(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