(word processor parameters LM=8, RM=75, TM=2, BM=2)
Taken from KeelyNet BBS (214) 324-3501
Sponsored by Vangard Sciences
PO BOX 1031
Mesquite, TX 75150
There are ABSOLUTELY NO RESTRICTIONS
on duplicating, publishing or distributing the
files on KeelyNet except where noted!
March 1, 1992
SWEET4C.ASC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
This file shared with KeelyNet courtesy of Guy Resh.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTES AND REFERENCES
1. E.g., T. E. Bearden and Walter Rosenthal, "On a testable
unification of electromagnetics, general relativity, and
quantum mechanics, Proceedings of the 26th Intersociety
Energy Conversion Engineering Conference (IECEC '91), Aug.
4-9, 1991, Boston, Massachusetts, p. 487-492.
2. E.g., Floyd Sweet and T. E. Bearden, "Utilizing scalar
electromagnetics to tap vacuum energy," Proceedings of the
26th Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference
(IECEC '91), Aug. 4-9, 1991, Boston, Massachusetts, p. 370-
375.
3. E. T. Whittaker, "On the partial differential equations of
mathematical physics," Mathematische Annalen, Vol. 57, 1903,
p. 333-355. In this paper Whittaker proved that all scalar
EM potentials have an internal, organized, bidirectional EM
plane-wave structure. Thus there exists an electromagnetics
that is totally internal to the scalar EM potential. Since
vacuum/spacetime is scalar potential, then this internal EM
is in fact "internal" to the local potentialized
vacuum/spacetime. For discovery of the Whittaker-type
structure in sonic potentials, see Richard W. Ziolkowski,
"Localized transmission of wave energy," Proc. SPIE Vol.
1061, Microwave and Particle Beam Sources and Directed
Energy Concepts, Jan. 1989, p. 396-397. For a mention of
this same type of bidirectional EM wave Whittaker structure
in the potential connected with the Schroedinger equation,
see V.K. Ignatovich, "The remarkable capabilities of
recursive relations," American Journal of Physics, 57(10),
Oct. 1989, p. 873-878. So far, American physicists have
shown by their nonreaction to Ignatovich's paper that they
have not yet realized that this is a methodology for
directly engineering quantum change, and hence physical
reality itself.
4. 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, 1904, p. 367-372. In this paper Whittaker
Page 1
showed that all the classical electromagnetics can be
replaced by scalar potential interferometry. This ignored
paper anticipated the Aharonov-Bohm (AB) effect by 55 years,
and drastically extended it as well. Indeed, it prescribes
a macroscopic AB effect that is distance-independent,
providing a direct and engineerable mechanism for action-at-
a-distance. It also provides a testable hidden-variable
theory that predicts drastically new and novel effects.
5. See Carl Barus, "A curious inversion in the wave mechanism
of the electromagnetic theory of light," American Journal of
Science, Vol. 5, Fourth Series, May 1898, p. 343-348. Even
though Barus actually discovered the "backward-traveling"
Maxwellian EM wave in 1898, modern Western scientists
essentially ignored his work, and did not rediscover the
time-reversed EM wave until it appeared in the open Soviet
literature. See also Robert A. Fisher, Ed., Optical Phase
Conjugation, Academic Press, New York, 1983, p. xv. In 1972
two Soviet scientists, from the P.N. Lebedev Physical
Institute in Moscow, visited Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory and mentioned to U.S. scientists Dr. B. Ya.
Zel'dovich's observation of an extremely curious "distortion
undoing" property of the stimulated Brillouin backscattering
process in a CS2-filled waveguide. This of course was
nonlinear optical phase conjugation and its production of a
time-reversed EM wave, the strange new EM wave that
"reversed disorder and restored order." Thereafter, U.S.
scientists gradually began working in optical phase
conjugation. Most of them, however, still have difficulty
with the fact that the phase conjugate wave is a true time-
reversed wave. Many do not understand the difference
between true time reversal (true phase conjugation) and
pseudo-phase-conjugation.
6. Amnon Yariv, Optical Electronics, 3rd edn., Holt, Rinehart
and Winston, New York, 1985. See particularly Chapter 16:
"Phase Conjugate Optics __ Theory and Applications."
7. David M. Pepper, "Nonlinear optical phase conjugation,"
Optical Engineering, 21(2), March/April 1982, p. 156-183.
On p. 156, Pepper specifically notes that "...these
processing techniques can, in principle, be extended to
other portions of the EM spectrum (e.g., rt, radio,
microwave, radars, UV, etc.); and can also involve other
fields (e.g., acoustic waves), given the proper nonlinear
medium." In other words, phase conjugation is a universal
nonlinear phenomenon, unknown until recently. Pepper's
paper is presently the best all-around introduction to
nonlinear optical phase conjugation in the English language.
8. See also David M. Pepper, "Applications of optical phase
conjugation," Scientific American, 254(1), Jan. 1986, p. 74-
83. See particularly the striking photographic
demonstration of time reversal of disorder on p. 75.
9. Robert G. Sachs, The Physics of Time Reversal, University of
Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, 1987.
10. For the theoretical proof, see E.V. Smetanin,
Page 2
"Electromagnetic field in a space with curvature __ new
solutions," Soviet Physics Journal, 25(2), Feb. 1982, p.
107-111. A classical particle can have both a magnetic
moment and a nonzero magnetic charge density in a curved
spacetime.
11. There is a good reason for using two frequencies. To first
(rough) order, the earth may be approximated as an isotropic
nonlinear material. In that case, a sine-wave transmitted
into the earth will simply break up, due to the
nonlinearities. However, if two sine waves separated
somewhat in frequency are input into the earth, but one
pretends that one transmitted the difference frequency
between them, the difference frequency will act as if it
were a sign wave transmitted through a linear, nondistorting
medium __ even though the individual two waves suffer all
sorts of distortion, breakdown, etc. This is a way of
"linearizing" a nonlinear situation if it isn't too
nonlinear.
12. Yariv, ibid., p. 500-501. Go back also and take a relook at
the photo on p. 75 of Pepper, Scientific American, 254(1),
Jan. 1986. Do you see that, if a heat source scatters EM
energy into a surrounding phase conjugate mirror, you will
get some of the scattered energy re-ordered and returned to
the source?
13. An amusing lay description of Tesla's experiment with the
accidental build-up of "earthquake-like" resonance in the
buildings and area surrounding his New York laboratory, from
induction by a tiny electromechanical oscillator, is
contained in Margaret Cheney, Tesla: Man Out of Time,
Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1981, p.
115-116. Slightly more light is shed on the incident by
John J. O'Neill, Prodigal Genius: The Life of Nikola Tesla,
Angriff Press, Hollywood, California, 1981, New Printing, p.
155-165.
14. See John J. O'Neill, Prodigal Genius, p. 164-165. Tesla
stated that his telegeodynamic oscillator, so small it could
be slipped into a pocket, could be attached to any part of
the Empire State Building and in 12 to 13 minutes would
bring the building to full resonance, and destroy it.
O'Neill could not make out the decimal point in his notes,
so could not be sure Tesla stated it would require 0.25 HP
or 2.5 HP. We point out that it must have been 0.25 if it
was to be slipped into a rather large pocket. A 2.5 HP
electric motor of the time would rather definitely not fit
in one's pocket! See also Cheney, Tesla: Man Out of Time,
p. 116-117, 275.
Tesla indicated that his telegeodynamics could project
enormous energy through the earth, essentially without loss.
In other references he indicated that the energy would
travel in beams to distant points on the earth, producing
desired effects there. He also indicated that he was
utilizing a unique form of resonance not presently
understood by science. Suppose we assume that Tesla had
discovered the mechanical analogue of the nonlinear optical
Page 3
pumped phase conjugate mirror. Then his "oscillator"
actually involved mechanically pumping (by opposing
mechanical waves or blows) a suitable nonlinear mechanical
phase conjugation mirror material. If timed at a mechanical
resonance frequency of the material, and attached to a
building, an interesting phenomenon would occur. The scalar
EM potential base waves for rhythmic scalar mechanical
stress waves have an affinity for traveling through the
atomic nucleus and its immediately adjacent vacuum. Recall
that, in QM, all mechanical forces are generated by exchange
of virtual photons, so opposing forces in a mechanical
stress are caused by bidirectional virtual photon exchanges.
It is "scalar electromagnetic" at base. As the scalar EM
stress potential wave travels through its vacuum/nuclei
medium, the normal electron orbital vibrations (including
those caused from covalent bond vibrations, lattice
vibrations, and temperature vibrations) constitute "signal
wave inputs," causing the gating and emission of phase
conjugate replica waves from the pumped nuclei out into the
material lattices. If the stress pumping is at a resonance
frequency of the material/nuclei, or a harmonic or
subharmonic of it, then nonlinear oscillation theory
together with E.T. Whittaker's bidirectional EM wave
composition of the scalar stress potential will result in a
phase-locked buildup or accumulation of the gated PCR energy
from the activated vacuum/nuclei internal medium by
constructive interference of the continually-gated PCR EM
energy into the material lattice at its resonant frequency.
In that case a "forced resonance" condition occurs in the
building, surrounding earth, etc., and this scalar
mechanical stress resonance spreads and builds, to enormous
power __ even to the destruction of the building or to an
earthquake.
But since the oscillator itself has certainly not input such
a large amount of energy, from whence does all the extra
energy come? The answer is contained in Sweet and Bearden,
"Utilizing scalar electromagnetics to tap vacuum energy,"
IECEC '91, ibid. The activated nuclei, in this mechanical
scalar oscillator case, actually involve an oscillation
modulated upon the virtual photon flux exchange between the
activated local vacuum and each activated nucleus, similar
to the type of oscillation that Sweet traps in the barium
nuclei of his vacuum triode. This scalar oscillation onto
the activated nucleus converts that nucleus to a pumped
phase conjugate mirror (PPCM). Covalent bond oscillations
and material lattice vibrations introduce "signal wave"
inputs into the pumped nucleus through the EM coupling with
its electron shells. Amplified phase conjugate replica
(PCR) waves are thus emitted by these PPCM nuclei, in
response to the signal wave inputs. According to standard
PPCM theory, these amplified PCR waves will thus leave the
nucleus and travel out through the electron shells into the
material lattice, being scattered there. This process
effectively gates energy from the vacuum/nucleus VPF
exchange into the PCR waves, which "backtrack" the signal
wave input path, back out into the material lattices, etc.
If the pumping is at the fundamental, a harmonic, or a
subharmonic of the resonance frequency of the materials,
Page 4
then the scattered energy will accumulate "in phase" and the
materials and building will be in increasing resonance.
Thus the building and the local earth will begin to build up
increasing, rumbling oscillations, as the increasing PCR
waves from the PPCM nuclei scatter increasing energy into
their constituent materials. The enormous energy involved
is actually organized and gated from the excited local
vacuum itself.
As to Tesla's telegeodynamics and making mechanical waves
that are laser-like and travel through the earth, one need
only apply the known principle of the forward-going PCR
wave. In other words, one deliberately inputs, say, two
small signal waves. The PPCM material acts as if a single
signal wave had been input, as a vector resultant wave. The
resulting amplified PCR wave thus "backtracks" the
resultant. If the resultant signal wave input is a sharp
laser-like incoming beam, then the responding amplified PCR
wave will be a sharp laser-like beam in the reverse
direction. In such manner, a laser-like mechanical
oscillation beam can be launched through the earth. The
laser-like portion is based on a laser-like scalar potential
beam that travels through the vacuum and atomic nuclei as
its natural medium. Such a beam should travel through the
earth or through the ocean with ease, since the scalar wave
is gravitational, and not affected by the ionized electron
shells of seawater, e.g. Note that, by slightly varying the
signal wave input resultant, one can "steer" the PCR wave
through its medium (the vacuum/atomic nuclei), much as a
phased array radar steers its beam through space. It
strongly suggests that one can make an underwater scalar
radar or a "through the intervening earth" scalar radar, as
well.
15. Y. Aharonov and D. Bohm, "Significance of Electromagnetic
Potentials in the Quantum Theory," Physical Review, Second
Series, 115(3), Aug. 1, 1959, p. 458-491. For an extensive
discussion of the Aharonov-Bohm effect and an extensive list
of references, see S. Olariu and I. Iovitzu Popescu, "The
quantum effects of electromagnetic fluxes," Reviews of
Modern Physics, 57(2), Apr. 1985. For confirmation that the
AB effect has been proven to all but the most diehard of
skeptics, see Bertram Schwarzschild, "Currents in normal-
metal rings exhibit Aharonov-Bohm effect," Physics Today,
39(1), Jan. 1986, p. 17-20.
16. See Timothy Boyer, "The classical vacuum," Scientific
American, Aug. 1985, p. 70; Walter Greiner and Joseph
Hamilton, "Is the Vacuum Really Empty?", American Scientist,
Mar.-Apr. 1980, p. 154; I.J.R. Aitchison, "Nothing's
plenty: The vacuum in modern quantum field theory,"
Contemporary Physics, 26(4), 1985, p. 333-391; Jack S.
Greenberg and Walter Greiner, "Search for the sparking of
the vacuum," Physics Today, Aug. 1982, p. 24-32; Richard E.
Prange and Peter Strance, "The semiconducting vacuum,"
American Journal of Physics, 52(1), Jan. 1984, p. 19-21.
See also R. Jackiw and J.R. Schrieffer, "The decay of the
vacuum," Nuclear Physics B 190, 1981, p. 944.
Page 5
17. Nick Herbert, Quantum Reality: Beyond the New Physics,
anchor Books, Doubleday, Garden City, New York, 1987 is
particularly recommended.
18. An excellent and thorough reference is Romon Podolny,
Something Called Nothing __ Physical Vacuum, What is It?",
Mir, 1986.
19. See particularly H.E. Puthoff, "Source of vacuum
electromagnetic zero-point energy, Physical Review A, 40(9),
Nov. 1, 1989, p. 4857-4862; "The energetic vacuum:
Implications for energy research," Speculations in Science
and Technology, 13(4), 1990, p. 247-257; "Gravity as a Zero-
Point Fluctuation Force," Physical Review A, Vol. 39, 1989,
p. 2333; "Ground State of Hydrogen as a Zero-Point-
Fluctuation-Determined State," Physical Review D, Vol. 35,
1987, p. 3266.
20. T.D. Lee, Chapter 25: Outlook, "Possibility of vacuum
engineering," Particle Physics and Introduction to Field
Theory, Harwood Academic Publishers, New York, 1981, p. 826.
The application of the extended Whittaker scalar EM is in
fact the method of accomplishing the very vacuum engineering
speculated upon by Nobel Laureate Lee.
21. Here I particularly recommend B.J. Hiley and F. David Peat,
Eds., Quantum Implications: Essays in Honour of David Bohm,
Routledge & Kegan Paul, London and New York, 1987. You
should of course also be aware of what Bohm's hidden
variable theory is all about, and its connection with
consciousness. See D. Bohm, Phys. Rev. 85, 1952, p. 166,
180; Causality and Chance in Modern Physics, Routledge &
Kegan Paul, London, 1957; "Hidden variables and the
implicate order," in Quantum Implications: Essays in Honour
of David Bohm, Eds. B.J. Hiley and F. David Peat, Routledge
& Kegan Paul, London & New York, 1987, p. 33. See also D.
Bohm and B.J. Hiley, Found. Phys. 5, 1975, p. 93; Found.
Phys. 12, 1982, p. 1001; Found. Phys. 14, 1984, p. 255. See
also Y. Aharonov and D. Albert, "The issue of retrodiction
in Bohm's theory," in Quantum Implications: Essays in Honour
of David Bohm, ibid., p. 223. For a discussion of what
nonlocal theory may really entail in terms of modular
variables, see Yakir Aharonov, "Non-local phenomena and the
Aharonov-Bohm effect," Quantum Concepts in Space and Time,
Eds. R. Penrose and C.J. Isham, Clarendon Press, Oxford,
1986, p. 41-64. For other important discussions see Lee
Smolin, "Stochastic mechanics, hidden variables, and
gravity," ibid., p. 147-173; and Abner Shimony, "Events and
processes in the quantum world," ibid., p. 182-203. For a
new viewpoint on emission processes, see Robert M. Wald,
"Correlations and causality in quantum field theory," ibid.,
p. 293-301; and Serge Haroche and Daniel Kleppner, "Cavity
quantum electrodynamics," Physics Today, Jan. 1989, p. 24-
30. See David Bohm, Wholeness and the Implicate Order,
Routledge and Kegan Paul; London, Boston, and Henley; 1980.
22. Even Einstein __ who was awarded the Nobel Prize in part for
explaining the photoelectric effect __ never understood what
a photon was. In his later years Einstein wrote: "All these
Page 7
50 years of pondering have not brought me closer to
answering the question: what are light-quanta?". The
quotation is contained in P. Speziali, Ed., Albert Einstein-
Michele Besso Correspondence 1903-1955, Hermann, Paris,
1972. There are formidable problems with the photon
concept. E.g., the "energy" of a photon is not localized,
but is distributed over the entire volume of the field and
there is, in general, no use in attaching a coordinate to
the photon. A photon in general cannot be described by a
wavefunction, but only for special cases. In geometrical
optics as well as Maxwell's electrodynamics, there is no
room for photons. The complex one-photon wavefunction
should not be identified with the electromagnetic field.
For a given photon number, the electric or magnetic fields
at a point cannot be measured as a function of time. For
states with a fixed photon number, the expectation value of
the electric field is zero even for a very large photon
number, so that in this case the correspondence principle
cannot be used. For additional strong anomalies in the
concept of a photon, see J. Strand, "Photons in introductory
quantum physics," American Journal of Physics, 54(7), July
1986, p. 650-652.
23. Richard Kidd et Al, "Evolution of the Modern Photon,"
American Journal of Physics, 57(1), Jan. 1989, p. 27-35.
Note particularly that detection is actually binary, but
one-half of each detection/measurement is normally discarded
[actually, it is just hidden and listed as simply "Newton's
third law reaction force."]. See also R. Chen,
"Cancellation of Internal Forces," American Journal of
Physics, 49(4), Apr. 1981, p. 372 for the fact that the
internal EM energy is always involved in interactions, but
usually never taken into account.
Indeed, the so-called "photon interaction" is usually a
spin-2 graviton breakup interaction. The graviton fissions
(the photon and antiphoton decouple). The photon half
normally interacts with the electron shells. The antiphoton
half "burrows back into" the nucleus and interacts with it,
providing the Newtonian third law recoil and the
conservation of angular momentum, energy, etc. The
ubiquitous presence of the Newtonian third law reaction
force is direct and positive evidence for the fact that not
only a photon interacts, but an antiphoton interacts also.
Consider. Quantum field theory requires that every
mechanical force be generated by virtual photon
interactions. Therefore, to be consistent, Newton's third
law reaction force must be generated by photon interaction.
Since the 3rd law force is considered to be universal, it
means that the "photon interaction that is a reverse of the
normal photon interaction" is universal, and this "reversed
photon" interaction must normally accompany each normal
photon interaction. We point out that the only type of
photon that would consistently produce the exact opposite
force from the photon interaction would be a phase conjugate
or time-reversal of that photon. I.e., there must have been
two photons present in the interaction: the normal or time-
forward photon, and the time-reversed or antiphoton. This
Page 7
is actually implied by a quantum field theory statement of
Newton's third law.
However, the point can be even more rigorously proven. In a
phase conjugate material, one can trick the antiphoton into
exiting out of the atom, instead of interacting in the
nucleus. In that case, according to the "photon interaction
is normally graviton interaction" principle, the agent that
normally generates Newton's third law recoil did not reach
the nucleus, and so the recoil should be absent. And it is
absent, in actual experiments. Such a phase conjugate
mirror does not recoil if it emits a phase conjugate replica
wave (phase conjugate photons, or antiphotons). And it
doesn't recoil no matter how powerful that antiphoton
emission is __ no matter how many antiphotons it emits. On
the other hand, if the same material emits an ordinary
photon, it does recoil, and Newton's third law is present.
This experiment directly establishes that most photon
interactions actually are graviton interactions __ paired
photon/antiphoton interactions.
24. To see just how arbitrary and postulational are present
"definitions" of mass and force, see Robert Bruce Lindsay
and Henry Margenau, Foundations of Physics, Dover
Publications, New York, 1963, p. 283-287. Note on page 283
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 also Richard P. Feynman, Robert B. Leighton, and Matthew
Sands, The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Addison-Wesley, New
York, Vol 1, p. 2-4, for a definition of the electric field
in context of its potentiality for producing a force. The
modern view of the field is that, because of vacuum
fluctuations, rigorously one no longer speaks of "the"
field, but of the probability of a particular field
configuration. See Charles W. Misner, Kip S. Thorne, and
John Archibald Wheeler, Gravitation, W.H. Freeman and Co.,
San Francisco, 1973, p. 1191. Note that this view is still
in error when one considers electron precession in the
interaction of vacuum "fields" and the electron gas inside a
detecting probe wire.
25. Aharonov and Bohm, Physical Review, 1959, ibid.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have comments or other information relating to such topics
as this paper covers, please upload to KeelyNet or send to the
Vangard Sciences address as listed on the first page.
Thank you for your consideration, interest and support.
Jerry W. Decker.........Ron Barker...........Chuck Henderson
Vangard Sciences/KeelyNet
--------------------------------------------------------------------
If we can be of service, you may contact
Jerry at (214) 324-8741 or Ron at (214) 242-9346
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 8