Bearden · Source catalogue

Bearden says classical electromagnetics (CEM) is wrong or incomplete in its definitions of energy, potential, charge, voltage and force, and that fixing this opens a route to 'free' (overunity) electrical energy. He defines energy and potential as the same thing: an 'ordering' in the virtual photon flux (VPF) of the quantum vacuum. He invokes the Whittaker (1904) and Ziolkowski decompositions to say a scalar potential contains an infinite harmonic series of bidirectional wave pairs (a wave and its phase-conjugate 'antiwave'), so a potential is a 'river of energy' linking a charge to the whole universe. He holds that force fields do not exist in vacuum, only potentials and gradients; that EM waves are longitudinal 'stress potential' waves; and that charge is 'discretized', not quantized. The device recipe is a two-cycle switching scheme. Cycle 1: connect a 'collector' (a doped, degenerate-semiconductor element with a long electron relaxation time) to a battery during the delay before current flows, so electrons are 'potentialized' without drawing power from the source. Cycle 2: switch the collector away from the battery and across a load, so the load is powered 'for free' and the source is never 'killed' by internal dissipation. Analogies: waterwheel with a gate-closing rope, coal-fired locomotive fireman. 'Pseudo-equations' [1]-[8] give trapped energy K_T = V_T x Coul_T. A copper relaxation time of 1.5e-19 s is quoted against about 10 days for quartz (p.17). Claims that one car battery could run a car indefinitely, that an elevated wire can tap the 200-300 V/m earth-ionosphere field (p.18; the Foreword says 250 V/m), 90% utility-bill savings and home units for a few hundred dollars (p.18), that rising EM signal density will be biologically harmful with a promised cancer cure (pp.10-11), and that the Swiss Testatika is an overunity device. Maxwell's original quaternion theory is said to have carried the gravity-EM unification, which Heaviside's vector version dropped. Footnote 25 says local energy conservation for closed systems is violated because the system is open to a hidden source. Many references (Whittaker, Ziolkowski, Yariv, Feynman Lectures, Aharonov-Bohm, Tesla, Barrett). No experiment or measured data are given. Tone is informal and evangelical.

Key claims

• Energy and potential have an identical definition: an ordering in the virtual photon flux of the vacuum.
• A static scalar potential is internally a harmonic series of phase-locked bidirectional wave pairs (Whittaker/Ziolkowski structure), so it carries unlimited energy exchanged with the whole universe.
• No electromagnetic force fields exist in vacuum, only potentials and potential gradients; vacuum EM waves are longitudinal stress-potential waves, not transverse E/B waves.
• Electron charge is not quantized but varies with the ambient potential through the virtual photon flux exchange.
• A collector with a finite electron relaxation time can take 'current-free' potential energy (V_T x Coul_T) from a battery without drawing power from it, and the battery is replenished by the vacuum.
• Switching the charged collector off the source and across a load in a separate circuit powers the load indefinitely at no cost to the source (overunity).
• Conventional circuit practice kills its own source by dissipating current inside the source's internal resistance, which is the only real cost of electrical power.
• Maxwell's equations as taught are Heaviside's truncation; Maxwell's original quaternion theory contained the unification of gravity and electromagnetism.

Relevance: The central source document. It sets out Bearden's theoretical foundation (vacuum, potential, longitudinal waves, quaternion Maxwell) and the first-stated practical method for extracting 'free' energy.

Mainstream conflict: Direct conflict. Standard theory says E and B fields and waves exist in vacuum (transverse EM waves are observed), potential energy is not 'an ordering of virtual photons', charge is quantized, voltage is a potential difference that exists before any current, and a source delivering energy to a load must lose that energy (conservation of energy). A battery loses energy U = Q x V whenever charge Q is moved through the load. The Whittaker/Ziolkowski results are ordinary solutions of the wave equation and do not give an energy reservoir. Aharonov-Bohm shows potentials matter quantum-mechanically but does not imply a field-free vacuum. Quaternion Maxwell was a notation, and the vector form is equivalent for classical EM.

Bearden says CEM describes closed, energy-conserving systems, so any device obeying CEM entirely cannot be overunity; a working overunity machine must therefore violate CEM in at least one section where a hidden, freely replenished source is tapped. He identifies the scalar potential (via Whittaker-Ziolkowski) as the only such source and names two tapping methods. Method 1 uses the potential's internal bi-wave structure as pump waves on a nonlinear material such as the atomic nucleus acting as a pumped phase-conjugate mirror (he says Floyd Sweet's 'vacuum triode' works this way; cites T. W. Barrett); he warns it yields time-reversed energy with unknown biological and physical effects. Method 2 is the collector scheme of the main paper, which he says yields ordinary positive-time electrical energy needing only integration and a degenerate semiconductor with the right relaxation time (e.g. 0.1 ms). He says he released Method 2 freely so it cannot be suppressed.

Key claims

• Any device that works entirely within classical EM cannot be overunity, so overunity requires a hidden freely replenished source (the vacuum potential).
• Floyd Sweet's vacuum triode operates by pumping the atomic nucleus as a phase-conjugate mirror, which amplifies an input signal.
• Higher-topology EM (quaternion) can do optical phase-conjugate functions in pure circuitry.
• The collector method uses only validated subsystems and needs only a suitable degenerate semiconductor to be built.

Relevance: States the logic of the whole programme explicitly: overunity needs an 'open' system, and the Whittaker/Ziolkowski potential is proposed as the source.

Mainstream conflict: Mainstream agrees with the first sentence (closed CEM systems cannot be overunity) and concludes overunity is impossible; Bearden concludes CEM is flawed. No accepted evidence exists that the atomic nucleus can act as a pumped phase-conjugate mirror for electrical signals, or that Sweet's device produced net energy under independent test.

A second paper in the same PDF. Bearden says he and associates have filed the first patent application on two electrical overunity processes: one like the 1993 collector paper and a variation using standard step-charged capacitors as collectors. Summary of the invention: use a source's terminals as a 'dipole antenna' to draw bidirectional EM wave energy from the vacuum via massless displacement current d(phi)/dt, collect it in a collector 'without entropy', then switch the collector across a load as a separate closed loop so load current never returns through the source against its back emf. Conventional two-wire circuits are 'underunity' because half the extracted energy is said to be spent destroying the source (the 'suicide circuit'). He defines 'operational efficiency' Alpha as average power in the load divided by average power dissipated inside the source; if Alpha > 1 the device can 'conceivably run itself' (p.31-32). This is not the ordinary efficiency (load power / total input power). He argues such open systems are like heat pumps, windmills and solar cells, that the second law does not apply to open non-equilibrium systems, and only global (not local) energy conservation applies. A step-charged ordinary capacitor (several hundred small voltage steps) is said to charge 'without appreciable work', citing Am. J. Phys. papers (Fundaun et al. 1992; Calkin & Kiang 1983; Heinrich 1986; Gupta et al. 1984), which in fact concern reducing entropy and energy loss when charging a capacitor. A 98% Al / 2% Fe alloy is 'tentatively suggested' as a long-relaxation collector material. He says a MOSFET with '25,000 internal components' behaves as a phase-conjugate mirror when pumped with excess potential, and promises 'proof-of-principle circuits' for certification or falsification. No measurement, circuit values or data are reported in the paper.

Key claims

• A patent application was filed on two overunity processes, one with step-charged capacitors as collectors.
• Drawing only massless displacement current from a source (never electron mass current) extracts unlimited free energy without depleting the source.
• Conventional two-wire circuits use half the extracted energy to destroy the source, so their operational efficiency Alpha (load power / power dissipated inside the source) is always below 1.
• Separating collection and discharge into two isolated circuits gives Alpha greater than 1 and an open system that obeys global energy conservation like a heat pump.
• The second law of thermodynamics does not apply to the open non-equilibrium electrical system.
• Ordinary MOSFETs act as phase-conjugate mirrors when pumped by excess potential.
• Bearden defines operational efficiency Alpha as the average power expended in the load divided by the average power expended inside the source to dissipate its dipolarity (verbatim pp.31-32); this is not true efficiency, and Alpha = eta/(1-eta) for a source with series resistance, so ordinary circuits such as a 12 V battery with 0.1 ohm internal resistance into 10 ohm have Alpha = 100 with eta = 0.99 [read: pp.31-32; the relation and example are the deep reader's own calculation].
• A normal capacitor can serve as the collector if step-charged in 'several hundred small incremental rectangular voltage steps' (p.30), said to charge 'without appreciable work'; no step count, voltage, capacitance or measurement is given, and standard theory gives efficiency N/(N+1), approaching but not exceeding 1 [read: p.30; efficiency formula is the deep reader's calculation, [memory] high].

Relevance: Source of the capacitor variant of claim 3 and of the Alpha definition, which can exceed 1 while true efficiency stays below 1 (a useful teaching point). Links the 1993 theory to the later patent track (US 6,362,718 is a different, magnetic device).

Mainstream conflict: Same as the main paper: sustained net output from a source that is not depleted contradicts conservation of energy. Step charging of a capacitor is established textbook physics: with N equal steps the resistive loss falls roughly as 1/N and total efficiency approaches (not exceeds) 1, but the source still delivers at least the stored energy. A heat pump is overunity only because it moves heat from a cold reservoir; the analogy supplies no comparable reservoir. Alpha as defined is not an efficiency.

Third paper in the same PDF (copy of a cheniere.org web page dated 13 May 1994). Bearden splits electric charge into two coupled parts, a 'massless charge' phi and an inert mass m, written (phi)(m). He concludes the massless charge is not quantized but varies with background potential, 'otherwise ... electrons would not move in our present circuits'. Applying d/dt gives i = dq/dt = [(dphi/dt)(dm/dt)], which he reads as a product of two coupled currents: massless displacement current dphi/dt (lossless energy transport) and mass current dm/dt (work/dissipation). Written as d/dt[(phi)(m)] = (dphi/dt)(dm/dt) in the text, which is not the product rule (d(ab)/dt = a'b + ab'). An 'ideal capacitor' is a dm/dt blocker; ordinary capacitors fail because plates move, but with 'ordinary capacitors ... the efficiency can approach 1.0 rather than 0.50 as expected' (p.45), which is the standard step-charging result, not gain. 'Rigidized' calibration-standard capacitors (about $400-2,000 for ~1 microfarad) are said to allow overunity. Capacitor energy is written K = 1/2 (CV)^2 (p.44; correct is 1/2 C V^2, units as written are C^2). SQUID detection of the magnetic field between capacitor plates is cited as proof that displacement current is real (p.44). Ammeters cannot separate dphi/dt from dq/dt. The main new device is a 'charge blocking semiconductor' (CBS), attributed to Fogal, that blocks dm/dt but passes dphi/dt: Fig. 1 feeds the CBS output through a step-up transformer primary, the 'ammeter reads dphi/dt as normal current' so measured 'power' is not conserved, giving 'very high variable power gain' limited by the transformer and the CBS; Fig. 2 closes the loop so the supply is switched out and the circuit runs as a self-powered 'negative resistor' and 'continuous free power supply' (p.47-48). No measurement, data, component values or test report is given for the CBS device. Papers 1-3 are called a completed 'triad'.

Key claims

• Electric charge factorises into a massless charge and an inert mass, and the massless part is not quantized.
• Current i = dq/dt consists of two coupled components, (dphi/dt)(dm/dt), the first lossless energy flow and the second dissipative work.
• SQUID detection of the magnetic field between capacitor plates shows displacement current is real.
• A Fogal charge-blocking semiconductor passes only dphi/dt, so a CBS plus step-up transformer delivers very high power gain (an ammeter at the CBS output misreads dphi/dt as ordinary current).
• Feeding part of the transformer secondary output back to the CBS lets the supply be removed, giving a self-powered overunity 'negative resistor'.
• With ordinary capacitors, step-charging efficiency approaches 1.0 rather than 0.50.

Relevance: Supplies Bearden's second concrete self-running device (the Fogal CBS and shuttle circuit) and the dphi/dt vs dm/dt decomposition behind claim 2; it also records his own concession that ordinary capacitors only reach efficiency near 1.0.

Mainstream conflict: Direct. Charge is quantized and is the same at any ambient potential (Millikan-type measurements; neutrality of atoms). Splitting dq/dt into a product of two currents is not a valid calculus step and has dimensional problems. Displacement current is already in Maxwell's equations as a rate of change of E, and the magnetic field between charging plates is consistent with that, not with a massless/massive charge split. A circuit whose measured output exceeds its input and then runs with the supply removed violates conservation of energy unless an energy source is shown; an ammeter reading is ordinary current, so the 'power gain' claim rests on a redefined power. No datum is given for the CBS device.

Exact duplicate of the primary PDF; all content is covered by the four bundled papers listed above under the '(1993).pdf' path.

Key claims

• Duplicate of the main paper bundle; see its entries.

Relevance: None beyond the primary file.

Mainstream conflict: Same as the primary file.

A patent for an electromagnetic generator with no moving parts (the 'MEG'). A rare-earth permanent magnet (iron-neodymium-boron, 40 x 25.4 x 38.1 mm) sits in a closed-loop core of Metglas 2605SA1 alloy (90 x 135 x 70 mm) with two magnetic paths. Each path carries an input coil (40 turns of 18-gauge wire) and an output coil (450 turns). A switching circuit (oscillator, flip-flop, two one-shots, two FET drivers; Figs. 2-5) alternately pulses the input coils at 87.5 kHz (period 11.45 microseconds, each FET pulse 11.45 microseconds), which shifts the permanent magnet's flux between the paths and induces pulses in the output coils. Stated aim: a generator needing no external power in operation, with a battery only for start-up (self-actuating form, input drawn from an output coil). The experimental section reports that output exceeded input at every point from 10 V to 75 V input; coefficient of performance (COP, output/input power) 'significantly greater than 1'. Power was computed from measured voltage and current averaged over the period and said to agree with a Tektronix THS730 oscilloscope's RMS power. The text says the data were extrapolated to 100 V input at 140 mA = 14 W, with 48 W from each of two output coils (12 mA average at 4000 V), COP 3.44. Reading Figs. 7-8 as an image [read: page image p.3]: about 8-9 measured points, COP from about 1.7 at 10 V to about 2.6 at 75 V, output about 22 W at 75 V; the 3.4 value at 100 V is the fitted curve extended past the data; the curve reaches about 47 W at 100 V, so it is unclear whether Fig. 7 is per coil or total. The patent itself says (p.12, col. 11) the system 'is an open dissipative system, receiving, collecting, and dissipating energy from its environment; in this case, from the magnetic flux stored within the permanent magnet. Continued operation ... causes demagnetization of the permanent magnet', that rare-earth magnets give 'a relatively long life', and that it is 'not a perpetual motion machine' but analogous to a nuclear reactor's fuel rods. Further embodiments (Figs. 9-13) use split cores, square cores with several magnets, and an annular core. Inconsistency: the description gives 11.45 microsecond pulses, but claims 5 and 17 give 'approximately 11.5 milliseconds' (about 1000 times longer). The patent makes no reference to the vacuum, scalar potential or the 1993 theory. The two-column OCR is garbled in places; figure data were read from the page image, not the OCR.

Key claims

• A permanent-magnet and soft-core generator with no moving parts and alternately pulsed input coils produces electrical output power.
• The device can run in a self-actuating form with input-coil power drawn from its own output coil, after a brief start-up from an external source.
• Measured output power exceeded input power at each of the tested input voltages (10-75 V), with COP about 1.7 to 2.6 [read: page image p.3].
• At 100 V input the device would deliver COP 3.44 per output coil, extrapolated from the 10-75 V measurements, not measured.
• The patent's own energy source is the flux stored in the permanent magnet, which demagnetizes with continued operation.

Relevance: The practical patent associated with Bearden's programme and the only document with numerical performance data; the testable, measurable claim of the project. Its own statement that the energy comes from the magnet makes the magnet-energy budget a direct test of the claim.

Mainstream conflict: If COP > 1 holds for a correctly measured steady state, it violates conservation of energy, because a permanent magnet is not an inexhaustible energy supply (the patent concedes demagnetization). The mainstream expectation is that the figures reflect measurement artefacts: input power taken from average battery current with pulsed or reactive loads, reactive power, high-frequency (87.5 kHz) waveforms with a high-impedance 4000 V output, or energy stored in the core. This reading did not establish whether the 14 W input includes the oscillator, flip-flop and one-shot supply; that remains unknown. The 100 V COP is an extrapolation.