The Search for COP Circuits and Systems

A very long search and much intense study and reflection eventually revealed the concepts and principles of those long-neglected disequilibrium Maxwellian systems that permissibly output more energy than the operator inputs. The active environment — not the operator — simply inputs the rest of the energy. Such disequilibrium systems are indeed permitted in Maxwell's theory {20}, and are also still prescribed by Heaviside's severe curtailment of it {21} into what is two vector equations with variables unseparated, rather than Maxwell's 20 equations in 20 variables.

15 Prior to interaction of the incoming time-energy with the observable charge or dipole, it interacts with the virtual particles of the vacuum, generating vacuum polarization. Neither the virtual particles nor the time-energy are observable; only the effects of their conglomerate interactions with observable charges are observed. Hence one can take the particle view that virtual particle energy is continually absorbed, or one can also take a quantum field theory view that time-energy is continually absorbed. The two are always present in combination.

When Lorentz16 symmetrically regauged the Maxwell-Heaviside equations, he arbitrarily discarded the entire class of Maxwellian systems that are far from equilibrium in their exchange with their active (vacuum) environment. Lorentz revised (symmetrically regauged) the Maxwell-Heaviside equations to make them amenable to separation of variables and closed analytical solutions, thus reducing the onerous chore of numerical methods. This Lorentz symmetrical regauging is given in most EM textbooks {22}, and we show it in Chapter 2. The symmetrically regauged Lorentz equations are not Maxwell's equations, nor are they the truncation of Maxwell's theory by Heaviside et al. Considering an active environment, under our altered thermodynamics definitions Lorentz implicitly selected and retained only the equilibrium class of Maxwellian systems, while arbitrarily discarding the entire disequilibrium class. He thus discarded all those Maxwellian systems permitted to produce COP lying in the range 1.0 < COP < <x>.

Maxwell's electrodynamics is a material fluid flow theory and it assumes a material ether. Anything that fluid systems can do, electrodynamics systems can do, at least in theory, because their mathematical models are the same form. So when one cites known examples of fluid-driven physical systems where the energy to run the system is freely furnished by the active environment, analogous electrodynamic systems in active environments — and in disequilibrium exchange with that environment — must also exist in nature. Indeed, particle physics requires it and proves it. These are the very systems arbitrarily discarded by Lorentz symmetrical regauging in every university.

So there exists a direct analogy between fluid systems and classical electromagnetic systems. The common windmill, waterwheel, and sailboat demonstrate by analogy that open EM systems far from equilibrium — powered by free EM "winds" and "energy flows" in the active vacuum environment — also exist in consonance with natural law. They are no more mysterious than a solar cell power system, which is after all a recognized "free energy" or "overunity" system, as is the humble charge (thought to be the source of all EM energy, fields, and potentials). In physics, the powering of systems by receipt and use of energy from their

16 Actually first accomplished by Ludwig Valentin Lorenz in 1867, then by H. A. Lorentz much later. Lorentz was given the credit erroneously. Lorenz actually derived electromagnetic theory independently in his paper. See J. D. Jackson and L. B. Okun, "Historical roots of gauge invariance," Rev. Mod. Phys, Vol. 73, July 2001, p. 663-680.

active environment leads directly to the thermodynamics of systems far from thermodynamic equilibrium in their energetic exchange with that active environment.

It follows that the seeming absence of such electrodynamic systems arises not because they are impossible but because present-day circuits and systems are ubiquitously designed to self-enforce an inherent energy equilibrium with their active vacuum environment. The closed-current loop circuit turned out to be the Lorentz self-regauging demon involved in destroying the COP>1.0 capabilities of every EM circuit. So little by little, we unraveled the long tedious trail of Maxwell's electrodynamics and what had happened to those missing Maxwellian-Heaviside systems far from equilibrium with the active vacuum.

We learned how, where, and by whom those permissible overunity Maxwellian systems were discarded. That is, we found what happened to all those Maxwellian open disequilibrium systems — originally included in Maxwell's and Heaviside's theories — where such a system receiving and using excess energy from its active environment17 is permitted by the laws of physics, electrodynamics, and thermodynamics to:

17 For the discerning reader, of necessity we have revised the foundations of the ancient classical thermodynamics, as further discussed in Appendix A. We refer the reader to Bimalendu N. Roy, Fundamentals of Classical and Statistical Thermodynamics, Wiley, New York, 2002, and to any good book on the history of thermodynamics. Also particularly good is Kondepudi and Prigogine, Modern Thermodynamics: From Heat Engines to Dissipative Structures, Wiley, Chichester, 1998, reprinted with corrections in 1999. The foundations of classical thermodynamics (and its fundamental definitions) were basically frozen prior to the advent of Maxwell's 1865 seminal theory, and well before the 1880s discovery (modeling) of the flow of EM force field energy through space. Some of the fundamental definitions of thermodynamics now will not withstand critical review in terms of "meshing" with the Heaviside/Poynting material fluid energy flow theory. Neither will they withstand the new concepts of energy such as mass-energy, time-energy and transduction between time-energy and spatial energy by every charge. E.g., thermodynamics defines an open system as one that exchanges energy and mass with its surroundings. Yet it defines a closed system as one closed only to mass exchange, not to energy exchange. If the energy exchange is analogous to material energy flow and changes the mass of the system, then that definition of closed system is a non sequitur. From general relativity, mass is simply energy anyway, and so "mass" exchanging across the boundary of the system is actually energy exchanging, and vice versa. Since Maxwell's theory is a material fluid theory, the Poynting and Heaviside energy flow models are material fluid flow energy models by analogy. The specialized thermodynamics definition of closed system rigorously will not logically allow the exchange of "material fluid energy flow" (or energy as matter)

since it prohibits matter flow, but the specialized definition of open system would and does. In short, with respect to material fluid energy flow, the concept of the "closed system" in thermodynamics has forced itself to become the isolated system instead, which is unacceptable since we must model EM energy flow exchange between the environment and the system. So we must change the thermodynamic definitions of open system and closed system. Else there cannot be any EM energy-mass or mass-energy flow between environment and system, which totally violates what is well known to be happening in all EM systems. In modern physics, every charge and every dipole already have such energy exchange with the active vacuum environment, and it is never zero; instead, it is of enormously high magnitude. Without that exchange, as we advance in this book, there cannot even be a "source charge" or associated EM fields and potentials and their energy, reaching across space. In other words, without it we can have no electrodynamics at all. So we have uncovered a fundamental and major contradiction between classical thermodynamics and general relativity, as well as between thermodynamics and the "material EM fluid energy flow" model used in electrodynamics. What classical thermodynamics calls a "closed system" permitting energy flow exchange, we must now logically regard as an open system because it is open to energy exchange across the boundary! The previous notion of the isolated system — with no exchange of either energy or mass — is what we must treat as a truly closed system. And there is none such in the universe, as we know in particle physics (e.g., because of the discovery of broken symmetry in 1957 and because of the well known active vacuum exchange with every EM charge and dipole). So we have corrected these direct contradictions between "EM as a material fluid energy flow theory" and the old classical thermodynamics.

As the reader will later see, this strongly affects our new definitions of efficiency and coefficient of performance. The new definitions we advance are rigorous, and they also apply to COP>1.0 EM systems, and even to self-powering (COP = <») EM systems. They also hold for very novel new energy processes such as quantum potential energy in a multiply connected space, multiple retroreflections and re-use of the same energy, conversion between time energy and spatial energy, and 4-space giant negentropy energy flow circulation.

But one can no longer be allowed to equate efficiency with coefficient of performance. Now they are never the same thing, just as a six-foot tall man and a six-foot tall doorway are never the same thing, even though they have the same height magnitude. We warn the reader that a great deal of thought and study must be put into appreciating these suddenly encountered changes to the quite old classical thermodynamics definitions. The changes are absolutely necessary. Bluntly put, in light of much more modern knowledge, a rigorous foundations analysis reveals the classical thermodynamics as well as disequilibrium thermodynamics to contain logical contradictions, such as its direct contradiction with general relativity and the EM material fluid energy flow theory. Either we give up or dramatically change the present EM energy flow theory, or we must make the necessary foundations changes to thermodynamics. We have chosen the latter option in this book, and the reader is forewarned of that dramatic change. The specific changes and rationale are discussed in Appendix A.

(2) self-oscillate or self-rotate,

(3) output more energy than the operator inputs (the excess being freely received from the active environment),

(4) power itself and its load simultaneously (all the energy being freely received from the active environment), and

(5) exhibit negentropy.

We vigorously pursued those long-lost Maxwellian systems, and we eventually found them. We also found real experiments {23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28} and real devices {29a, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35a, 36a, 36b} that performed one or more of those fabulous five functions, though there was often no realization by the experimenters, inventors, and scientists of the actual mechanism involved. Eventually my colleagues and I were also able to produce a successful experimental device {37, 38a-38c, 39}, the motionless electromagnetic generator (MEG), which outputs more energy than we input to it. We cover the MEG in Chapter 7. Presently a cooperative research program is ongoing with the National Materials Science Laboratory of the National Academy of Sciences of a friendly foreign nation, to develop and market commercial power systems based on successful laboratory experiments with the MEG. At this writing, we are also strongly seeking the extensive funding required to set up a physics lab and complete the final research allowing production of power systems.

Saving Power, Saving The World

Saving Power, Saving The World

Get All The Support And Guidance You Need To Be A Success At Helping Save Power. This Book Is One Of The Most Valuable Resources In The World When It Comes To How To Use Renewable Energy As Your Alternative Power Suppliers.

Get My Free Ebook

Post a comment