Explanation of John Bedini’s Formation of Negative Resistors in Batteries Pt1
Explanation of John Bedini's Formation of
Negative Resistors in Batteries
By Tom Bearden 4-26-00
First we must include the usual warning that the experimenter assumes all
legal responsibilities for his experiments, at his own volition. This
author assumes no responsibilities or liabilities for such actions.
John has kindly given his permission for me to explain his use of the lead
acid battery and how he gets the vacuum to contribute excess energy to the
battery and to the circuit. I'll discuss the battery a bit, very informally
because I don't have a lot of time to go back and look up all the
references, etc. and prepare a formal paper. But we'll cover the gist of it
so you can understand how John uses batteries and switches them in his
units, and why he does it the way he does. We'll point out the processes
that are involved in his methodology, and why he can use a lead acid
battery to produce COP1.0 in perfect compliance with the laws of physics,
thermodynamics, and the conservation of energy law. One must use a
combination of electrodynamics and particle physics to grasp these
processes and mechanisms, because classical EM theory does not include the
active vacuum interaction, even though it's been clearly proven
(theoretically and experimentally) in particle physics for decades.
Vacuum energy already powers every electrical circuit and every electrical
load today, and always has done so from the beginning. Contrary to the
received view, extraction of usable EM energy from the vacuum is the
easiest thing in all the world to do, and it is ubiquitous to all our
circuits and power systems. All the coal, oil, and natural gas ever burned
in powerplants added not a single watt to the powerline. All that energy
input from the fuel combustion was used only to continuously restore the
source dipoles in the generators, dipoles that our scientists and engineers
unwittingly design the external circuits to keep destroying. The source
dipole, once established, was and is a "negative resistor" of enormous
power that has powered every electrical circuit and load from the
beginning. As we shall see, Bedini discovered how to make a negative
resistor right inside the battery itself.
Every electrodynamicist already assumes (and utilizes) the fact that you
can freely change the potential energy of any EM system, at will. It's
called "regauging". E.g., Jackson's Classical Electrodynamics, second
edition (and any other important EM book one chooses), applies arbitrary
Lorentz "regauging" to the Maxwell-Heaviside equations, changing them to a
new set erroneously said to be identical to the others in every way. They
are not. Specifically, that little change (symmetrical regauging after
first Lorenz in 1867 and later H.A. Lorentz), simply discards all open
Maxwellian systems far from thermodynamic equilibrium with the active
vacuum. In short, it arbitrarily discards all overunity EM systems,
including those that could permissibly capture and use energy from the
active vacuum to power themselves and their loads simultaneously. A priori,
such Maxwellian systems are far from thermodynamic equilibrium in the
vacuum flux -- much as a windmill is out of equilibrium with the wind's
energy exchange with it.
First, to understand John's work one must be aware that there are several
currents in a lead acid battery, not just one. For our purposes we will
need just two: the heavy lead-type ion current in the battery, and the
electron current in the battery but also commuting into the external
circuit.
Note particularly that the electrons communicate between the inside of the
battery (e.g., the plates) and the external circuit, but the lead ions do
not. There is thus an interface and a sharp separation between the electron
current and the ion current.
Here's the point everyone is missing. Check the mass-to-charge ratio of
each of the two currents. (I have it somewhere, from calculating it years
ago, but have no time to search for it again. So someone should look up the
numbers again and add them up; it's straightforward.). As I recall, the
lead ions' m/q ratio is several hundred thousand times the m/q ratio of the
electrons. For our purposes here, all we need to know is that the m/q ratio
for the lead ions is very much bigger than the m/q ratio for the electrons.
So there is obviously a hysteresis (time delay) in the response of the
massive ion current to far less massive electron currents that interact and
try to change the ion current and its momentum. This time-delay in ion
response to electron urging can be adroitly manipulated and used to cause
the vacuum to add energy to the ions and also to the electrons. In short,
the delay can be manipulated to freely "regauge" the system, freely
changing its potential energy, and dramatically increasing how much
potential energy is available for battery recharging and how much is
available for powering the external circuit (loads and losses).
Instead of thinking of the energy John inputs to the battery as the
"powering" energy, one must think of it as "triggering" and "timing" energy
which initiates certain other key interactions to occur. These additional
interactions then add lots of additional energy to the ions and the
electrons, all for free or nearly so. In short, John "switches'" and
"triggers" certain kinds of vacuum interactions, including the highly
specialized formation of a negative resistor in the battery itself. He then
"triggers" that negative resistor in certain ways to increase its
functioning even further.
John's method does the following: (1) It forms a true negative resistor in
a most unexpected way, inside a common lead acid battery, (2) it uses that
negative resistor to extract excess energy from the vacuum and furnish it
both to the ions in charging mode and to the electrons in load powering
mode, and (3) it adds several other stimuli which increase the
amplification of the negative resistor and further enhance the effect,
increasing the excess energy extracted from the vacuum and collected in the
charging process and also in the powering process.
Specifically, the delay in ion response can be manipulated to place the
battery in ion recharging mode while the signal pulse electrons are
simultaneously placed in external circuit powering mode. By manipulating
the hysteresis and adroitly timing the electron pulses and pulse widths,
one can break the forced Lorentz symmetry of the excitation discharge in a
usually closed current loop containing both the battery's source dipole and
the external load. This is possible since John's method deliberately opens
the loop so that the vacuum energy enters freely, increasing the
potentialization (energy collection) upon the ions and the electrons as
well.
Suppose we "hit" a battery's terminals with an instantaneous leading edge
rise of a pulse of electrons and potential. Let us assume the "hit" is in
the "battery-charging" mode. The electrons drive in instantly, trying to
force the heavy ions to start moving in the charging direction. For a
moment the lead ions just sit there, and then very slowly (compared to the
electrons!) start to reluctantly move in the recharging mode. During that
"ion response lag" time, the electrons continue to furiously rush in and
pile-up on the plates. The charge density sharply increases on the plates
in that pile-up where the charges are "squeezing" together (clustering). So
now we have a much higher potential suddenly rising in the squeezed charge
cluster, because of the increased charge density arising there.
Refer to E.T. Whittaker, "On the Partial Differential Equations of
Mathematical Physics, Mathematische Annalen, Vol. 57, 1903, p. 333-355.
Whittaker shows us that a "scalar" potential is not at all what they taught
us in EM theory 101. If one hasn't read Whittaker 1903, one will need to do
so.
As Whittaker shows, the scalar potential (actually its reaction cross
section is what even Whittaker is decomposing) identically is a harmonic
set of bidirectional longitudinal EM wavepairs, where each pair is a phase
conjugate pair. In short, a "scalar" potential identically is a
multivectorial, multiwave entity (but comprised of longitudinally polarized
EM waves, and those waves come in bidirectional pairs!). In fact, because
in the phase conjugate pair one wave is "time-forward" and the other is
"time-reversed", time-reversal and time-forward perturbations occur paired
and simultaneously in nature's electrodynamics. This is erroneously
omitted, however, in Maxwellian electrodynamics theory.
Anyway, the "scalar" potential isn't even a scalar entity. Since Whittaker
1903, the proof has been in the literature nearly a century and it has just
been ignored!
Since the QM vacuum contains and is a virtual particle flux (that's one way
to model it) and thus contains energy, it is (or can be modeled as) a
special kind of "scalar" potential. Every EM potential is in fact a change
to the vacuum energy density. Any EM potential in a circuit is a change to
the ambient vacuum potential or to some intermediate potential that is.
Rigorously, any increased EM potential in a circuit is a special kind of
negative resistor, since extra bidirectional, flowing EM energy from the
vacuum has been added to the circuit. However, electrodynamicists have not
recognized that regauging produces a true negative resistor. Very large
bidirectional energy flows (very large potentials) can be freely added to
the circuit at any time. However, to use these negative resistors so that
we extract usable energy from them, we have to learn how to more carefully
use bidirectional potentials so that we apply them adroitly in two opposing
directions simultaneously.
No textbook or professor ever calculates the potential itself, but only its
reaction cross section. Consider that for awhile; it's quite rigorous. We
have been and are taught to calculate only how much energy is diverged from
the potential, around a little unit point static charge (assumed), and that
little "swirl-around" energy is then supposed to be "the potential". It
isn't. The little swirl-around is the energy diverged from the potential.
Calling that "the potential" is analogous to mistaking a tiny little
whirlpool in a river as the entire river. Same error.
For more than a century the electricians have erroneously "defined" the
scalar potential "at a point" as the amount of energy diverged from it
around a little fixed unit point static charge at that point The amount of
energy "swirled or diverted from all those bidirectional LWs around a
little unit point static charge" fixed at a point, does indeed have a
scalar magnitude. For fixed conditions, there's a fixed amount of energy in
the "swirl-around" at any moment. But that "magnitude of the energy in the
swirl" isn't the potential; it's what's diverted from the potential.
Obviously it's a major non sequitur to mistake "the" potential for a tiny
fraction of itself.
As a set of bidirectional LWs, the potential is an ensemble of mighty,
rushing rivers of EM energy, with paired rivers flowing in opposite
directions. From those rushing rivers of energy comprising any nonzero
"static" potential, you can collect as much energy as you wish, just by
adding more intercepting/collecting charges. The equation is already known
and very simple: W = (phi)q, where W is the total energy collected
(diverged) from a potential of reaction cross section phi, upon
intercepting charges q. Fix the phi to a constant value, then add as much q
as is needed to have W reach any value you wish. One can collect a billion
watts of power from a millivolt, e.g., given enough intercepting charges q.
The "magnitude" of the potential isn't fixed at any point, because the
potential is a set of flows involving the entire vacuum of the universe.
Anyway, back to our battery that we just "popped" with an electron pulse.
Now we have a higher potential in that pileup of electrons onto the
interface with the ions, urging the ions forward. Well, the potential
energy being collected on those ions (i.e., diverged around them from the
potential's multiwaves) is given by W = (phi) q, where W is the energy
collected from the new and dramatically increased potential with reaction
cross section (phi), upon charges q -- in this case, upon the ions. And
also upon the piled up electrons on the circuit side of the battery plate,
because the waves comprising the potential run in both directions.
Set a potential in the middle of a transmission line, and it takes off like
two scalded hogs in both directions simultaneously, thereby revealing its
bidirectional vectorial nature. The new, increased potential from the pile-
up at the interface between electrons and ions in the battery takes off
like two scalded hogs in both directions -- into the battery onto the ions
and out into the external circuit onto the electrons.
But that increased potential at the pileup is actually a change to the
ambient potential of the vacuum. It is part of the vacuum and a
reorganization of it, reaching across the universe in all directions (or
speeding out there in all directions at light speed).
Since the internal LW waves comprising the increased potential at the pile-
up are bidirectional, we have added energy to both the electrons out there
in the circuit and to the ions in there in the battery. Since the electrons
react (relax and move) so much faster than the ions, we can now be drawing
power in the external circuit and its load, due to the instant response of
the overpotentialized electrons, while we are still urging those
overpotentialized ions into motion in a recharging direction.
For the purist, electrons really move on the average with only a very small
drift velocity in the circuit, often on the order of a few inches per hour.
However, that average "drift" is comprised of an enormous distribution of
electron velocities, collisions, etc. So what we have actually done is
dramatically change that distribution underlying the drift velocity. The
"current" in a circuit is not as simple as the physical movement of
electrons like marbles through a hollow pipe, even though loosely one
usually uses that kind of language.
I sent you the IC-2000 paper, in which we pointed out that there is no such
thing as an isolated charge anyway, when you consider the shadowing virtual
charges of opposite sign in the vacuum that cluster around it. That is
already well-established in QM theory. So an "isolated charge" really is a
set of dipoles, where each dipole is comprised of a piece of the observed
charge and one of the clustering virtual charges. Each of those dipoles
contains a potential between its ends, and thus identically generates a
bidirectional LW flow across the universe, altering (and structuring and
organizing) the entire vacuum.
In particle physics, it has been known for more than 40 years (couple of
Nobel Prizes awarded and all that) that any dipole is a broken symmetry in
the fierce virtual energy exchange between the active vacuum and the dipole
charges. By definition of broken symmetry, this means that some of that
virtual disordered energy continuously absorbed from the vacuum by the
dipole's charges, is NOT radiated back as disordered virtual photons.
Instead, it is self-ordered by the charges. Open systems not in equilibrium
with their active environment -- in this case the active vacuum -- are
permitted to do that, and a dipole is such an open system in disequilibrium
with the active vacuum. So the re-ordered component of the energy emitted
from the charges is radiated back as observable EM field energy flow, which
does interact macroscopically and observably with charges.
Rigorously, this "charges pile-up" at the plate interface between electrons
and ions has asymmetrically self-regauged the system including both the
recharging ions inside the battery and the electron current out in the
external circuit now forced into powering mode. The reorganized vacuum has
added excess energy to the entire system, the excess being energy which was
extracted from the vacuum by that pile-up of charges, each with its
associated clustered virtual charges, so that the charge pile-up acts as a
cluster of dipoles.
We have specified a situation and process which asymmetrically self-
regauges the system, using excess energy from the vacuum. The increased
potential at the pile-up is in fact a direct change to the entire vacuum.
It is an organization of the entire vacuum. To the system the change in the
vacuum is negentropic because the vacuum energy has been organized into a
bidirectional set of flows. Such self-organization is permissible in an
open system not in equilibrium with its external active environment. All
this is based on rigorous, proven physics, but it is not in the hoary old
classical electrodynamics, which contains a great many foundations errors
and omissions.
The set of bidirectional energy flows involving the entire vacuum and
comprising that increased potential at the pile-up, represents a re-
organization of the local vacuum to a more ordered state. In short,
negentropy. The pile-up of charges and its associated potential
(negentropic reorganization of the vacuum) constitute an active negative
resistor.
This is the way that John creates a negative resistor directly inside a
lead acid storage battery (and in several other kinds of batteries also).
The pile-up becomes a true negative resistor, extracting additional biwave
flowing energy from the external vacuum. The negative resistor receives
energy from the vacuum in that half of the unobserved internal LWs that
flow from every point in external space to the pile-up. The negative
resistor then sends that organized energy out into the "circuit" in that
half of the potential's internal LWs that flow out into the battery and in
the opposite direction into the external circuit and on out to every other
point in the universe.
One should again check Whittaker 1903 and think about that extra "pile-up"
potential as a harmonic set of bidirectional EM longitudinal wavepairs,
until one understands this active negative resistance effect clearly.
The absolutely permissible, justified, scientific result is that the energy
of the system is freely and dramatically increased (the system is regauged)
from the negentropic vacuum. The ions in that increased energy flow into
the battery take on more energy than we ourselves "input", with the excess
being taken from the reorganized vacuum by the action of the negative
resistor formed at the pile-up. The charges in the pile-up took on more
energy, taken from the vacuum, and the higher potential also flows at the
speed of light back out the terminals along the conductors, potentializing
the surface charges and increasing the intercepted energy diverged into the
conductors by the surface charges. Since a back-lash emf exists from the
higher potential at the back-up and the beginning potential in the external
circuit, current flows in the external circuit (1) in circuit-powering
mode, and (2) with greater energy collected upon the electrons from the
increased Poynting energy flow diverged into the circuit conductors.
John puts in some electrons and potential and makes a negative resistor.
The action of the negative resistor then overpotentializes both the
battery-charging ions and the circuit-powering electrons. The vacuum
furnishes the extra potential energy. So John now has lots more energy in
the circuit than he himself put in, both to recharge the battery and power
the load.
The net result is that the system eats its cake and has it too, courtesy of
having produced a negative resistor and tricked the active vacuum to
momentarily give it lots of excess energy (potential energy). It collects
some of that excess energy upon both the recharging ions and the circuit
electrons back-forced to power the circuit. Note that the formation of the
negative resistor actually produced in the external circuit a "back emf"
which is of the circuit powering type, even though in the battery the ion
current is still moving and accelerating in the charging position -
- exactly opposed to the electron current!
So the timing and negative resistor effect simultaneously introduce
additional energy extracted from the vacuum to (1) the battery charging
process, and (2) the load powering process in the external circuit.
Then we deliberately cut off the pulse sharply, with the ions now moving in
the charge direction and with the electrons in the external circuit
powering the load. The sharp cutoff rate produces a very interesting effect
here also, if we end it just precisely while most of the pile-up (and
higher potential) still exists at the plate-ion interface. In that case,
Lenz's law applies due to the sharp cutoff and it aids us, since
momentarily the negative resistor potential is even further dramatically
increased by the Lenz reaction! So even more potential energy momentarily
surges out onto the circuit electrons in the "powering the circuit" mode,
and even more potential energy simultaneously surges onto the ions in the
"charging the battery" mode.
The result of this second effect is that (1) the negative resistor is again
increased, (2) even more energy is furnished from the vacuum to the
battery-charging process, and (3) even more energy is furnished from the
vacuum to the load-powering process.
In short, the system suddenly and remarkably increases the negative
resistor effect, self-regauging itself for the second consecutive time, and
increasing the excess energy extracted from the vacuum!
This second surge of excess energy comes directly from the vacuum, from the
suddenly increased negative resistor, via those suddenly increased
bidirectional longitudinal EM wave energy flows between the pile-up and
every point in all the surrounding space. That's what a bidirectional set
of wavepairs means; observable energy flows from the pile-up (source
dipole) to every point in external space, and from every point in external
space virtual (complex) energy flows to the source dipole.
That is the second case where we cause the external circuit to be
"regauged" and change its potential energy freely, and we cause the
internal ions to be "regauged" and change their potential energy freely.
Again we accent that electrodynamicists already assume that any EM system
can freely change its energy at any time; it's called "regauging". It is
inexplicable why electrodynamicists have not focused upon actually
producing self-regauging circuits which asymmetrically discharge their
freely increased energy, as John has done, so that the dissipated energy is
used to recharge the battery while also powering the load. Instead, the
electrodynamicists continue to give us regauging circuits which
symmetrically discharge their freely increased energy, so that half the
dissipated energy is used to destroy the source dipole of the generator or
battery while the other half is dissipated in the external loads and
losses.
On the other hand, John uses half the excess regauging energy from the
negative resistor to restore the battery (source) dipole, and uses the
other half to power the load and losses simultaneously. So he
asymmetrically discharges the free excitation energy received from the
vacuum via the negative resistor.
But back to John's battery process. Now we have the Lenz effect pulse
finally removed and the ions moving in charging mode but slowing down now.
Since the Lenz law effect dies rapidly, we have a rapid resumption of
"draw" of electrons from the pile-up into the external circuit to power it.
But for a bit, the ions only start to slow and have not yet stopped
completely. They "overshoot" because of their sluggishness, and keep on
charging the battery a moment longer. During this third moment, the
external circuit is still being powered even though the battery is still in
charging mode.
When all these "excess energy" mechanisms are added, one finds that excess
energy can be collected from the vacuum by the negative resistor and used
appropriately to produce a system with a permissible overall COP1.0
performance. The dramatic difference in John's method, from the
conventional method, is that in John's method the same current through the
load does not pass back through the back emf of the source dipole negative
resistor to continually destroy it. On the contrary, he inverts the phase
of the current through the source dipole negative resistor to continually
restore it.
There are several other schemes that can be used at this point. If the
follow-on pulsing etc. is matched to again initiate the effects discussed,
one can continue to draw power in the circuit while charging the battery,
etc. for about a succession of the three periods of time: (1) the initial
hysteresis pileup, formation of the negative resistor, and associated
effects, (2) the following Lenz law reaction, increase of the negative
resistor, and associated effects, and (3) the follow-on period of
simultaneous charging the battery and powering the circuit from the pile-up
while the overshoot of the ions is still slowing and ending.
One trick John sometimes uses is to time the next pulse front to arrive
just at the time that the ions are almost but not quite stopped in their
"overshoot" charging mode and are preparing to reverse into discharge mode
(following the electrons in the external circuit, which are already in that
mode). With the exact timing, the whole situation starts over. There are
several other variations that John has also used and found effective.
In developing this methodology, John long ago built various controllers and
timers, and experimented with a variety of pulses, pulse widths, and timing
to get it all just right for a specific battery of interest. He had one
little battery-powered motor -- an inefficient little beast with only about
35-40% normal efficiency -- which continuously "ran off the battery"
seemingly (actually, off the excess energy from the negative resistor
created and manipulated in the battery) for a couple of years. The motor
represented a "load" continually being driven by the excess energy
extracted from the vacuum by the negative resistor continually created in
the battery. He recharged the battery and ran the motor directly off vacuum
energy, using the precise set of negative resistor effects just discussed.
This is part one of a two part article.
