source, but as a power
source. Power being the time-rate of performing work, and work being the
dissipation of energy, they are thus naturally conditioned to think of the
"dissipation of the source" as its natural functioning.

In fact, hardly a single one of them is aware that EM energy itself is a
free-flowing process. Only a finite collector possesses a finite collection of
EM energy. In nature, the potential gradients of all dipoles are already
rivers of free-flowing EM energy exchange with those dipoles, where the energy
density is freely furnished and is essentially free for the taking. It is
mind-boggling that we have all been conditioned to extract this free energy
furnished by nature and the creator, but to always utilize half of the
extracted energy to destroy the receiver-antenna and thus strangle the flow!

In our work, we simply have excised this "self-destructive" cancer and
reworked the circuitry so that only a minimal amount of the freely extracted
energy is utilized for internal destruction of the source-antenna.

Thermodynamics and Open Overunity Systems Not
In Equilibrium

In our approach we have an open system during every collection
cycle, with an external source of energy and a continual energy influx. We
have deliberately broken the local symmetry of the system's energy exchange
with the vacuum, by spatially and temporally separating the energy collection
and energy discharge phases. Overunity operational efficiency is permissible
for such a system without violation of any of the laws of nature. Some of the
influx of excess energy from the vacuum into the dipolar source antenna is
transported without loss to the collector and collected. The collected energy
in the collector is then separately discharged through the load, without any
of it being discharged back inside the source-antenna. Note that we have
broken local energy flow equilibrium but not global energy flow equilibrium.

The second law of thermodynamics, e.g., does not even apply to such an open
system not in equilibrium. Classical thermodynamics cannot even compute the
entropy of an open system not in thermodynamic equilibrium, as is well-known
to thermodynamicists. [Ref
10]

What classical thermodynamics does have to say, is that such an open system
must contain excess energy when compared to the closed system in equilibrium,
because the closed system in equilibrium is in the maximum entropy condition.
[Ref
11] Global conservation of energy is not violated, just as it is not
violated in a windmill or in a heat pump, which are similar open systems.
Local conservation of energy (which applies only to a closed system or to a
system in total equilibrium) does not apply because the system is open and not
in equilibrium.

Permissible Electrical Overunity Is Not
Perpetual Motion

An open system out of equilibrium need not conform to (1) the
local (closed system, equilibrium conditions) conservation of energy nor to
(2) the second law of thermodynamics (which assumes equilibrium conditions).
It must and does conform to the global conservation of energy, just as does a
waterwheel or windmill. We strongly stress that the overunity electrical
device is not a "perpetuum mobile." [Ref
12] The electrical operations and systems we propose are perfectly
permissible by the known laws of physics and do not violate any of them. We
propose a permissible series of overunity electrical systems.

The Heat Pump Analogy

In one way of viewing it, all we have done is utilize the
potential as a more modern type of quantum mechanical fluid having hidden
bidirectional flowing EM energy. [Ref
13], Ref
14, Ref
15, Ref
16] QM already certifies that the potentials, not the force fields, are
the primary causes of all EM phenomena. Contrary to classical EM theory, the
force fields are effects in, on, and of the charged particles themselves.
Consequently, if the potentials are the primary causes of all EM phenomena,
then for free energy to perform work (free causes to collect and generate
desired effects) we must turn to the potentials.

We have utilized a hookup and switching arrangement so that energy-free
collection is totally separated from collected energy discharge in the load.
In short, we have done what a normal heat pump does, when it uses the air with
its thermal energy as a working energy-containing fluid. Consequently,
overunity operational efficiency of analogous electrical devices is perfectly
permissible, and not prohibited by the known laws of physics.

An Electrical Power Source Is a Dipolar
Antenna For Free Reception of Energy

An electrical power source is in fact only a dipolar antenna for
reception of potential (hidden bidirectional Whittaker/Ziolkowski waves). All
the current you run back through the back emf of the source, to perform
dissipative work inside it, is something you yourself are doing to the source.
It is not a priori a characteristic of the source!

If no work is done inside the source's internal bipolar separation of
charges (i.e., if no electron or ion current is forced back up from the ground
return line against the source-antenna's potential and therefore against its
back emf), then the dipolar source-antenna will last essentially forever, or
until something corrodes or breaks mechanically.

The flow exchange of energy between the vacuum and the dipolar
source-antenna is freely driven by all the charges of the universe, in
accordance with Puthoff's cosmological feedback loop. [Ref
17]

Massless Displacement Current

Technically one is using massless displacement current to
charge the capacitor, rather than electron mass flow current. It is real
energy flow nonetheless; just in work-free, dissipation-free form. As is
well-known, one plate of a capacitor already charges the other plate by just
this very massless displacement current, transporting real EM energy across
the gap between the plates in the process. The electrons themselves do not
cross the gap.

Displacement current is already well-known to be "free" energy transport
without any dissipation as power and work. By drawing massless displacement
current only from the source-antenna instead of electron flow current, you can
draw work-free, dissipation-free energy as long as you wish, as often as you
wish, and as much as you wish, without ever dissipating the source-antenna.
You just have to collect it onto some trapped electrons or other charges, such
as in a capacitor's plates, then switch the collected energy (charged
capacitor) separately across a load, in a separate discharge circuit, to
discharge through the load as work.

The real trick is to prevent the electrons in the circuit from moving and
providing mass "energy dissipation" current inside the source during the
collection process. In the original paper, we explained that this could be
done by using as a collector a degenerate semiconductor material, with
extended electron gas relaxation time. In this paper we have explained how
this can be done by step-charging an ordinary capacitor as a collector. We
have also included specific references proving (both experimentally and
theoretically) that this is correct. With the requirement for special
materials removed, there is no reason that a competent researcher cannot
develop a step-charged capacitor device to prove it experimentally for himself
or herself.

Requirement: Proof of Principle and
Independent Test and Certification

My associates and I are proceeding as rapidly as possible toward
full-up "proof-of-principle" circuits for open release and certification or
falsification by the scientific community and engineers at large. Soon we also
expect to release to other researchers information on the kinds of new
electrical phenomenology one meets in true overunity electrical devices. These
are not in the textbook, at least with respect to electrical power systems. We
give some indication of these phenomena below:

New Circuit Phenomena Must Be
Mastered

One meets unusual electrical phenomena in attempting to perform
overunity electrical operations. For overunity, a priori one must "slip excess
potential" through the circuit essentially without losses. That is, one must
deliberately pass massless displacement currents through the circuit and at
least through some of its components.

Solid-state switching components in particular exhibit unusual phenomena,
to say the least, when excess potential is introduced into and through all
their internal components inside modern semiconductors. An ordinary MOSFET,
e.g., may have 25,000 separate internal components. It is as if someone
crammed the entire electronic parts store inside it. Simple switches these
semiconductors are not, when exposed to appreciable massless displacement
current.

When one "slips in" some pure potential, by SWZ decomposition one has also
slipped in some bidirectional EM pump waves. The nonlinear semiconductor
materials will function as phase conjugate mirrors when suitably pumped,
including at non-optical frequencies. Consequently pumped phase conjugate
replicas, self-targeting, formation of quantum potentials, and modular
variable effects sometimes begin to evidence. We will address and explain some
of these effects in a future paper. For now, we simply state that they occur,
and there is a host of extra phenomenology the experimenter may encounter.

However, an iron rule for the experimenter is that, for odd circuit
behavior, first exhaust all "normal" causes before turning to the
extraordinary causes. One will save oneself a great deal of grief by applying
this Occam's razor.

Also in deliberately utilizing displacement current, one is actually
employing an expanded, higher topology EM with additional degrees of freedom,
similar to that pointed out by Barrett. [Ref
18] Consequently one encounters a host of additional higher topology EM
phenomenology. In particular one encounters nonlinear optical (NLO)
functioning of the semiconductors at any and all frequencies, not just in
optical bands.

Overunity Electrical Devices Are Permissible
By The Laws of Physics

The overunity electrical energy system is permissible by the laws
of physics and is not in any manner perpetual motion. It simply extracts
excess EM energy from an ubiquitous source, through a dipole as a receiver,
and collects that excess energy, conducts it to the load, and separately
dissipates it in the load to power the load, without using any of the
collected energy to perform work inside the source to dissipate the
source-antenna. It is directly analogous to a heat pump, which is well-known
to perform at overunity operational efficiency under nominal conditions.

In Conclusion

Primarily my associates and I believe we have corrected an
ubiquitous error made in present power systems that prevents these systems
from realizing their already-inherent overunity operational efficiency. We
also firmly believe that the permissible electrical overunity device is an
idea whose time has finally come.

Notes and References

T. E. Bearden, "The Final Secret of Free Energy," distributed
over the Internet, Feb. 9, 1993. The paper was also published in
Magnets, 7(5), pp. 4-26 (1993); in Explore!, 4(3/4), pp.
112-126 (1993), and in several other media.

For proof that you can charge an ordinary capacitor almost without
entropy, see I. Fundaun, C. Reese, and H. H. Soonpaa, "Charging a
Capacitor," American Journal of Physics, 60(11), pp. 1047-1048
(1992). A capacitor can be step-charged in small steps to dramatically
reduce the entropy required to charge it. In the limit, a theoretically
perfect capacitor can be fully charged without any electrical current or
work at all, i.e., you can simply transport the excess energy density (the
potential gradient) of the open circuit voltage of the source to the
collector, and couple that to the electrons trapped in the capacitor plates, without
electric current from or through the source.

M. G. Calkin and D. Kiang, "Entropy Change and Reversibility,"
American Journal of Physics, 51(1), pp. 78-79 (1983).

F. Heinrich, "Entropy Change When Charging a Capacitor: A Demonstration
Experiment," American Journal of Physics,54(8), pp. 742-744 (1986).

V. K. Gupta, Gauri Shanker, and N.K. Sharma, "Reversibility and Step
Processes: An Experiment for the Undergraduate Laboratory," American
Journal of Physics, 52(10), pp. 945-947 (1984).

In most texts the treatment of displacement current is far from
adequate. A better treatment than most is given by John D. Krauss,
Electromagnetics, Fourth Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 437-439,
547-549 (1992). Additional useful insight can be gained from David J.
Griffiths, Introduction To Electrodynamics, Second Edition,
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, pp. 304-308 (1989). Problem
7.51 on p. 335 is also of direct interest, as is particularly the comment by
Griffiths below the problem. Additional insight can be gained from David
Halliday and Robert Resnick, with assistance by John Merrill,
Fundamentals of Physics, Extended Third Edition (1988), John Wiley
& Sons, New York, vol. 2, Article 37-4: Displacement Current, pp.
836-837, 839-841. The standard notion is to (1) retain the continuity of
current, thus modifying and salvaging Ampere's law, (2) the displacement
current is non-physical, i.e., it does not involve the transfer of charged
mass, (3) focus primarily upon magnetostatics as to the results achievable
by the displacement current, (4) retain the notion of as E, a force field, thereby focusing the notion of
displacement current upon the change of the E field without the flow of
charged mass, and (5) retain the confusion between electrical charge and
charged mass that is inherent in the terms "charge", "current", etc. On p.
836 Halliday and Resnick point out that the displacement current is not
derived per se, but is a "fit" based upon symmetry arguments, and it must
stand or fall simply on whether or not its predictions agree with
experiment. On the same page the displacement current is taken to be a
linear function of d/dt. For flow along a circuit where there is no electron
mass current, it seems appropriate to replace d/dt by d/dl. It is also strongly indicated that one should clearly
distinguish between charged mass current flow and the flow of massless
charge, which is the approach we have taken.

A final indication of the way conventional scientists tend to regard
displacement current is given by Martin A. Plonus, Applied
Electromagnetics, McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 446-448 (1978). Here Plonus
uses the prevailing notion of the E field being altered by the flow of
massless displacement current. As can be seen, the displacement current is
relegated almost to a curiosity of capacitors, and not really too essential
except just to "balance the books" and retain Ampere's current continuity.

We now wish to point out something very subtle but very rigorous. CEM
erroneously uses E = - to equate a mass-free potential gradient with a
mass-containing force field. This "E-field" only exists at a point when
there is a point-coulomb of electrical charged mass at the point. The real
version of this equation should be E == -[()q]/|q|, where is the potential gradient coupled directly to the charged
point-mass at the point, q is the number of coulombs of charged mass at the
point, q/|q| is one coulomb of charged mass, and E now is properly the force
on and of each coulomb of the collected charged mass at the point.

Viewed in this manner, one can now see that the E field may be altered by
flow of additional charged mass q, or by flow of massless additional , or both. This is now in agreement with the manner in
which it is approached in CEM, but more rigorous. Essentially it states we
may increase the total "charge" (potential) at a point by either (1) moving
in additional charged masses by use of a conventional current, or (2) moving
in additional massless charge (potential) without any additional change in
mass, or (3) a combination of the above.

However, let us apply this to a single charged particle or to a fixed
number of them. No one seems to have noticed that the notion of altering the
E-field of the collected point- charges at a point via method #2 , i.e. by a
flow of massless displacement current onto the fundamental charged particles
themselves, a priori requires the electrical charge of each fundamental
particle to change. Hence it falsifies the notion of quantization of
charge.

Also, no one seems to have noticed the electric power implications: if it
is known that one can charge a capacitor purely by displacement current,
then one can charge up the capacitor with energy, without any dissipation of
the source, because only charged mass current through the back emf of the
source does that. So one can then disconnect the charged capacitor and
separately connect it in a closed circuit with a load, to discharge through
the load and furnish free work in the load (free in the sense than no
dissipation of the primary source occurred in either the collection of the
energy or in discharge of the collected energy through the load as useful
work). Free energy, overunity electrical devices, etc. should then be
readily apparent and permissible, from the known nature of displacement
current and capacitors alone.

Maxwell assumed a material ether, which was assumed to be a thin
material fluid filling all space. Hence force (which must have mass as a
component due to its definition F == d(mv)/dt) could be modeled as existing
in the Maxwellian ether, for there was already thin matter present
everywhere. Hence in Maxwell's EM the incorrect notion resulted that force
fields existed in the vacuum. Oliver Heaviside continued this erroneous
assumption, since in fact he hated the potentials, regarded them as
mystical, and stated that they should be "...murdered from the theory."
Also, electricity was thought to be a similar thin material fluid. So the
material electric fluid could and did flow through the fluid vacuum also,
giving the notion of the material electric flux density for D. Consequently,
the units of D are coulombs (charged mass rate of flow) per square meter.
Rigorously, that material D flux exists only on and of charged mass that
moves; it cannot and does not exist in vacuum. Only potentials and potential
gradients exist in vacuum. However, after Maxwell's formation of his theory,
the Michelson-Morley experiment destroyed the material ether (not the ether
per se, but its material nature). So electricians then simply proclaimed
that they were no longer using the material ether, and that such did not
exist! Not a single Maxwell/Heaviside equation was changed. The material
ether is still very much assumed in classical EM (CEM) theory, and so the
theory is accordingly very seriously flawed. Since CEM also has no adequate
definition for either electric charge or the scalar potential, the problem
is confounded.

To clarify this problem, one must separate the notion of electric charge
from the notion of mass. The electrical charge of a charged mass is the
virtual photon flux exchange between the surrounding vacuum and that mass.
Since a virtual photon flux is just a scalar potential, the electron's
massless electrical charge is simply its scalar potential. It can now be
seen that, if we forcibly remove the notion of "mass" from D in the vacuum,
or in a charged material medium where the charged masses cannot move, then
the "material electric flux concept" portion of D turns into d/dt, a change in the nonmaterial electric flux. However, D
is a vector and hence has a "net flux" spatial directional aspect which
d/dt alone does not possess. It follows that the value of
d/dt at a spatial point actually represents the result of
change of the value of at that point, as a function of time. Thus a directional
operator must first be invoked upon at the point, to provide a direction for the spatial -current after the d/dt operator is invoked. The
appropriate operator to give directionality to is , so that D in vacuum or in an electron-current-free
charged medium becomes a function of d/dt(-). Conventionally, the use in the literature of E = - immediately provides that d/dt(-) at a point results in dE/dt, or the time rate of change
of the E-field at that point. If no distinction is made between charged mass
current flow and massless charge current flow, this would be true in either
vacuum or material media. However, we wish to specifically distinguish
between massive displacement current and massless displacement current. So
we point out that the increase dE/dt in the magnitude of the E-field at, on,
and of a charged particle at a point, can be due to either (1) the flow of
mass current to build up the number of point coulombs at that given point,
where each coulomb has a fixed massless charge (potential), or (2) the flow
of massless current d/dt (-) so as to alter the value of at that point, evidenced by a fixed number of coulombs of
charged particles, each of which has altered its individual potential and
therefore its individual massless electrical charge.

So what "flows" when the charged masses are frozen or absent is simply a
current of scalar potential, resulting in a change of the potential upon
fixed point charges of d/dt. This is what crosses between the plates of a
capacitor, e.g., which is where the notion of "displacement current"
originated in the first place. (See, e.g., Halliday and Resnick, 1988,
ibid., p. 836, Sample Problem 1, for expression of the displacement current
as d/dt, neglecting constants of proportionality). This is
also what flows when one connects multiple open circuit pairs of conductors
to a source.

It remains to examine Maxwell's equation .D = ρv. If mass displacement current cannot
flow, then there exists no divergence of the mass current portion of D.
However, massless displacement current can still flow, and there can exist
divergence of that component. There are now three aspects to that equation:
(1) the case in the vacuum, where there exists no physical ρ and hence no
ρv as such because of the absence of mass, (2) the case in a
material medium, which is the normal case already treated in the standard
equation and need not be further addressed, and (3) the case in a material
medium where, nonetheless, physical charged masses such as electrons cannot
move, but massless charge currents may still move. Only cases 1 and 3 need
to be addressed, and they have the same treatment.

We address the one dimensional case, which is sufficient for circuit
current flow considerations. First we replace D with (D + Dρ), where the first term is the massless
displacement current and the second term is the massive displacement
current. In other words, we account separately for charged mass flow and for
massless charge flow. Similarly, we express ρv as two components,
one massive and one massless, so that ρv = d/dl( + mv). For case 1 and case 3 we make
mv = 0 and Dρ = 0. For those cases, we have .D = .D = d/dl (since current along a wire is a one-dimensional
flow). We specifically note that , D, .D, and d/dl are not necessarily conserved quantities, since is mathematically decomposed into bidirectional EM waves,
and is hence a freely flowing process. When symmetry is broken so that
equilibrium conditions no longer exist, one or more of these quantities will
not be locally conserved.

What has actually been done here is to open the classical EM model to the
free exchange of massless EM energy that is always ongoing between any
charged particle's mass and the vacuum. We then account separately for the
flow of the energy exchange (of the massless charge flow) and the flow of
the physical receiver/transmitters (i.e., for charged mass flow). Our
switching arrangement to separate the collection and discharge cycles
constitutes a permissible "Maxwell's Demon" which breaks symmetry, hence
breaks equilibrium and opens the system as required. Since such a system can
continually receive a free influx of energy from its external source, such a
system can permissibly exhibit overunity operational efficiency without
violating the laws of physics.

Displacement current is already known to be lossless transport of energy
without entropy, i.e., without work. For a typical confirmation see Jed Z.
Buchwald, From Maxwell to Microphysics, University of Chicago Press,
Chicago and London, p. 44 (1985). Quoting: "...no energy transformation into
heat occurs for displacement currents."

We strongly stress again that the scalar potential may be mathematically
decomposed into a harmonic series of hidden bidirectional EM wave pairs.
Each wave pair consists of an ordinary EM wave together with its superposed
phase conjugate replica wave. Thus internally the scalar potential gradient
across a source represents a bidirectional exchange of EM wave energy with
the surrounding vacuum. See notes 13, 14, 15, and 16 below for references
confirming the decomposition of the "fixed" potential into a dynamic flow
process and energy exchange process.

For confirmation see Robert Bruce Lindsay and Henry Margenau,
Foundations of Physics, Dover Publications, New York, pp. 283-287
(1963). See particularly p. 283, which emphasizes that a "field of force" at
any point is actually defined only for the case when a unit mass is present
at that point. See p. 17 on the limitations of a "natural law"; p. 213 and
215 for limitation of thermodynamic analysis to equilibrium states; and see
p. 216 for definition of entropy. See p. 217 for the fact that the entropy
for non-equilibrium conditions cannot be computed, and the entropy of a
system not in equilibrium must be less than the entropy of the system in
equilibrium, i.e., for a system to depart from equilibrium conditions, its
entropy must decrease. Therefore its energy must increase. Thus the energy
of an open system not in equilibrium must always be greater than the energy
of the same system when it is closed and in equilibrium, since the
equilibrium state is the state of maximum entropy.

Lindsay and Margenau, ibid., p. 217.

The basic notion in the perpetual motion conundrum is that somehow a
closed system in thermodynamic equilibrium could perpetually provide
external energy to a load outside the system. Such a notion is an oxymoron;
if the system is closed, no energy can escape or enter, hence the system
could not furnish energy externally to power a load or even just to radiate
away. My associates and I have not in any manner proposed such a system or
entertained the notion that such might exist. But it is well-known that open
systems not in thermodynamic equilibrium can freely extract energy from
their environment and furnish energy to power a load, and that is precisely
what we have proposed.

G. J. Stoney, "XLVIII. On a Supposed Proof of a Theorem in Wave-motion,
To the Editors of the Philosophical Magazine," Philosophical Magazine,
5(43), pp. 368-373 (1897).

E. T. Whittaker, "On the Partial Differential Equations of Mathematical
Physics," Mathematische Annalen, vol. 57, pp. 333-355 (1903). Whittaker
mathematically decomposes the scalar potential into a bidirectional series
of EM wave pairs in a harmonic sequence. Each wave pair consists of the wave
and its phase conjugate. (We have pointed out elsewhere that such a wave
pair is a standing electrogravitational wave and a standing wave in the
curvature of local space-time). To see that all classical EM can be replaced
by interference of two such scalar potentials (i.e., by the interference of
their hidden multi-wave sets), see E. T. Whittaker, "On an Expression of the
Electromagnetic Field Due to Electrons by Means of Two Scalar Potential
Functions," Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, Series 2, vol.
1, pp. 367-372 (1904).

Richard W. Ziolkowski, "Localized Transmission of Electromagnetic
Energy," Physical Review A, 39, p. 2005 (1989). For related material, see
Richard W. Ziolkowski, "Exact Solutions of the Wave Equation With Complex
Source Locations," Journal of Mathematical Physics, 26, pp. 861-863 (1985).
See also Michael K. Tippett and Richard Ziolkowski, "A Bidirectional Wave
Transformation of the Cold Plasma Equations," Journal of Mathematical
Physics, 32(2), pp. 488-492 (1991).

C. W. Hsue, "A DC Voltage is Equivalent to Two Traveling Waves on a
Lossless, Nonuniform Transmission Line," IEEE Microwave and Guided Wave
Letters, 3, pp. 82-84 (1993).

H. E. Puthoff, "Source of Vacuum Electromagnetic Zero-point Energy,"
Physical Review A, 40(9), pp. 4857-4862 (1989). Presents Puthoff's
self-regenerating cosmological feedback cycle for the source of the vacuum
EM zero-point energy.

Our comment: Over any macroscopic range, the vacuum fluctuations ('s) of the ZPE sum to a vector zero translational
resultant. The individual ZPE components ('s), however, are still present and active, and their
energies are present as well. That vector zero can thus be considered to be
a gradient-free potential, or the vacuum potential, since it contains
enormously dense, trapped EM energy. So the vacuum potential -- pure
space-time (ST) itself -- contains enormously dense EM energy.

One can then apply the Stoney/Whittaker/Ziolkowski (SWZ) methodology to
decompose this powerful vacuum potential, i.e., the vacuum, and in fact
space-time (ST) itself, into an incredibly dense flux of EM energy.
Space-time is revealed to be an incredibly powerful electrostatic scalar
potential. The electrical charge (potential) of a charged particle is a
small potential gradient in the ST potential, i.e., it is a slight
alteration of the local ST potential. Via Puthoff's self-regenerative
feedback cycle, the energy flowing in this potential is being exchanged
between the local source and all the charges everywhere in the universe.
This "potential gradient" or electrical charge itself can be decomposed via
the SWZ approach, and becomes a bidirectional EM wave pair exchange of
excess EM energy between the vacuum/ST and the charged particle's mass. The
potential gradient between the ends of a dipole have similar decompositions,
with the additional characteristic that the negatively charged end of the
dipole receives the forward-time waves from the SWZ wave pairs, and the
positively charged end receives the time-reversed waves.

Our final comment is that Cole and Puthoff have rigorously shown that, in
theory, the vacuum EM energy can indeed be extracted. See Daniel C. Cole,
and Harold E. Puthoff, "Extracting Energy and Heat from the Vacuum,"
Physical Review E, 48(2), pp. 1562-1565 (1993).

T. W. Barrett, "Tesla's Nonlinear Oscillator-Shuttle-Circuit (OSC)
Theory," Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie, 16(1), pp. 23-41 (1991).
Barrett shows that a higher topology EM model (e.g., EM expressed in
quaternions) allows shuttling and storage of potentials in circuits, and
also allows additional EM functioning of a circuit that a conventional EM
analysis cannot reveal. As an example, one may meet optical functioning
without the presence of optical materials.